National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for nuclear environment total

  1. environment | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    environment | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Library Bios Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Photo Gallery Jobs Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog

  2. PIA - Savannah River Nuclear Solution SRNS ProRad Environment...

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

    SRNS ProRad Environment Management PIA - Savannah River Nuclear Solution SRNS ProRad Environment Management PIA - Savannah River Nuclear Solution SRNS ProRad Environment Management...

  3. Concern for the Environment | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    About Us / Our Programs / Powering the Nuclear Navy / Concern for the Environment Concern for the Environment Long before protection of the environment became a prevalent endeavor, it was a high priority in the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program. From the beginning, the Program recognized that the environmental safety of operating U.S. nuclear-powered ships would be key to their acceptance at home and abroad. Long before protection of the environment became a prevalent endeavor, it was a high

  4. Concern for the Environment | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Our Mission / Powering the Nuclear Navy / Concern for the Environment Concern for the Environment Long before protection of the environment became a prevalent endeavor, it was a high priority in the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program. From the beginning, the Program recognized that the environmental safety of operating U.S. nuclear-powered ships would be key to their acceptance at home and abroad. Long before protection of the environment became a prevalent endeavor, it was a high priority in the

  5. Computational Systems & Software Environment | National Nuclear Security

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Administration Computational Systems & Software Environment | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Library Bios Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Photo Gallery

  6. Environment, Safety & Health | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Environment, Safety & Health | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Library Bios Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Photo Gallery Jobs Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs

  7. Total..........................................................

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

    Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 2 Fewer than 500... 3.2 Q 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.5 500 to 999......

  8. Total..........................................................

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

    2,033 1,618 1,031 791 630 401 Total Floorspace (Square Feet) Fewer than 500... 3.2 357 336 113 188 177 59 500 to 999......

  9. Total..........................................................

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

    . 111.1 20.6 15.1 5.5 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500... 3.2 0.9 0.5 0.4 500 to 999......

  10. Total..........................................................

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

    25.6 40.7 24.2 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500... 3.2 0.9 0.5 0.9 1.0 500 to 999......

  11. Total..........................................................

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

    5.6 17.7 7.9 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500... 3.2 0.5 0.3 Q 500 to 999......

  12. Total............................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total................................................................... 111.1 2,033 1,618 1,031 791 630 401 Total Floorspace (Square Feet) Fewer than 500............................................... 3.2 357 336 113 188 177 59 500 to 999....................................................... 23.8 733 667 308 343 312 144 1,000 to 1,499................................................. 20.8 1,157 1,086 625 435 409 235 1,500 to 1,999................................................. 15.4 1,592

  13. Total

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

    Product: Total Crude Oil Liquefied Petroleum Gases Propane/Propylene Normal Butane/Butylene Other Liquids Oxygenates Fuel Ethanol MTBE Other Oxygenates Biomass-based Diesel Fuel Other Renewable Diesel Fuel Other Renewable Fuels Gasoline Blending Components Petroleum Products Finished Motor Gasoline Reformulated Gasoline Conventional Gasoline Kerosene-Type Jet Fuel Kerosene Distillate Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil, 15 ppm Sulfur and Under Distillate Fuel Oil, Greater than 15 ppm to 500 ppm Sulfur

  14. Total

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

    Product: Total Crude Oil Liquefied Petroleum Gases Propane/Propylene Normal Butane/Butylene Other Liquids Oxygenates Fuel Ethanol MTBE Other Oxygenates Biomass-based Diesel Other Renewable Diesel Fuel Other Renewable Fuels Gasoline Blending Components Petroleum Products Finished Motor Gasoline Reformulated Gasoline Conventional Gasoline Kerosene-Type Jet Fuel Kerosene Distillate Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil, 15 ppm Sulfur and Under Distillate Fuel Oil, Greater than 15 ppm to 500 ppm Sulfur

  15. Total..........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0.7 21.7 6.9 12.1 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500................................................... 3.2 0.9 0.6 Q Q 500 to 999........................................................... 23.8 9.0 4.2 1.5 3.2 1,000 to 1,499..................................................... 20.8 8.6 4.7 1.5 2.5 1,500 to 1,999..................................................... 15.4 6.0 2.9 1.2 1.9 2,000 to 2,499..................................................... 12.2 4.1 2.1 0.7

  16. Total..........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7.1 19.0 22.7 22.3 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500................................................... 3.2 2.1 0.6 Q 0.4 500 to 999........................................................... 23.8 13.6 3.7 3.2 3.2 1,000 to 1,499..................................................... 20.8 9.5 3.7 3.4 4.2 1,500 to 1,999..................................................... 15.4 6.6 2.7 2.5 3.6 2,000 to 2,499..................................................... 12.2 5.0 2.1

  17. Total................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    .. 111.1 86.6 2,522 1,970 1,310 1,812 1,475 821 1,055 944 554 Total Floorspace (Square Feet) Fewer than 500............................. 3.2 0.9 261 336 162 Q Q Q 334 260 Q 500 to 999.................................... 23.8 9.4 670 683 320 705 666 274 811 721 363 1,000 to 1,499.............................. 20.8 15.0 1,121 1,083 622 1,129 1,052 535 1,228 1,090 676 1,500 to 1,999.............................. 15.4 14.4 1,574 1,450 945 1,628 1,327 629 1,712 1,489 808 2,000 to

  18. Total..........................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    .. 111.1 24.5 1,090 902 341 872 780 441 Total Floorspace (Square Feet) Fewer than 500...................................... 3.1 2.3 403 360 165 366 348 93 500 to 999.............................................. 22.2 14.4 763 660 277 730 646 303 1,000 to 1,499........................................ 19.1 5.8 1,223 1,130 496 1,187 1,086 696 1,500 to 1,999........................................ 14.4 1.0 1,700 1,422 412 1,698 1,544 1,348 2,000 to 2,499........................................ 12.7

  19. Total..........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7.1 7.0 8.0 12.1 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500................................................... 3.2 0.4 Q Q 0.5 500 to 999........................................................... 23.8 2.5 1.5 2.1 3.7 1,000 to 1,499..................................................... 20.8 1.1 2.0 1.5 2.5 1,500 to 1,999..................................................... 15.4 0.5 1.2 1.2 1.9 2,000 to 2,499..................................................... 12.2 0.7 0.5 0.8 1.4

  20. Total...........................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    14.7 7.4 12.5 12.5 18.9 18.6 17.3 9.2 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500.................................... 3.2 0.7 Q 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.6 0.3 Q 500 to 999........................................... 23.8 2.7 1.4 2.2 2.8 5.5 5.1 3.0 1.1 1,000 to 1,499..................................... 20.8 2.3 1.4 2.4 2.5 3.5 3.5 3.6 1.6 1,500 to 1,999..................................... 15.4 1.8 1.4 2.2 2.0 2.4 2.4 2.1 1.2 2,000 to 2,499..................................... 12.2 1.4 0.9

  1. PIA - Savannah River Nuclear Solution SRNS ProRad Environment Management |

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

    Department of Energy SRNS ProRad Environment Management PIA - Savannah River Nuclear Solution SRNS ProRad Environment Management PIA - Savannah River Nuclear Solution SRNS ProRad Environment Management PDF icon PIA - Savannah River Nuclear Solution SRNS ProRad Environment Management More Documents & Publications PIA - Savannah River Nuclear Solutions (SRNS) Human Resource Management System (HRMS) PIA - Savannah River Nuclear Solution (SRNS) Procurement Cycle System (PCS) PIA - Savannah

  2. Development of a Total Energy, Environment and Asset Management (TE2AM tm) Curriculum

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-12-31

    The University of Wisconsin Department of Engineering Professional Development (EPD) has completed the sponsored project entitled, Development of a Total Energy, Environment and Asset Management (TE2AM) Curriculum. The project involved the development of a structured professional development program to improve the knowledge, skills, capabilities, and competencies of engineers and operators of commercial buildings. TE2AM advances a radically different approach to commercial building design, operation, maintenance, and end-?of-?life disposition. By employing asset management principles to the lifecycle of a commercial building, owners and occupants will realize improved building performance, reduced energy consumption and positive environmental impacts. Through our commercialization plan, we intend to offer TE2AM courses and certificates to the professional community and continuously improve TE2AM course materials. The TE2AM project supports the DOE Strategic Theme 1 -? Energy Security; and will further advance the DOE Strategic Goal 1.4 Energy Productivity. Through participation in the TE2AM curriculum, engineers and operators of commercial buildings will be eligible for a professional certificate; denoting the completion of a prescribed series of learning activities. The project involved a comprehensive, rigorous approach to curriculum development, and accomplished the following goals: 1. Identify, analyze and prioritize key learning needs of engineers, architects and technical professionals as operators of commercial buildings. 2. Design and develop TE2AM curricula and instructional strategies to meet learning needs of the target learning community. 3. Establish partnerships with the sponsor and key stakeholders to enhance the development and delivery of learning programs. 4. Successfully commercialize and sustain the training and certificate programs for a substantial time following the term of the award. The project team was successful in achieving the goals and deliverables set forth in the original proposal. Though attempts were made to adhere to the original project timeline, the team requested, and was granted a 6-?month project extension, during which time the project was completed.

  3. Irradiation of Microbes from Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage Pool Environments

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Breckenridge, C.R.; Watkins, C.S.; Bruhn, D.F.; Roberto, F.F.; Tsang, M.N.; Pinhero, P.J.; Brey, R.F.; Wright, R.N.; Windes, W.F.

    1999-09-03

    Microbes have been isolated and identified from spent nuclear fuel storage pools at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL). Included among these are Corynebacterium aquaticum, Pseudomonas putida, Comamonas acidovorans, Gluconobacter cerinus, Micrococcus diversus, Rhodococcus rhodochrous, and two strains of sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB). We examined the sensitivity of these microbes to a variety of total exposures of radiation generated by a 6-MeV linear accelerator (LINAC). The advantage of using a LINAC is that it provides a relatively quick screen of radiation tolerance. In the first set of experiments, we exposed each of the aforementioned microbes along with four additional microbes, pseudomonas aeruginosa, Micrococcus luteus, Escherchia coli, and Deinococcus radiodurans to exposures of 5 x 10{sup 3} and 6 x 10{sup 4} rad. All microbial specimens withstood the lower exposure with little or no reduction in cell population. Upon exposing the microbes to the larger dose of 6 x 10{sup 4} rad, we observed two distinct groupings: microbes that demonstrate resistance to radiation, and microbes that display intolerance through a dramatic reduction from their initial population. Microbes in the radiation tolerant grouping were exposed to 1.1 x 10{sup 5} rad to examine the extent of their resistance. We observe a correlation between radiation resistance and gram stain. The gram-positive species we examined seem to demonstrate a greater radiation resistance.

  4. Concern for the Environment | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    over 14,000 sailors, the Department of Energy S1C Prototype Reactor Site in Windsor, Connecticut, was returned to "green field" conditions. Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program...

  5. NEAMS Nuclear Waste Management IPSC : evaluation and selection of tools for the quality environment.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bouchard, Julie F.; Stubblefield, William Anthony; Vigil, Dena M.; Edwards, Harold Carter (Org. 1444 : Multiphysics Simulation Technology)

    2011-05-01

    The objective of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation Nuclear Waste Management Integrated Performance and Safety Codes (NEAMS Nuclear Waste Management IPSC) is to provide an integrated suite of computational modeling and simulation (M&S) capabilities to quantitatively assess the long-term performance of waste forms in the engineered and geologic environments of a radioactive-waste storage facility or disposal repository. These M&S capabilities are to be managed, verified, and validated within the NEAMS Nuclear Waste Management IPSC quality environment. M&S capabilities and the supporting analysis workflow and simulation data management tools will be distributed to end-users from this same quality environment. The same analysis workflow and simulation data management tools that are to be distributed to end-users will be used for verification and validation (V&V) activities within the quality environment. This strategic decision reduces the number of tools to be supported, and increases the quality of tools distributed to end users due to rigorous use by V&V activities. This report documents an evaluation of the needs, options, and tools selected for the NEAMS Nuclear Waste Management IPSC quality environment. The objective of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation Nuclear Waste Management Integrated Performance and Safety Codes (NEAMS Nuclear Waste Management IPSC) program element is to provide an integrated suite of computational modeling and simulation (M&S) capabilities to assess quantitatively the long-term performance of waste forms in the engineered and geologic environments of a radioactive-waste storage facility or disposal repository. This objective will be fulfilled by acquiring and developing M&S capabilities, and establishing a defensible level of confidence in these M&S capabilities. The foundation for assessing the level of confidence is based upon the rigor and results from verification, validation, and uncertainty quantification (V&V and UQ) activities. M&S capabilities are to be managed, verified, and validated within the NEAMS Nuclear Waste Management IPSC quality environment. M&S capabilities and the supporting analysis workflow and simulation data management tools will be distributed to end-users from this same quality environment. The same analysis workflow and simulation data management tools that are to be distributed to end-users will be used for verification and validation (V&V) activities within the quality environment. This strategic decision reduces the number of tools to be supported, and increases the quality of tools distributed to end users due to rigorous use by V&V activities. NEAMS Nuclear Waste Management IPSC V&V and UQ practices and evidence management goals are documented in the V&V Plan. This V&V plan includes a description of the quality environment into which M&S capabilities are imported and V&V and UQ activities are managed. The first phase of implementing the V&V plan is to deploy an initial quality environment through the acquisition and integration of a set of software tools. An evaluation of the needs, options, and tools selected for the quality environment is given in this report.

  6. Nuclear Safety Information Agreement Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, and the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    On December 15, Matt Moury, Associate Under Secretary, Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security (EHSS DOE) and EHSS Office of Nuclear Safety staff met with the NRC Executive Director for Operations, the Deputy Executive Director for Operations, and the Director, Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards to sign a nuclear safety information exchange agreement between NRC Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards and the Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security.

  7. New Opportunity for Improved Nuclear Forensics, Radiochemical Diagnostics, and Nuclear Astrophysics: Need for a Total-Cross-Section Apparatus at the LANSCE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Koehler, Paul E.; Hayes-Sterbenz, Anna C.; Bredeweg, Todd Allen; Couture, Aaron J.; Engle, Jonathan; Keksis, August L.; Nortier, Francois M.; Ullmann, John L.

    2014-03-12

    Total-cross-section measurements are feasible on a much wider range of radioactive samples than (n,?) cross-section measurements, and information extracted from the former can be used to set tight constraints on the latter. There are many (n,?) cross sections of great interest to radiochemical diagnostics, nuclear forensics, and nuclear astrophysics which are beyond the reach of current direct measurement, that could be obtained in this way. Our simulations indicate that measurements can be made at the Manuel Lujan Jr. Neutron Scattering Center at the Los Alamos Neutron Science Center for samples as small as 10?g. There are at least 40 high-interest nuclides which should be measurable, including 88Y,167,168,170,171Tm, 173,174Lu, and189,190,192Ir.

  8. Nuclear EMP simulation for large-scale urban environments. FDTD for electrically large problems.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Smith, William S.; Bull, Jeffrey S.; Wilcox, Trevor; Bos, Randall J.; Shao, Xuan-Min; Goorley, John T.; Costigan, Keeley R.

    2012-08-13

    In case of a terrorist nuclear attack in a metropolitan area, EMP measurement could provide: (1) a prompt confirmation of the nature of the explosion (chemical or nuclear) for emergency response; and (2) and characterization parameters of the device (reaction history, yield) for technical forensics. However, urban environment could affect the fidelity of the prompt EMP measurement (as well as all other types of prompt measurement): (1) Nuclear EMP wavefront would no longer be coherent, due to incoherent production, attenuation, and propagation of gamma and electrons; and (2) EMP propagation from source region outward would undergo complicated transmission, reflection, and diffraction processes. EMP simulation for electrically-large urban environment: (1) Coupled MCNP/FDTD (Finite-difference time domain Maxwell solver) approach; and (2) FDTD tends to be limited to problems that are not 'too' large compared to the wavelengths of interest because of numerical dispersion and anisotropy. We use a higher-order low-dispersion, isotropic FDTD algorithm for EMP propagation.

  9. Expected environments in high-level nuclear waste and spent fuel repositories in salt

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Claiborne, H.C.; Rickertsen, L.D., Graham, R.F.

    1980-08-01

    The purpose of this report is to describe the expected environments associated with high-level waste (HLW) and spent fuel (SF) repositories in salt formations. These environments include the thermal, fluid, pressure, brine chemistry, and radiation fields predicted for the repository conceptual designs. In this study, it is assumed that the repository will be a room and pillar mine in a rock-salt formation, with the disposal horizon located approx. 2000 ft (610 m) below the surface of the earth. Canistered waste packages containing HLW in a solid matrix or SF elements are emplaced in vertical holes in the floor of the rooms. The emplacement holes are backfilled with crushed salt or other material and sealed at some later time. Sensitivity studies are presented to show the effect of changing the areal heat load, the canister heat load, the barrier material and thickness, ventilation of the storage room, and adding a second row to the emplacement configuration. The calculated thermal environment is used as input for brine migration calculations. The vapor and gas pressure will gradually attain the lithostatic pressure in a sealed repository. In the unlikely event that an emplacement hole will become sealed in relatively early years, the vapor space pressure was calculated for three scenarios (i.e., no hole closure - no backfill, no hole closure - backfill, and hole closure - no backfill). It was assumed that the gas in the system consisted of air and water vapor in equilibrium with brine. A computer code (REPRESS) was developed assuming that these changes occur slowly (equilibrium conditions). The brine chemical environment is outlined in terms of brine chemistry, corrosion, and compositions. The nuclear radiation environment emphasized in this report is the stored energy that can be released as a result of radiation damage or crystal dislocations within crystal lattices.

  10. Environment

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

    Environment Environment Events Learn about our science, listen to lectures on environment and climate change at the Bradbury Science Museum or at Cafe Scientific events in your community. Oct 14 Wed 4:00 PM Laboratory's Electronic Public Reading room training J. Robert Oppenheimer Study Center, Room JRO 1&2 - West Jemez Road at Casa Grande The Department of Energy (DOE) and the Los Alamos National Security, LLC (LANS), are holding training on the contents and use of the Los Alamos National

  11. Environment

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

    Video News Room » News Releases » Environment /newsroom/_assets/images/envi-icon.png Earth, Environment Climate impacts, including global temperatures, drought and forest fires as well as Ocean and Sea Ice Modeling Health Space Computing Energy Environment Materials Science Technology The Lab Wildfire fuel being burned in the fire laboratory as the aerosols from the top are being sucked into inlets and sampled at the Missoula Fire Sciences Laboratory in Missoula, Montana by Los Alamos and

  12. Environment

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

    Environment Environment A repository for images showing environmental cleanup and protection efforts around the Lab. News Releases Science Briefs Photos Picture of the Week Social Media Videos Fact Sheets Publications PHOTOS BY TOPIC Careers Community Visitors Environment History Science The Lab Click thumbnails to enlarge. Photos arranged by most recent first, horizontal formats before vertical. See Flickr for more sizes and details. Workers sample contents of LANL's Material Disposal Area B

  13. environment

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    history-over 5,900 reactor years of operation and more than 139 million miles steamed on nuclear power-there has never been a reactor accident, nor any release of radioactivity...

  14. Underground Infrastructure Impacts Due to a Surface Burst Nuclear Device in an Urban Canyon Environment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bos, Randall J.; Dey, Thomas N.; Runnels, Scott R.

    2012-07-03

    Investigation of the effects of a nuclear device exploded in a urban environment such as the Chicago studied for this particular report have shown the importance on the effects from the urban canyons so typical of today's urban environment as compared to nuclear test event effects observed at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) and the Pacific Testing Area on which many of the typical legacy empirical codes are based on. This report first looks at the some of the data from nuclear testing that can give an indication of the damage levels that might be experienced due to a nuclear event. While it is well known that a above ground blast, even a ground burst, very poorly transmits energy into the ground ( < 1%) and the experimental results discussed here are for fully coupled detonations, these results do indicate a useful measure of the damage that might be expected. The second part of the report looks at effects of layering of different materials that typically would make up the near ground below surface environment that a shock would propagate through. As these simulations support and is widely known in the community, the effects of different material compositions in these layers modify the shock behavior and especially modify the energy dispersal and coupling into the basement structures. The third part of the report looks at the modification of the underground shock effects from a surface burst 1 KT device due to the presence of basements under the Chicago buildings. Without direct knowledge of the basement structure, a simulated footprint of a uniform 20m depth was assumed underneath each of the NGI defined buildings in the above ground environment. In the above ground case, the underground basement structures channel the energy along the line of site streets keeping the shock levels from falling off as rapidly as has been observed in unobstructed detonations. These simulations indicate a falloff of factors of 2 per scaled length as compared to 10 for the unobstructed case. Again, as in the above ground case, the basements create significant shielding causing the shock profile to become more square and reducing the potential for damage diagonal to the line of sight streets. The results for a 1KT device is that the heavily damaged zone (complete destruction) will extend out to 50m from the detonation ({approx}100m for 10KT). The heavily to moderately damaged zone will extend out to 100m ({approx}200m for 10KT). Since the destruction will depend on geometric angle from the detonation and also the variability of response for various critical infrastructure, for planning purposes the area out to 100m from the detonation should be assumed to be non-operational. Specifically for subway tunnels, while not operational, they could be human passable for human egress in the moderately damaged area. The results of the simulations presented in this report indicate only the general underground infrastructure impact. Simulations done with the actual basement geometry would be an important improvement. Equally as important or even more so, knowing the actual underground material configurations and material composition would be critical information to refine the calculations. Coupling of the shock data into structural codes would help inform the emergency planning and first response communities on the impact to underground structures and the state of buildings after the detonation.

  15. Environment

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

    Lab has a strategy to clean up the past, control current operations, and move toward a sustainable future in which waste is minimized and other effects on the environment are...

  16. Public views on multiple dimensions of security : nuclear waepons, terrorism, energy, and the environment : 2007.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Herron, Kerry Gale; Jenkins-Smith, Hank C.

    2008-01-01

    We analyze and compare findings from identical national surveys of the US general public on nuclear security and terrorism administered by telephone and Internet in mid-2007. Key areas of investigation include assessments of threats to US security; valuations of US nuclear weapons and nuclear deterrence; perspectives on nuclear proliferation, including the specific cases of North Korea and Iran; and support for investments in nuclear weapons capabilities. Our analysis of public views on terrorism include assessments of the current threat, progress in the struggle against terrorism, preferences for responding to terrorist attacks at different levels of assumed casualties, and support for domestic policies intended to reduce the threat of terrorism. Also we report findings from an Internet survey conducted in mid 2007 that investigates public views of US energy security, to include: energy supplies and reliability; energy vulnerabilities and threats, and relationships among security, costs, energy dependence, alternative sources, and research and investment priorities. We analyze public assessments of nuclear energy risks and benefits, nuclear materials management issues, and preferences for the future of nuclear energy in the US. Additionally, we investigate environmental issues as they relate to energy security, to include expected implications of global climate change, and relationships among environmental issues and potential policy options.

  17. “Full Model” Nuclear Data and Covariance Evaluation Process Using TALYS, Total Monte Carlo and Backward-forward Monte Carlo

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bauge, E.

    2015-01-15

    The “Full model” evaluation process, that is used in CEA DAM DIF to evaluate nuclear data in the continuum region, makes extended use of nuclear models implemented in the TALYS code to account for experimental data (both differential and integral) by varying the parameters of these models until a satisfactory description of these experimental data is reached. For the evaluation of the covariance data associated with this evaluated data, the Backward-forward Monte Carlo (BFMC) method was devised in such a way that it mirrors the process of the “Full model” evaluation method. When coupled with the Total Monte Carlo method via the T6 system developed by NRG Petten, the BFMC method allows to make use of integral experiments to constrain the distribution of model parameters, and hence the distribution of derived observables and their covariance matrix. Together, TALYS, TMC, BFMC, and T6, constitute a powerful integrated tool for nuclear data evaluation, that allows for evaluation of nuclear data and the associated covariance matrix, all at once, making good use of all the available experimental information to drive the distribution of the model parameters and the derived observables.

  18. Analysis of a Nuclear Accident: Fission and Activation Product Releases from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Facility as Remote Indicators of Source Identification, Extent of Release, and State of Damaged Spent Nuclear Fuel

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Schwantes, Jon M.; Orton, Christopher R.; Clark, Richard A.

    2011-12-05

    Evidence of the release Pu from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station to the local environment and surrounding communities and estimates on fraction of total fuel inventory released

  19. Preliminary total-system analysis of a potential high-level nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eslinger, P.W.; Doremus, L.A.; Engel, D.W.; Miley, T.B.; Murphy, M.T.; Nichols, W.E.; White, M.D. [Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA (United States); Langford, D.W.; Ouderkirk, S.J. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

    1993-01-01

    The placement of high-level radioactive wastes in mined repositories deep underground is considered a disposal method that would effectively isolate these wastes from the environment for long periods of time. This report describes modeling performed at PNL for Yucca Mountain between May and November 1991 addressing the performance of the entire repository system related to regulatory criteria established by the EPA in 40 CFR Part 191. The geologic stratigraphy and material properties used in this study were chosen in cooperation with performance assessment modelers at Sandia National Laboratories (SNL). Sandia modeled a similar problem using different computer codes and a different modeling philosophy. Pacific Northwest Laboratory performed a few model runs with very complex models, and SNL performed many runs with much simpler (abstracted) models.

  20. American perspectives on security : energy, environment, nuclear weapons, and terrorism : 2010.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Herron, Kerry Gale; Jenkins-Smith, Hank C.; Silva, Carol L.

    2011-03-01

    We report findings from an Internet survey and a subset of questions administered by telephone among the American public in mid-2010 on US energy and environmental security. Key areas of investigation include public perceptions shaping the context for debate about a comprehensive national energy policy, and what levels of importance are assigned to various prospective energy technologies. Additionally, we investigate how public views on global climate change are evolving, how the public assesses the risks and benefits of nuclear energy, preferences for managing used nuclear fuel, and public trust in sources of scientific and technical information. We also report findings from a national Internet survey and a subset of questions administered by telephone in mid-2010 on public views of the relevance of US nuclear weapons today, support for strategic arms control, and assessments of the potential for nuclear abolition. Additionally, we analyze evolving public views of the threat of terrorism, assessments of progress in the struggle against terrorism, and tolerance for intrusive antiterror policies. Where possible, findings from each survey are compared with previous surveys in this series for analyses of trends.

  1. nuclear

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    2%2A en U.S-, Japan Exchange Best Practices on Nuclear Emergency Response http:nnsa.energy.govmediaroompressreleasesu.s-japan-exchange-best-practices-nuclear-emergency-respon...

  2. Decline of radionuclides in the nearshore environment following nuclear reactor closure: A U.K. case study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cundy, A.B.; Croudace, I.W.; Warwick, P.E.; Bains, M.E.D.

    1999-09-01

    Radioactive discharges from nuclear facilities are frequently made into the marine environment and their fate during and after cessation of discharges is a matter of interest and concern. This study examines the decline of the radionuclides {sup 60} and {sup 65}Zn along the southern UK. coast, over the per 1988--1998, following the closure of the steam-generating heavy water (SGHW) reactor at AEA Winfrith, Dorset, UK. {sup 60}Co and {sup 65}Zn (and other activation products such as {sup 63}Ni and {sup 55}Fe) were widely dispersed in the marine environment off the central south coast of England, due to authorized releases from AEA Winfrith. Significant interaction occurred with clay-rich sediments and biota. A general exponential decline in {sup 60}Co activities (and in {sup 65}Zn activity) is found in intertidal mudflat sediments, seaweed and marine fauna in different areas along the south coast following closure of the reactor in 1990. Effective half-lives are determined which vary from 1 to 4 years in surface sediments ({sup 60}Co only), 1--4 years in seaweed and 0.5--2.5 years in crustaceans, bivalves and molluscs. Physical mixing and bioturbation largely control the rate at which {sup 60}Co declines in surface sediments. Both {sup 60}Co and {sup 65}Zn show a relatively slow rate of decline in seaweed and in marine fauna, showing that even after the virtual cessation of discharge from nuclear facilities, contamination of these organisms may persist for a number of years, albeit at reduced activities. Reasons for this persistence are likely to include absorption of radionuclides from sediment, and release and recycling of radionuclides via breakdown of contaminated organic material.

  3. A Review Corrosion of TI Grade 7 and Other TI Alloys in Nuclear Waste Repository Environments

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    F. Hua; K. Mon; P. Pasupathi; G. Gordon

    2004-05-11

    Titanium alloy degradation modes are reviewed in relation to their performance in repository environments. General corrosion, localized corrosion, stress corrosion cracking, hydrogen induced cracking, microbially influenced corrosion, and radiation-assisted corrosion of Ti alloys are considered. With respect to the Ti Grade 7 drip shields selected for emplacement in the repository at Yucca Mountain, general corrosion, hydrogen induced cracking, and radiation-assisted corrosion will not lead to failure within the 10,000 year regulatory period; stress corrosion cracking (in the absence of disruptive events) is of no consequence to barrier performance; and localized corrosion and microbially influenced corrosion are not expected to occur. To facilitate the discussion, Ti Grades 2, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12, 16, 17, 18, and 24 are included in this review.

  4. STATEOFNEWMEXICO ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH...

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

    STATEOFNEWMEXICO ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION, HAZARDOUS WASTE BUREAU, Complainant UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, and NUCLEAR WASTE PARTNERSIDP, LLC...

  5. Barge Truck Total

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

    Barge Truck Total delivered cost per short ton Shipments with transportation rates over total shipments Total delivered cost per short ton Shipments with transportation rates over...

  6. Nuclear Safety | Department of Energy

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

    Nuclear Safety Nuclear Safety The Nuclear Safety Program mission is to support the design, construction, operation, and deactivation and decommissioning of the Paducah and Portsmouth nuclear facilities in a manner that ensures adequate protection of workers, the public, and the environment. Major Responsibilities: Establish and implement nuclear safety requirements that utilize national consensus (or other government) standards or applicable external agency regulations (Nuclear Regulatory

  7. Hadronic nuclear energy: An approach towards green energy

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Das Sarma, Indrani B.

    2015-03-10

    Nuclear energy is undoubtedly the largest energy source capable of meeting the total energy requirements to a large extent in long terms. However the conventional nuclear energy involves production of high level of radioactive wastes which possesses threat, both to the environment and mankind. The modern day demand of clean, cheap and abundant energy gets fulfilled by the novel fuels that have been developed through hadronic mechanics/chemistry. In the present paper, a short review of Hadronic nuclear energy by intermediate controlled nuclear synthesis and particle type like stimulated neutron decay and double beta decay has been presented.

  8. Total Crude by Pipeline

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

    Product: Total Crude by All Transport Methods Domestic Crude by All Transport Methods Foreign Crude by All Transport Methods Total Crude by Pipeline Domestic Crude by Pipeline Foreign Crude by Pipeline Total Crude by Tanker Domestic Crude by Tanker Foreign Crude by Tanker Total Crude by Barge Domestic Crude by Barge Foreign Crude by Barge Total Crude by Tank Cars (Rail) Domestic Crude by Tank Cars (Rail) Foreign Crude by Tank Cars (Rail) Total Crude by Trucks Domestic Crude by Trucks Foreign

  9. ,"Total Natural Gas Consumption

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

    Gas Consumption (billion cubic feet)",,,,,"Natural Gas Energy Intensity (cubic feetsquare foot)" ,"Total ","Space Heating","Water Heating","Cook- ing","Other","Total ","Space...

  10. FY2015 Status Report: CIRFT Testing of High-Burnup Used Nuclear Fuel Rods from Pressurized Water Reactor and BWR Environments

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    High-burnup spent nuclear fuel cladding has a significant amount of microcracks and hydrides which will reduce the stress intensity required for crack growth.  Characteristics of cladding, fuel...

  11. $787 Million Total in Small Business Contract Funding Awarded...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    787 Million Total in Small Business Contract Funding Awarded in FY2009 by DOE Programs in Oak Ridge | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS...

  12. TOTAL WORKFORCE Males

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    93 504 619 838 259 22 YEARS OF FEDERAL SERVICE 16.8 874 535 594 308 24 EDUCATION J.D.Ph.DSc.D Degrees 91 Masters Degrees 737 Bachelors Degrees 792 715 National Nuclear...

  13. TOTAL WORKFORCE Males

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    105 515 633 823 263 25 YEARS OF FEDERAL SERVICE 16.7 876 566 552 344 26 EDUCATION J.D.Ph.DSc.D Degrees 95 Masters Degrees 761 Bachelors Degrees 801 707 National Nuclear...

  14. Total Space Heat-

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey: Energy End-Use Consumption Tables Total Space Heat- ing Cool- ing Venti- lation Water Heat- ing Light- ing Cook- ing Refrig- eration...

  15. ,"Total Fuel Oil Expenditures

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

    . Fuel Oil Expenditures by Census Region for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Fuel Oil Expenditures (million dollars)",,,,"Fuel Oil Expenditures (dollars)" ,,,,,"per...

  16. ,"Total Fuel Oil Consumption

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

    0. Fuel Oil Consumption (gallons) and Energy Intensities by End Use for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Fuel Oil Consumption (million gallons)",,,,,"Fuel Oil Energy Intensity...

  17. ,"Total Fuel Oil Expenditures

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

    4. Fuel Oil Expenditures by Census Region, 1999" ,"Total Fuel Oil Expenditures (million dollars)",,,,"Fuel Oil Expenditures (dollars)" ,,,,,"per Gallon",,,,"per Square Foot"...

  18. Total Space Heat-

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Revised: December, 2008 Total Space Heat- ing Cool- ing Venti- lation Water Heat- ing Light- ing Cook- ing Refrig- eration Office Equip- ment Com- puters Other All Buildings...

  19. Total Space Heat-

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Released: September, 2008 Total Space Heat- ing Cool- ing Venti- lation Water Heat- ing Light- ing Cook- ing Refrig- eration Office Equip- ment Com- puters Other All Buildings*...

  20. ,"Total Fuel Oil Expenditures

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

    A. Fuel Oil Expenditures by Census Region for All Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Fuel Oil Expenditures (million dollars)",,,,"Fuel Oil Expenditures (dollars)" ,,,,,"per Gallon",,,,"per...

  1. ,"Total Fuel Oil Consumption

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

    A. Fuel Oil Consumption (gallons) and Energy Intensities by End Use for All Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Fuel Oil Consumption (million gallons)",,,,,"Fuel Oil Energy Intensity...

  2. Anthropogenic radionuclides in the environment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hu, Q; Weng, J; Wang, J

    2007-11-15

    Studies of radionuclides in the environment have entered a new era with the renaissance of nuclear energy and associated fuel reprocessing, geological disposal of high-level nuclear wastes, and concerns about national security with respect to nuclear non-proliferation. This work presents an overview of anthropogenic radionuclide contamination in the environment, as well as the salient geochemical behavior of important radionuclides. We first discuss the following major anthropogenic sources and current development that contribute to the radionuclide contamination of the environment: (1) nuclear weapons program; (2) nuclear weapons testing; (3) nuclear power plants; (4) commercial fuel reprocessing; (5) geological repository of high-level nuclear wastes, and (6) nuclear accidents. Then, we summarize the geochemical behavior for radionuclides {sup 99}Tc, {sup 129}I, and {sup 237}Np, because of their complex geochemical behavior, long half-lives, and presumably high mobility in the environment. Biogeochemical cycling and environment risk assessment must take into account speciation of these redox-sensitive radionuclides.

  3. Parallel Total Energy

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2004-10-21

    This is a total energy electronic structure code using Local Density Approximation (LDA) of the density funtional theory. It uses the plane wave as the wave function basis set. It can sue both the norm conserving pseudopotentials and the ultra soft pseudopotentials. It can relax the atomic positions according to the total energy. It is a parallel code using MP1.

  4. German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety Jump to: navigation, search Logo: German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and...

  5. Summary Max Total Units

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Summary Max Total Units *If All Splits, No Rack Units **If Only FW, AC Splits 1000 52 28 28 2000 87 59 35 3000 61 33 15 4000 61 33 15 Totals 261 153 93 ***Costs $1,957,500.00 $1,147,500.00 $697,500.00 Notes: added several refrigerants removed bins from analysis removed R-22 from list 1000lb, no Glycol, CO2 or ammonia Seawater R-404A only * includes seawater units ** no seawater units included *** Costs = (total units) X (estimate of $7500 per unit) 1000lb, air cooled split systems, fresh water

  6. Total Space Heat-

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Survey: Energy End-Use Consumption Tables Total Space Heat- ing Cool- ing Venti- lation Water Heat- ing Light- ing Cook- ing Refrig- eration Office Equip- ment Com- puters Other...

  7. ARM - Measurement - Total carbon

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

    carbon 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 : Total carbon The total concentration of carbon in all its organic and non-organic forms. Categories Aerosols, Atmospheric Carbon 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 measurements, including

  8. Nuclear Safety Information Agreement Between the U.S. Nuclear...

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

    Environment, Health, Safety and Security (EHSS DOE), Cathy Haney (Director, Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards (NRC)), Marissa Bailey (Director, Division of Fuel...

  9. 21 briefing pages total

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

    1 briefing pages total p. 1 Reservist Differential Briefing U.S. Office of Personnel Management December 11, 2009 p. 2 Agenda - Introduction of Speakers - Background - References/Tools - Overview of Reservist Differential Authority - Qualifying Active Duty Service and Military Orders - Understanding Military Leave and Earnings Statements p. 3 Background 5 U.S.C. 5538 (Section 751 of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009, March 11, 2009) (Public Law 111-8) Law requires OPM to consult with DOD Law

  10. TOTAL WORKFORCE Males

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    3 Females Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 1 1 1 7 3 2 7 5 55 18 PAY PLAN SES 3 EJ/EK 5 EN 05 13 EN 04 11 EN 03 1 NN (Engineering) 43 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 23 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 1 * Reorganization, includes NA-SH and NA-00 employees. White 33.0% Associate Administrator for Infrastructure & Environment (NA-50) As of March 21, 2015 DIVERSITY 100 67 67.0% American Indian Alaska Native African American Asian American Pacific Islander Hispanic SES EJ/EK EN 05 EN 04

  11. TOTAL WORKFORCE Males

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    3 Females Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 0 1 1 4 1 0 0 4 10 4 PAY PLAN SES 7 EX 2 EJ/EK 1 EN 05 1 EN 04 2 EN 00 1 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 10 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 1 National Nuclear Security Administration (NA-1) As of March 21, 2015 DIVERSITY 25 12 48.0% American Indian Alaska Native African American Asian American Pacific Islander Hispanic White 52.0% SES EX EJ/EK EN 05 EN 04 EN 00 NQ NU 28.0% 8.0% 4.0% 4.0% 8.0% 4.0% 40.0% 4.0% 0.0% 4.0% 4.0% 16.0% 4.0% 0.0% 0.0%

  12. TOTAL WORKFORCE Males

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    91 Females Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 1 0 3 17 3 6 8 10 70 58 PAY PLAN SES 12 EX 1 EJ/EK 3 EN 05 1 EN 04 2 EN 03 1 EN 00 3 NN (Engineering) 27 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 123 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 2 GS 15 1 Deputy Administrator for Defense Nuclear NonProliferation (NA-20) As of March 21, 2015 DIVERSITY 176 85 48.3% American Indian Alaska Native African American Asian American Pacific Islander Hispanic White 51.7% SES EX EJ/EK EN 05 EN 04 EN 03 EN 00 NN NQ NU GS 15

  13. TOTAL WORKFORCE Males

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    2 4 6 0 0 6 15 29 18 PAY PLAN SES 2 EJ/EK 1 NN (Engineering) 7 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 67 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 3 DIVERSITY 80 39 48.8% American Indian Alaska Native African American Asian American Pacific Islander Hispanic White 51.3% Associate Administrator for Defense Nuclear Security (NA-70) As of March 21, 2015 SES EJ/EK NN NQ NU 2.5% 1.3% 8.8% 83.8% 3.8% 0.0% 2.5% 5.0% 7.5% 0.0% 0.0% 7.5% 18.8% 36.3% 22.5% SUPERVISORS DISABILITY 7 SUPERVISORS RATIO VETERANS 29 RETIREMENT AGE 51.7 2 14 12 35

  14. TOTAL WORKFORCE Males

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    92 Females Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 1 0 3 16 4 7 9 10 72 59 PAY PLAN SES 12 EX 1 EJ/EK 3 EN 05 1 EN 04 4 EN 03 7 EN 00 4 NN (Engineering) 28 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 118 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 1 GS 15 1 ED 00 1 DIVERSITY 181 89 49.2% American Indian Alaska Native African American Asian American Pacific Islander Hispanic White 50.8% Deputy Administrator for Defense Nuclear NonProliferation (NA-20) As of September 5, 2015 SES EX EJ/EK EN 05 EN 04 EN 03 EN 00 NN NQ

  15. TOTAL WORKFORCE Males

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    0 Females Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 0 2 4 6 0 0 7 14 27 18 PAY PLAN SES 3 NN (Engineering) 6 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 66 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 3 DIVERSITY 78 38 48.7% American Indian Alaska Native African American Asian American Pacific Islander Hispanic White 51.3% Associate Administrator for Defense Nuclear Security (NA-70) As of September 5, 2015 SES NN NQ NU 3.8% 7.7% 84.6% 3.8% 0.0% 2.6% 5.1% 7.7% 0.0% 0.0% 9.0% 17.9% 34.6% 23.1% Prepared by NNSA Office of

  16. Nuclear economics 2000: Deterministic and probabilistic projections of nuclear and coal electric power generation costs for the year 2000

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Williams, K.A.; Delene, J.G.; Fuller, L.C.; Bowers, H.I.

    1987-06-01

    The total busbar electric generating costs were estimated for locations in ten regions of the United States for base-load nuclear and coal-fired power plants with a startup date of January 2000. For the Midwest region a complete data set that specifies each parameter used to obtain the comparative results is supplied. When based on the reference set of input variables, the comparison of power generation costs is found to favor nuclear in most regions of the country. Nuclear power is most favored in the northeast and western regions where coal must be transported over long distances; however, coal-fired generation is most competitive in the north central region where large reserves of cheaply mineable coal exist. In several regions small changes in the reference variables could cause either option to be preferred. The reference data set reflects the better of recent electric utility construction cost experience (BE) for nuclear plants. This study assumes as its reference case a stable regulatory environment and improved planning and construction practices, resulting in nuclear plants typically built at the present BE costs. Today's BE nuclear-plant capital investment cost model is then being used as a surrogate for projected costs for the next generation of light-water reactor plants. An alternative analysis based on today's median experience (ME) nuclear-plant construction cost experience is also included. In this case, coal is favored in all ten regions, implying that typical nuclear capital investment costs must improve for nuclear to be competitive.

  17. Nuclear methods in environmental and energy research

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Vogt, J R

    1980-01-01

    A total of 75 papers were presented on nuclear methods for analysis of environmental and biological samples. Sessions were devoted to software and mathematical methods; nuclear methods in atmospheric and water research; nuclear and atomic methodology; nuclear methods in biology and medicine; and nuclear methods in energy research.

  18. Total Sales of Kerosene

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

    End Use: Total Residential Commercial Industrial Farm All Other Period: Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: End Use Area 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 View History U.S. 269,010 305,508 187,656 81,102 79,674 137,928 1984-2014 East Coast (PADD 1) 198,762 237,397 142,189 63,075 61,327 106,995 1984-2014 New England (PADD 1A) 56,661 53,363 38,448 15,983 15,991 27,500 1984-2014 Connecticut 8,800 7,437

  19. TotalView Training 2015

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

    TotalView Training 2015 TotalView Training 2015 NERSC will host an in-depth training course on TotalView, a graphical parallel debugger developed by Rogue Wave Software, on...

  20. Nuclear Science

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

    Nuclear Science Nuclear Science Experimental and theoretical nuclear research carried out at NERSC is driven by the quest for improving our understanding of the building blocks of...

  1. Determination of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) Using Total Carbon Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ekechukwu, A.A.

    2002-05-10

    Several methods have been proposed to replace the Freon(TM)-extraction method to determine total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH) content. For reasons of cost, sensitivity, precision, or simplicity, none of the replacement methods are feasible for analysis of radioactive samples at our facility. We have developed a method to measure total petroleum hydrocarbon content in aqueous sample matrixes using total organic carbon (total carbon) determination. The total carbon content (TC1) of the sample is measured using a total organic carbon analyzer. The sample is then contacted with a small volume of non-pokar solvent to extract the total petroleum hydrocarbons. The total carbon content of the resultant aqueous phase of the extracted sample (TC2) is measured. Total petroleum hydrocarbon content is calculated (TPH = TC1-TC2). The resultant data are consistent with results obtained using Freon(TM) extraction followed by infrared absorbance.

  2. Computational Systems & Software Environment | National Nuclear...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    ... run-time libraries, math libraries, component frameworks, other emerging programming paradigms of importance to scientific code development and application performance analysis. ...

  3. Nuclear Physics

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

    Science Programs Office of Science Nuclear Physics science-innovationassetsimagesicon-science.jpg Nuclear Physics Enabling remarkable discoveries and tools that ...

  4. U.S. Total Exports

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

    Warroad, MN Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Buffalo, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Sweetgrass, MT Total to Chile Sabine Pass, LA Total to China Kenai, AK Sabine Pass, LA Total to Egypt Freeport, TX Total to India Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA Total to Japan Cameron, LA Freeport, TX Kenai, AK Port Nikiski, AK Sabine Pass, LA Total to Mexico Douglas, AZ Nogales, AZ Sasabe, AZ Calexico, CA Ogilby Mesa, CA Otay Mesa, CA San

  5. U.S. Total Exports

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

    Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Buffalo, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Sweetgrass, MT Total to Chile Sabine Pass, LA Total to China Kenai, AK Sabine Pass, LA Total to Egypt Freeport, TX Total to India Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA Total to Japan Cameron, LA Kenai, AK Sabine Pass, LA Total to Mexico Douglas, AZ Nogales, AZ Sasabe, AZ Calexico, CA Ogilby Mesa, CA Otay Mesa, CA Alamo, TX Clint, TX Del Rio, TX Eagle Pass,

  6. Total Eolica | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Eolica Jump to: navigation, search Name: Total Eolica Place: Spain Product: Project developer References: Total Eolica1 This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by expanding...

  7. International Standards & Policy Development | National Nuclear...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    and Nuclear Facilities off site link to better reflect the threat environment. NNSA also led the international effort to revise the International Atomic Energy Agency's off site...

  8. Nuclear Forensics

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

    Nuclear Forensics AMS is a Powerful Tool for Nuclear Forensics Nuclear forensics, which can be applied to both interdicted materials and debris from a nuclear explosion, is the application of laboratory analysis and interpretation to provide technical conclusions (provenance, design, etc.) about a nuclear device or interdicted nuclear material. Nuclear forensic analysts can build confidence in their conclusions by employing multiple signatures that collectively minimize the subset of possible

  9. Risk Analysis Virtual ENvironment

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2014-02-10

    RAVEN has 3 major functionalities: 1. Provides a Graphical User Interface for the pre- and post-processing of the RELAP-7 input and output. 2. Provides the capability to model nuclear power plants control logic for the RELAP-7 code and dynamic control of the accident scenario evolution. This capability is based on a software structure that realizes a direct connection between the RELAP-7 solver engine (MOOSE) and a python environment where the variables describing the plant statusmore » are accessible in a scripting environment. RAVEN support the generation of the probabilistic scenario control by supplying a wide range of probability and cumulative distribution functions and their inverse functions. 3. Provides a general environment to perform probability risk analysis for RELAP-7, RELAP-5 and any generic MOOSE based applications. The probabilistic analysis is performed by sampling the input space of the coupled code parameters and it is enhanced by using modern artificial intelligence algorithms that accelerate the identification of the areas of major risk (in the input parameter space). This environment also provides a graphical visualization capability to analyze the outcomes. Among other approaches, the classical Monte Carlo and Latin Hypercube sampling algorithms are available. For the acceleration of the convergence of the sampling methodologies, Support Vector Machines, Bayesian regression, and collocation stochastic polynomials chaos are implemented. The same methodologies here described could be used to solve optimization and uncertainties propagation problems using the RAVEN framework.« less

  10. Total........................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    111.1 24.5 1,090 902 341 872 780 441 Census Region and Division Northeast............................................. 20.6 6.7 1,247 1,032 Q 811 788 147 New England.................................... 5.5 1.9 1,365 1,127 Q 814 748 107 Middle Atlantic.................................. 15.1 4.8 1,182 978 Q 810 800 159 Midwest................................................ 25.6 4.6 1,349 1,133 506 895 810 346 East North Central............................ 17.7 3.2 1,483 1,239 560 968 842 351

  11. Total...........................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Q Table HC3.2 Living Space Characteristics by Owner-Occupied Housing Units, 2005 2 to 4 Units 5 or More Units Mobile Homes Million U.S. Housing Units Owner- Occupied Housing Units (millions) Type of Owner-Occupied Housing Unit Housing Units (millions) Single-Family Units Apartments in Buildings With-- Living Space Characteristics Detached Attached Energy Information Administration 2005 Residential Energy Consumption Survey: Preliminary Housing Characteristics Tables Table HC3.2 Living Space

  12. Total...........................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Q Million U.S. Housing Units Renter- Occupied Housing Units (millions) Type of Renter-Occupied Housing Unit U.S. Housing Units (millions Single-Family Units Apartments in Buildings With-- Living Space Characteristics Detached Attached Table HC4.2 Living Space Characteristics by Renter-Occupied Housing Units, 2005 2 to 4 Units 5 or More Units Mobile Homes Energy Information Administration 2005 Residential Energy Consumption Survey: Preliminary Housing Characteristics Tables Million U.S. Housing

  13. Total............................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

  14. Total.............................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    26.7 28.8 20.6 13.1 22.0 16.6 38.6 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer........... 35.5 17.1 10.8 4.2 1.8 1.6 10.3 20.6 Use a Personal Computer....................... 75.6 9.6 18.0 16.4 11.3 20.3 6.4 17.9 Most-Used Personal Computer Type of PC Desk-top Model.................................. 58.6 7.6 14.2 13.1 9.2 14.6 5.0 14.5 Laptop Model...................................... 16.9 2.0 3.8 3.3 2.1 5.7 1.3 3.5 Hours Turned on Per Week Less than 2 Hours..............................

  15. Total..............................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    ,171 1,618 1,031 845 630 401 Census Region and Division Northeast................................................... 20.6 2,334 1,664 562 911 649 220 New England.......................................... 5.5 2,472 1,680 265 1,057 719 113 Middle Atlantic........................................ 15.1 2,284 1,658 670 864 627 254 Midwest...................................................... 25.6 2,421 1,927 1,360 981 781 551 East North Central.................................. 17.7 2,483 1,926 1,269

  16. Total..............................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Do Not Have Cooling Equipment................ 17.8 5.3 4.7 2.8 1.9 3.1 3.6 7.5 Have Cooling Equipment............................. 93.3 21.5 24.1 17.8 11.2 18.8 13.0 31.1 Use Cooling Equipment.............................. 91.4 21.0 23.5 17.4 11.0 18.6 12.6 30.3 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............. 1.9 0.5 0.6 0.4 Q Q 0.5 0.8 Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System.......................................... 65.9 11.0 16.5 13.5 8.7 16.1 6.4 17.2 Without a Heat

  17. Total...............................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    20.6 25.6 40.7 24.2 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer ........... 35.5 6.9 8.1 14.2 6.4 Use a Personal Computer......................... 75.6 13.7 17.5 26.6 17.8 Number of Desktop PCs 1.......................................................... 50.3 9.3 11.9 18.2 11.0 2.......................................................... 16.2 2.9 3.5 5.5 4.4 3 or More............................................. 9.0 1.5 2.1 2.9 2.5 Number of Laptop PCs

  18. Total...............................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0.7 21.7 6.9 12.1 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer ........... 35.5 14.2 7.2 2.8 4.2 Use a Personal Computer......................... 75.6 26.6 14.5 4.1 7.9 Number of Desktop PCs 1.......................................................... 50.3 18.2 10.0 2.9 5.3 2.......................................................... 16.2 5.5 3.0 0.7 1.8 3 or More............................................. 9.0 2.9 1.5 0.5 0.8 Number of Laptop PCs

  19. Total...............................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    26.7 28.8 20.6 13.1 22.0 16.6 38.6 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer ........... 35.5 17.1 10.8 4.2 1.8 1.6 10.3 20.6 Use a Personal Computer......................... 75.6 9.6 18.0 16.4 11.3 20.3 6.4 17.9 Number of Desktop PCs 1.......................................................... 50.3 8.3 14.2 11.4 7.2 9.2 5.3 14.2 2.......................................................... 16.2 0.9 2.6 3.7 2.9 6.2 0.8 2.6 3 or More............................................. 9.0 0.4 1.2

  20. Total...............................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    47.1 19.0 22.7 22.3 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer ........... 35.5 16.9 6.5 4.6 7.6 Use a Personal Computer......................... 75.6 30.3 12.5 18.1 14.7 Number of Desktop PCs 1.......................................................... 50.3 21.1 8.3 10.7 10.1 2.......................................................... 16.2 6.2 2.8 4.1 3.0 3 or More............................................. 9.0 2.9 1.4 3.2 1.6 Number of Laptop PCs

  1. Total.................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    49.2 15.1 15.6 11.1 7.0 5.2 8.0 Have Cooling Equipment............................... 93.3 31.3 15.1 15.6 11.1 7.0 5.2 8.0 Use Cooling Equipment................................ 91.4 30.4 14.6 15.4 11.1 6.9 5.2 7.9 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............... 1.9 1.0 0.5 Q Q Q Q Q Do Not Have Cooling Equipment................... 17.8 17.8 N N N N N N Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System............................................. 65.9 3.9 15.1 15.6 11.1 7.0 5.2 8.0 Without a Heat

  2. Total.................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    14.7 7.4 12.5 12.5 18.9 18.6 17.3 9.2 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment........ 1.2 N Q Q 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.2 Q Have Main Space Heating Equipment........... 109.8 14.7 7.4 12.4 12.2 18.5 18.3 17.1 9.2 Use Main Space Heating Equipment............. 109.1 14.6 7.3 12.4 12.2 18.2 18.2 17.1 9.1 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It............... 0.8 Q Q Q Q 0.3 Q N Q Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas................................................... 58.2 9.2 4.9 7.8 7.1 8.8 8.4 7.8 4.2 Central

  3. Total..................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    78.1 64.1 4.2 1.8 2.3 5.7 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment..................... 17.8 11.3 9.3 0.6 Q 0.4 0.9 Have Cooling Equipment................................. 93.3 66.8 54.7 3.6 1.7 1.9 4.8 Use Cooling Equipment.................................. 91.4 65.8 54.0 3.6 1.7 1.9 4.7 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it................. 1.9 1.1 0.8 Q N Q Q Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System.............................................. 65.9 51.7 43.9 2.5 0.7 1.6 3.1 Without a Heat

  4. Total..................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    33.0 8.0 3.4 5.9 14.4 1.2 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment..................... 17.8 6.5 1.6 0.9 1.3 2.4 0.2 Have Cooling Equipment................................. 93.3 26.5 6.5 2.5 4.6 12.0 1.0 Use Cooling Equipment.................................. 91.4 25.7 6.3 2.5 4.4 11.7 0.8 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it................. 1.9 0.8 Q Q 0.2 0.3 Q Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System.............................................. 65.9 14.1 3.6 1.5 2.1 6.4 0.6 Without a Heat

  5. Total..................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    . 111.1 14.7 7.4 12.5 12.5 18.9 18.6 17.3 9.2 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment..................... 17.8 3.9 1.8 2.2 2.1 3.1 2.6 1.7 0.4 Have Cooling Equipment................................. 93.3 10.8 5.6 10.3 10.4 15.8 16.0 15.6 8.8 Use Cooling Equipment.................................. 91.4 10.6 5.5 10.3 10.3 15.3 15.7 15.3 8.6 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it................. 1.9 Q Q Q Q 0.6 0.4 0.3 Q Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central

  6. Total...................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    15.2 7.8 1.0 1.2 3.3 1.9 For Two Housing Units............................. 0.9 Q N Q 0.6 N Heat Pump.................................................. 9.2 7.4 0.3 Q 0.7 0.5 Portable Electric Heater............................... 1.6 0.8 Q Q Q 0.3 Other Equipment......................................... 1.9 0.7 Q Q 0.7 Q Fuel Oil........................................................... 7.7 5.5 0.4 0.8 0.9 0.2 Steam or Hot Water System........................ 4.7 2.9 Q 0.7 0.8 N For One Housing

  7. Total...................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System............................................... 65.9 47.5 4.0 2.8 7.9 3.7 Without a Heat Pump.................................. 53.5 37.8 3.4 2.2 7.0 3.1 With a Heat Pump....................................... 12.3 9.7 0.6 0.5 1.0 0.6 Window/Wall Units.......................................... 28.9 14.9 2.3 3.5 6.0 2.1 1 Unit........................................................... 14.5 6.6 1.0 1.6 4.2 1.2 2

  8. Total...................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System.............................................. 65.9 47.5 4.0 2.8 7.9 3.7 Without a Heat Pump.................................. 53.5 37.8 3.4 2.2 7.0 3.1 With a Heat Pump....................................... 12.3 9.7 0.6 0.5 1.0 0.6 Window/Wall Units........................................ 28.9 14.9 2.3 3.5 6.0 2.1 1 Unit........................................................... 14.5 6.6 1.0 1.6 4.2 1.2 2

  9. Total.......................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0.6 15.1 5.5 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer ................... 35.5 6.9 5.3 1.6 Use a Personal Computer................................ 75.6 13.7 9.8 3.9 Number of Desktop PCs 1.................................................................. 50.3 9.3 6.8 2.5 2.................................................................. 16.2 2.9 1.9 1.0 3 or More..................................................... 9.0 1.5 1.1 0.4 Number of Laptop PCs

  10. Total.......................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    5.6 17.7 7.9 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer ................... 35.5 8.1 5.6 2.5 Use a Personal Computer................................ 75.6 17.5 12.1 5.4 Number of Desktop PCs 1.................................................................. 50.3 11.9 8.4 3.4 2.................................................................. 16.2 3.5 2.2 1.3 3 or More..................................................... 9.0 2.1 1.5 0.6 Number of Laptop PCs

  11. Total.......................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4.2 7.6 16.6 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer ................... 35.5 6.4 2.2 4.2 Use a Personal Computer................................ 75.6 17.8 5.3 12.5 Number of Desktop PCs 1.................................................................. 50.3 11.0 3.4 7.6 2.................................................................. 16.2 4.4 1.3 3.1 3 or More..................................................... 9.0 2.5 0.7 1.8 Number of Laptop PCs

  12. Total........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    25.6 40.7 24.2 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment............... 1.2 Q Q Q 0.7 Have Main Space Heating Equipment.................. 109.8 20.5 25.6 40.3 23.4 Use Main Space Heating Equipment.................... 109.1 20.5 25.6 40.1 22.9 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It...................... 0.8 N N Q 0.6 Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas.......................................................... 58.2 11.4 18.4 13.6 14.7 Central Warm-Air Furnace................................ 44.7 6.1

  13. Total........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    15.1 5.5 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment............... 1.2 Q Q Q Have Main Space Heating Equipment.................. 109.8 20.5 15.1 5.4 Use Main Space Heating Equipment.................... 109.1 20.5 15.1 5.4 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It...................... 0.8 N N N Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas.......................................................... 58.2 11.4 9.1 2.3 Central Warm-Air Furnace................................ 44.7 6.1 5.3 0.8 For One Housing

  14. Total........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    5.6 17.7 7.9 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment............... 1.2 Q Q N Have Main Space Heating Equipment.................. 109.8 25.6 17.7 7.9 Use Main Space Heating Equipment.................... 109.1 25.6 17.7 7.9 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It...................... 0.8 N N N Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas.......................................................... 58.2 18.4 13.1 5.3 Central Warm-Air Furnace................................ 44.7 16.2 11.6 4.7 For One Housing

  15. Total........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0.7 21.7 6.9 12.1 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment............... 1.2 Q Q N Q Have Main Space Heating Equipment.................. 109.8 40.3 21.4 6.9 12.0 Use Main Space Heating Equipment.................... 109.1 40.1 21.2 6.9 12.0 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It...................... 0.8 Q Q N N Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas.......................................................... 58.2 13.6 5.6 2.3 5.7 Central Warm-Air Furnace................................ 44.7 11.0 4.4

  16. Total........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4.2 7.6 16.6 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment............... 1.2 0.7 Q 0.7 Have Main Space Heating Equipment.................. 109.8 23.4 7.5 16.0 Use Main Space Heating Equipment.................... 109.1 22.9 7.4 15.4 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It...................... 0.8 0.6 Q 0.5 Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas.......................................................... 58.2 14.7 4.6 10.1 Central Warm-Air Furnace................................ 44.7 11.4 4.0 7.4 For One

  17. Total........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7.1 7.0 8.0 12.1 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment............... 1.2 Q Q Q 0.2 Have Main Space Heating Equipment.................. 109.8 7.1 6.8 7.9 11.9 Use Main Space Heating Equipment.................... 109.1 7.1 6.6 7.9 11.4 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It...................... 0.8 N Q N 0.5 Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas.......................................................... 58.2 3.8 0.4 3.8 8.4 Central Warm-Air Furnace................................ 44.7 1.8 Q 3.1 6.0

  18. Total........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7.1 19.0 22.7 22.3 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment............... 1.2 0.7 Q 0.2 Q Have Main Space Heating Equipment.................. 109.8 46.3 18.9 22.5 22.1 Use Main Space Heating Equipment.................... 109.1 45.6 18.8 22.5 22.1 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It...................... 0.8 0.7 Q N N Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas.......................................................... 58.2 27.0 11.9 14.9 4.3 Central Warm-Air Furnace................................ 44.7

  19. Total...........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0.6 15.1 5.5 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................. 17.8 4.0 2.4 1.7 Have Cooling Equipment.......................................... 93.3 16.5 12.8 3.8 Use Cooling Equipment........................................... 91.4 16.3 12.6 3.7 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it.......................... 1.9 0.3 Q Q Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 6.0 5.2 0.8 Without a Heat

  20. Total...........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    5.6 17.7 7.9 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................. 17.8 2.1 1.8 0.3 Have Cooling Equipment.......................................... 93.3 23.5 16.0 7.5 Use Cooling Equipment........................................... 91.4 23.4 15.9 7.5 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it.......................... 1.9 Q Q Q Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 17.3 11.3 6.0 Without a Heat

  1. Total...........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4.2 7.6 16.6 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................. 17.8 10.3 3.1 7.3 Have Cooling Equipment.......................................... 93.3 13.9 4.5 9.4 Use Cooling Equipment........................................... 91.4 12.9 4.3 8.5 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it.......................... 1.9 1.0 Q 0.8 Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 10.5 3.9 6.5 Without a Heat

  2. Total.............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................... 17.8 4.0 2.1 1.4 10.3 Have Cooling Equipment............................................ 93.3 16.5 23.5 39.3 13.9 Use Cooling Equipment............................................. 91.4 16.3 23.4 38.9 12.9 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................ 1.9 0.3 Q 0.5 1.0 Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 6.0 17.3 32.1 10.5 Without a Heat

  3. Total.............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Cooking Appliances Frequency of Hot Meals Cooked 3 or More Times A Day......................................... 8.2 1.2 1.0 0.2 2 Times A Day...................................................... 24.6 4.0 2.7 1.2 Once a Day........................................................... 42.3 7.9 5.4 2.5 A Few Times Each Week...................................... 27.2 6.0 4.8 1.2 About Once a Week.............................................. 3.9 0.6 0.5 Q Less Than Once a

  4. Total.............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Cooking Appliances Frequency of Hot Meals Cooked 3 or More Times A Day......................................... 8.2 1.4 1.0 0.4 2 Times A Day...................................................... 24.6 5.8 3.5 2.3 Once a Day........................................................... 42.3 10.7 7.8 2.9 A Few Times Each Week...................................... 27.2 5.6 4.0 1.6 About Once a Week.............................................. 3.9 0.9 0.6 0.3 Less Than Once a

  5. Total.............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................... 17.8 2.1 1.8 0.3 Have Cooling Equipment............................................ 93.3 23.5 16.0 7.5 Use Cooling Equipment............................................. 91.4 23.4 15.9 7.5 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................ 1.9 Q Q Q Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 17.3 11.3 6.0 Without a Heat

  6. Total.............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................... 17.8 1.4 0.8 0.2 0.3 Have Cooling Equipment............................................ 93.3 39.3 20.9 6.7 11.8 Use Cooling Equipment............................................. 91.4 38.9 20.7 6.6 11.7 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................ 1.9 0.5 Q Q Q Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 32.1 17.6 5.2 9.3 Without a Heat

  7. Total.............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Cooking Appliances Frequency of Hot Meals Cooked 3 or More Times A Day......................................... 8.2 2.6 0.7 1.9 2 Times A Day...................................................... 24.6 6.6 2.0 4.6 Once a Day........................................................... 42.3 8.8 2.9 5.8 A Few Times Each Week...................................... 27.2 4.7 1.5 3.1 About Once a Week.............................................. 3.9 0.7 Q 0.6 Less Than Once a

  8. Total.............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................... 17.8 10.3 3.1 7.3 Have Cooling Equipment............................................ 93.3 13.9 4.5 9.4 Use Cooling Equipment............................................. 91.4 12.9 4.3 8.5 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................ 1.9 1.0 Q 0.8 Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 10.5 3.9 6.5 Without a Heat

  9. Total.............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................... 17.8 8.5 2.7 2.6 4.0 Have Cooling Equipment............................................ 93.3 38.6 16.2 20.1 18.4 Use Cooling Equipment............................................. 91.4 37.8 15.9 19.8 18.0 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................ 1.9 0.9 0.3 0.3 0.4 Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 25.8 10.9 16.6 12.5 Without a Heat

  10. Total..............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    20.6 25.6 40.7 24.2 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment................................ 17.8 4.0 2.1 1.4 10.3 Have Cooling Equipment............................................. 93.3 16.5 23.5 39.3 13.9 Use Cooling Equipment.............................................. 91.4 16.3 23.4 38.9 12.9 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................. 1.9 0.3 Q 0.5 1.0 Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................... 65.9 6.0 17.3 32.1 10.5

  11. Total..............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0.7 21.7 6.9 12.1 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment................................ 17.8 1.4 0.8 0.2 0.3 Have Cooling Equipment............................................. 93.3 39.3 20.9 6.7 11.8 Use Cooling Equipment.............................................. 91.4 38.9 20.7 6.6 11.7 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................. 1.9 0.5 Q Q Q Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................... 65.9 32.1 17.6 5.2 9.3 Without a

  12. Total..............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    111.1 7.1 7.0 8.0 12.1 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer .......................... 35.5 3.0 2.0 2.7 3.1 Use a Personal Computer....................................... 75.6 4.2 5.0 5.3 9.0 Number of Desktop PCs 1......................................................................... 50.3 3.1 3.4 3.4 5.4 2......................................................................... 16.2 0.7 1.1 1.2 2.2 3 or More............................................................ 9.0 0.3

  13. Total..............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7.1 19.0 22.7 22.3 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment................................ 17.8 8.5 2.7 2.6 4.0 Have Cooling Equipment............................................. 93.3 38.6 16.2 20.1 18.4 Use Cooling Equipment.............................................. 91.4 37.8 15.9 19.8 18.0 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................. 1.9 0.9 0.3 0.3 0.4 Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................... 65.9 25.8 10.9 16.6 12.5

  14. Total.................................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    ... 111.1 20.6 15.1 5.5 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment................................. 17.8 4.0 2.4 1.7 Have Cooling Equipment............................................. 93.3 16.5 12.8 3.8 Use Cooling Equipment............................................... 91.4 16.3 12.6 3.7 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................. 1.9 0.3 Q Q Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System.......................................................... 65.9 6.0 5.2 0.8 Without a Heat

  15. Total.................................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7.1 7.0 8.0 12.1 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment................................... 17.8 1.8 Q Q 4.9 Have Cooling Equipment................................................ 93.3 5.3 7.0 7.8 7.2 Use Cooling Equipment................................................. 91.4 5.3 7.0 7.7 6.6 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................... 1.9 Q N Q 0.6 Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System.............................................................. 65.9 1.1 6.4 6.4 5.4 Without a

  16. Total....................................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    25.6 40.7 24.2 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer.................................. 35.5 6.9 8.1 14.2 6.4 Use a Personal Computer.............................................. 75.6 13.7 17.5 26.6 17.8 Most-Used Personal Computer Type of PC Desk-top Model......................................................... 58.6 10.4 14.1 20.5 13.7 Laptop Model............................................................. 16.9 3.3 3.4 6.1 4.1 Hours Turned on Per Week Less than 2

  17. Total....................................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    5.6 17.7 7.9 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer.................................. 35.5 8.1 5.6 2.5 Use a Personal Computer.............................................. 75.6 17.5 12.1 5.4 Most-Used Personal Computer Type of PC Desk-top Model......................................................... 58.6 14.1 10.0 4.0 Laptop Model............................................................. 16.9 3.4 2.1 1.3 Hours Turned on Per Week Less than 2

  18. Total....................................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer.................................. 35.5 14.2 7.2 2.8 4.2 Use a Personal Computer.............................................. 75.6 26.6 14.5 4.1 7.9 Most-Used Personal Computer Type of PC Desk-top Model......................................................... 58.6 20.5 11.0 3.4 6.1 Laptop Model............................................................. 16.9 6.1 3.5 0.7 1.9 Hours Turned on Per Week Less than 2

  19. Total....................................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4.2 7.6 16.6 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer.................................. 35.5 6.4 2.2 4.2 Use a Personal Computer.............................................. 75.6 17.8 5.3 12.5 Most-Used Personal Computer Type of PC Desk-top Model......................................................... 58.6 13.7 4.2 9.5 Laptop Model............................................................. 16.9 4.1 1.1 3.0 Hours Turned on Per Week Less than 2

  20. Total....................................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    111.1 47.1 19.0 22.7 22.3 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer.................................. 35.5 16.9 6.5 4.6 7.6 Use a Personal Computer.............................................. 75.6 30.3 12.5 18.1 14.7 Most-Used Personal Computer Type of PC Desk-top Model......................................................... 58.6 22.9 9.8 14.1 11.9 Laptop Model............................................................. 16.9 7.4 2.7 4.0 2.9 Hours Turned on Per Week Less than 2

  1. Total.........................................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    ..... 111.1 7.1 7.0 8.0 12.1 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer...................................... 35.5 3.0 2.0 2.7 3.1 Use a Personal Computer.................................................. 75.6 4.2 5.0 5.3 9.0 Most-Used Personal Computer Type of PC Desk-top Model............................................................. 58.6 3.2 3.9 4.0 6.7 Laptop Model................................................................. 16.9 1.0 1.1 1.3 2.4 Hours Turned on Per Week Less

  2. Total..........................................................

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

    ... 2.0 0.4 Q 0.3 Basements Basement in Single-Family Homes and Apartments in 2-4 Unit Buildings Yes......

  3. Total..........................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Housing Units Living Space Characteristics Attached 2 to 4 Units 5 or More Units Mobile Homes Apartments in Buildings With-- Housing Units (millions) Single-Family Units Detached...

  4. Total..........................................................

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

    ... Living Space Characteristics Below Poverty Line Eligible for Federal Assistance 1 Million ... Living Space Characteristics Below Poverty Line Eligible for Federal Assistance 1 Million ...

  5. Total..........................................................

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

    ... Below Poverty Line Eligible for Federal Assistance 1 80,000 or More 60,000 to 79,999 ... Below Poverty Line Eligible for Federal Assistance 1 80,000 or More 60,000 to 79,999 ...

  6. Total..........................................................

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

    ... Table HC7.4 Space Heating Characteristics by Household Income, 2005 Below Poverty Line ... Below Poverty Line Eligible for Federal Assistance 1 80,000 or More Space Heating ...

  7. Total..........................................................

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

    ... Table HC7.10 Home Appliances Usage Indicators by Household Income, 2005 Below Poverty Line ... Below Poverty Line Eligible for Federal Assistance 1 40,000 to 59,999 60,000 to 79,999 ...

  8. Total..........................................................

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

    Income Relative to Poverty Line Below 100 Percent......1.3 1.2 0.8 0.4 1. Below 150 percent of poverty line or 60 percent of median State ...

  9. Total..........................................................

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

    ... Table HC13.10 Home Appliances Usage Indicators by South Census Region, 2005 Million U.S. Housing Units South Census Region Home Appliances Usage Indicators South Atlantic East ...

  10. Total..........................................................

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

    ... Table HC8.10 Home Appliances Usage Indicators by UrbanRural Location, 2005 Million U.S. Housing Units UrbanRural Location (as Self-Reported) Housing Units (millions) Home ...

  11. Total..............................................

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

    ... 14.8 10.5 2,263 1,669 1,079 1,312 1,019 507 N N N ConcreteConcrete Block... 5.3 3.4 2,393 1,660 1,614 Q Q Q Q Q Q Composition...

  12. Maryland Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Unit 1, Unit 2","1,705","13,994",100.0,"Calvert Cliffs Nuclear PP Inc" "1 Plant 2 Reactors","1,705","13,994",100.0 "Note: Totals

  13. Massachusetts Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Unit 1",685,"5,918",100.0,"Entergy Nuclear Generation Co" "1 Plant 1 Reactor",685,"5,918",100.0 "Note: Totals may not equal sum of components due to

  14. WIPP Documents - Nuclear Safety

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

    Nuclear Safety DOE/WIPP-07-3372, Revision 4 WIPP Documented Safety Analysis Approved November 2013 The Documented Safety Analysis addresses all hazards (both radiological and nonradiological) and the controls necessary to provide adequate protection to the public, workers, and the environment. The WIPP DSA demonstrates the extent to which the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant can be operated safely with respect to workers, the public, and the environment. DOE/WIPP-07-3373, Revision 4 WIPP Technical

  15. National Nuclear Security Administration

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

    Nuclear Security Administration Savannah River Site 1 NNSA Budget ($ Millions) By Program Office FY 2015 Enacted FY 2016 Enacted FY 2017 President Request Delta FY Request Weapon Activities 241 242 252 10 Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility (MOX) 340 332 270 (62) Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation (DNN) 77 58 91 33 Federal Expenses 4.7 5.2 5.4 .2 Total Budget for NNSA at SRS 662.7 637.2 618.4 (18.8)

  16. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Vermont profile Vermont total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 620 55.0 4,782 72.2 Hydro and Pumped Storage 324 28.7 1,347 20.3 Natural Gas - - 4 0.1 Other Renewable1 84 7.5 482 7.3 Petroleum 100 8.9 5 0.1 Total 1,128 100.0 6,620 100.0 1Municipal Solid Waste net generation is allocated according to the

  17. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Vermont profile Vermont total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 620 55.0 4,782 72.2 Hydro and Pumped Storage 324 28.7 1,347 20.3 Natural Gas - - 4 0.1 Other Renewable1 84 7.5 482 7.3 Petroleum 100 8.9 5 0.1 Total 1,128 100.0 6,620 100.0 1Municipal Solid Waste net generation is allocated according to the

  18. Office of Nuclear Safety | Department of Energy

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

    Nuclear Safety Office of Nuclear Safety Mission The Office of Nuclear Safety establishes nuclear safety requirements and expectations for the Department to ensure protection of workers, the public, and the environment from the hazards associated with nuclear operations. It also establishes general facility safety requirements in the areas of fire protection, natural phenomena hazards, and quality assurance (QA) to ensure that products and services meet or exceed the Department's objectives in

  19. nuclear security

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    3%2A en Shaping the future of nuclear detection http:nnsa.energy.govblogshaping-future-nuclear-detection

    Learning techniques to combat nuclear trafficking, touring the...

  20. Nuclear Science

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    and Engineering Education Sourcebook 2013 American Nuclear Society US Department of Energy Nuclear Science & Engineering Education Sourcebook 2013 North American Edition American Nuclear Society Education, Training, and Workforce Division US Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy Editor and Founder John Gilligan Professor of Nuclear Engineering North Carolina State University Version 5.13 Welcome to the 2013 Edition of the Nuclear Science and Engineering Education (NS&EE)

  1. nuclear enterprise

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Outlines Accomplishments in Stockpile Stewardship, Nuclear Nonproliferation, Naval Reactors and Managing the Nuclear Enterprise

    The...

  2. Nuclear Energy

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

    Safety, Security & Resilience of the Energy Infrastructure Energy Storage Nuclear Power & Engineering Grid Modernization Battery Testing Nuclear Fuel Cycle Defense Waste Management ...

  3. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Arizona Nuclear Profile 2010 Arizona profile Arizona total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,937 14.9 31,200 27.9 Coal 6,233 23.6 43,644 39.1 Hydro and Pumped Storage 2,937 11.1 6,831 6.1 Natural Gas 13,012 49.3 29,676 26.6 Other 1 - - 15 * Other Renewable1 181 0.7 319 0.3 Petroleum 93 0.4 66 0.1 Total

  4. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Iowa Nuclear Profile 2010 Iowa profile Iowa total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 601 4.1 4,451 7.7 Coal 6,956 47.7 41,283 71.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 144 1.0 948 1.6 Natural Gas 2,299 15.8 1,312 2.3 Other Renewable1 3,584 24.6 9,360 16.3 Petroleum 1,007 6.9 154 .0.3 Total 14,592 100.0 57,509 100

  5. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Kansas Nuclear Profile 2010 Kansas profile Kansas total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,160 9.2 9,556 19.9 Coal 5,179 41.3 32,505 67.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 3 * 13 * Natural Gas 4,573 36.5 2,287 4.8 Other Renewable1 1,079 8.6 3,459 7.2 Petroleum 550 4.4 103 0.2 Total 12,543 100.0 47,924 100

  6. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Mississippi Nuclear Profile 2010 Mississippi profile Mississippi total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,251 8.0 9,643 17.7 Coal 2,526 16.1 13,629 25.0 Natural Gas 11,640 74.2 29,619 54.4 Other 1 4 * 10 * Other Renewable1 235 1.5 1,504 2.8 Petroleum 35 0.2 18 0.1 Total 15,691 100.0 54,487 100.0

  7. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Missouri Nuclear Profile 2010 Missouri profile Missouri total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,190 5.5 8,996 9.7 Coal 12,070 55.5 75,047 81.3 Hydro and Pumped Storage 1,221 5.6 2,427 2.6 Natural Gas 5,579 25.7 4,690 5.1 Other 1 - - 39 * Other Renewable1 466 2.1 988 1.1 Petroleum 1,212 5.6 126 0.1 Total

  8. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Nebraska Nuclear Profile 2010 Nebraska profile Nebraska total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,245 15.8 11,054 30.2 Coal 3,932 50.0 23,368 63.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 278 3.5 1,314 3.6 Natural Gas 1,864 23.5 375 1.0 Other Renewable1 165 2.1 493 1.3 Petroleum 387 4.9 31 0.1 Total 7,857 100.0 36,630

  9. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Arizona Nuclear Profile 2010 Arizona profile Arizona total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,937 14.9 31,200 27.9 Coal 6,233 23.6 43,644 39.1 Hydro and Pumped Storage 2,937 11.1 6,831 6.1 Natural Gas 13,012 49.3 29,676 26.6 Other 1 - - 15 * Other Renewable1 181 0.7 319 0.3 Petroleum 93 0.4 66 0.1 Total

  10. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Iowa Nuclear Profile 2010 Iowa profile Iowa total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 601 4.1 4,451 7.7 Coal 6,956 47.7 41,283 71.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 144 1.0 948 1.6 Natural Gas 2,299 15.8 1,312 2.3 Other Renewable1 3,584 24.6 9,360 16.3 Petroleum 1,007 6.9 154 .0.3 Total 14,592 100.0 57,509 100

  11. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Kansas Nuclear Profile 2010 Kansas profile Kansas total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,160 9.2 9,556 19.9 Coal 5,179 41.3 32,505 67.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 3 * 13 * Natural Gas 4,573 36.5 2,287 4.8 Other Renewable1 1,079 8.6 3,459 7.2 Petroleum 550 4.4 103 0.2 Total 12,543 100.0 47,924 100

  12. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Mississippi Nuclear Profile 2010 Mississippi profile Mississippi total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,251 8.0 9,643 17.7 Coal 2,526 16.1 13,629 25.0 Natural Gas 11,640 74.2 29,619 54.4 Other 1 4 * 10 * Other Renewable1 235 1.5 1,504 2.8 Petroleum 35 0.2 18 0.1 Total 15,691 100.0 54,487 100.0

  13. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Missouri Nuclear Profile 2010 Missouri profile Missouri total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,190 5.5 8,996 9.7 Coal 12,070 55.5 75,047 81.3 Hydro and Pumped Storage 1,221 5.6 2,427 2.6 Natural Gas 5,579 25.7 4,690 5.1 Other 1 - - 39 * Other Renewable1 466 2.1 988 1.1 Petroleum 1,212 5.6 126 0.1 Total

  14. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Nebraska Nuclear Profile 2010 Nebraska profile Nebraska total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,245 15.8 11,054 30.2 Coal 3,932 50.0 23,368 63.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 278 3.5 1,314 3.6 Natural Gas 1,864 23.5 375 1.0 Other Renewable1 165 2.1 493 1.3 Petroleum 387 4.9 31 0.1 Total 7,857 100.0 36,630

  15. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Ohio Nuclear Profile 2010 Ohio profile Ohio total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 2,134 6.5 15,805 11.0 Coal 21,360 64.6 117,828 82.1 Hydro and Pumped Storage 101 0.3 429 0.3 Natural Gas 8,203 24.8 7,128 5.0 Other 1 123 0.4 266 0.2 Other Renewable1 130 0.4 700 0.5 Petroleum 1,019 3.1 1,442 1.0 Total

  16. Radiation effects in the environment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Begay, F.; Rosen, L.; Petersen, D.F.; Mason, C.; Travis, B.; Yazzie, A.; Isaac, M.C.P.; Seaborg, G.T.; Leavitt, C.P.

    1999-04-01

    Although the Navajo possess substantial resource wealth-coal, gas, uranium, water-this potential wealth has been translated into limited permanent economic or political power. In fact, wealth or potential for wealth has often made the Navajo the victims of more powerful interests greedy for the assets under limited Navajo control. The primary focus for this education workshop on the radiation effects in the environment is to provide a forum where scientists from the nuclear science and technology community can share their knowledge toward the advancement and diffusion of nuclear science and technology issues for the Navajo public. The scientists will make an attempt to consider the following basic questions; what is science; what is mathematics; what is nuclear radiation? Seven papers are included in this report: Navajo view of radiation; Nuclear energy, national security and international stability; ABC`s of nuclear science; Nuclear medicine: 100 years in the making; Radon in the environment; Bicarbonate leaching of uranium; and Computational methods for subsurface flow and transport. The proceedings of this workshop will be used as a valuable reference materials in future workshops and K-14 classrooms in Navajo communities that need to improve basic understanding of nuclear science and technology issues. Results of the Begay-Stevens research has revealed the existence of strange and mysterious concepts in the Navajo Language of nature. With these research results Begay and Stevens prepared a lecture entitled The Physics of Laser Fusion in the Navajo language. This lecture has been delivered in numerous Navajo schools, and in universities and colleges in the US, Canada, and Alaska.

  17. $787 Million Total in Small Business Contract Funding Awarded in FY2009 by

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    DOE Programs in Oak Ridge | National Nuclear Security Administration $787 Million Total in Small Business Contract Funding Awarded in FY2009 by DOE Programs in Oak Ridge | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations

  18. Nuclear Facilities and Applied Technologies at Sandia

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wheeler, Dave; Kaiser, Krista; Martin, Lonnie; Hanson, Don; Harms, Gary; Quirk, Tom

    2014-11-28

    The Nuclear Facilities and Applied Technologies organization at Sandia National Laboratories Technical Area Five (TA-V) is the leader in advancing nuclear technologies through applied radiation science and unique nuclear environments. This video describes the organizations capabilities, facilities, and culture.

  19. International Nuclear Security

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Doyle, James E.

    2012-08-14

    This presentation discusses: (1) Definitions of international nuclear security; (2) What degree of security do we have now; (3) Limitations of a nuclear security strategy focused on national lock-downs of fissile materials and weapons; (4) What do current trends say about the future; and (5) How can nuclear security be strengthened? Nuclear security can be strengthened by: (1) More accurate baseline inventories; (2) Better physical protection, control and accounting; (3) Effective personnel reliability programs; (4) Minimize weapons-usable materials and consolidate to fewer locations; (5) Consider local threat environment when siting facilities; (6) Implement pledges made in the NSS process; and (7) More robust interdiction, emergency response and special operations capabilities. International cooperation is desirable, but not always possible.

  20. Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting

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

    2003-08-19

    To ensure timely collection, reporting, analysis, and dissemination of information on environment, safety, and health issues as required by law or regulations or as needed to ensure that the Department of Energy (DOE) and National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) are kept fully informed on a timely basis about events that could adversely affect the health and safety of the public or the workers, the environment, the intended purpose of DOE facilities, or the credibility of the Department. Cancels DOE O 210.1, DOE O 231.1, and DOE O 232.1A. Canceled by DOE O 232.2.

  1. Characteristics RSE Column Factor: Total

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

    and 1994 Vehicle Characteristics RSE Column Factor: Total 1993 Family Income Below Poverty Line Eli- gible for Fed- eral Assist- ance 1 RSE Row Factor: Less than 5,000 5,000...

  2. ARM - Measurement - Total cloud water

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

    cloud water 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 : Total cloud water The total concentration (mass/vol) of ice and liquid water particles in a cloud; this includes condensed water content (CWC). Categories Cloud Properties Instruments The above measurement is considered scientifically relevant for the following instruments. Refer to the datastream (netcdf) file headers of each instrument for a

  3. Nuclear forensics: Soil content

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Beebe, Merilyn Amy

    2015-08-31

    Nuclear Forensics is a growing field that is concerned with all stages of the process of creating and detonating a nuclear weapon. The main goal is to prevent nuclear attack by locating and securing nuclear material before it can be used in an aggressive manner. This stage of the process is mostly paperwork; laws, regulations, treaties, and declarations made by individual countries or by the UN Security Council. There is some preliminary leg work done in the form of field testing detection equipment and tracking down orphan materials; however, none of these have yielded any spectacular or useful results. In the event of a nuclear attack, the first step is to analyze the post detonation debris to aid in the identification of the responsible party. This aspect of the nuclear forensics process, while reactive in nature, is more scientific. A rock sample taken from the detonation site can be dissolved into liquid form and analyzed to determine its chemical composition. The chemical analysis of spent nuclear material can provide valuable information if properly processed and analyzed. In order to accurately evaluate the results, scientists require information on the natural occurring elements in the detonation zone. From this information, scientists can determine what percentage of the element originated in the bomb itself rather than the environment. To this end, element concentrations in soils from sixty-nine different cities are given, along with activity concentrations for uranium, thorium, potassium, and radium in various building materials. These data are used in the analysis program Python.

  4. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Alabama Nuclear Profile 2010 Alabama profile Alabama total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 5,043 15.6 37,941 24.9 Coal 11,441 35.3 63,050 41.4 Hydro and Pumped Storage 3,272 10.1 8,704 5.7 Natural Gas 11,936 36.8 39,235 25.8 Other1 100 0.3 643 0.4 Other Renewable1 583 1.8 2,377 1.6 Petroleum 43 0.1 200

  5. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Arkansas Nuclear Profile 2010 Arkansas profile Arkansas total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State ttal (percent) Nuclear 1,835 11.5 15,023 24.6 Coal 4,535 28.4 28,152 46.2 Hydro and Pumped Storage 1,369 8.6 3,658 6.0 Natural Gas 7,894 49.4 12,469 20.4 Other 1 - - 28 * Other Renewable1 326 2.0 1,624 2.7 Petroleum 22 0.1 45 0.1 Total

  6. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    California Nuclear Profile 2010 California profile California total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 4,390 6.5 32,201 15.8 Coal 374 0.6 2,100 1.0 Hydro and Pumped Storage 13,954 20.7 33,260 16.3 Natural Gas 41,370 61.4 107,522 52.7 Other 1 220 0.3 2,534 1.2 Other Renewable1 6,319 9.4 25,450 12.5 Petroleum

  7. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Connecticut Nuclear Profile 2010 Connecticut profile Connecticut total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 2,103 25.4 16,750 50.2 Coal 564 6.8 2,604 7.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 151 1.8 400 1.2 Natural Gas 2,292 27.7 11,716 35.1 Other 1 27 0.3 730 2.2 Other Renewable1 159 1.9 740 2.2 Petroleum 2,989 36.1 409

  8. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Florida Nuclear Profile 2010 Florida profile Florida total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary Energy Source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 3,924 6.6 23,936 10.4 Coal 9,975 16.9 59,897 26.1 Hydro and Pumped Storage 55 0.1 177 0.1 Natural Gas 31,563 53.4 128,634 56.1 Other1 544 0.9 2,842 1.2 Other Renewable1 1,053 1.8 4,487 2.0 Petroleum 12,033 20.3

  9. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Georgia Nuclear Profile 2010 Georgia profile Georgia total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 4,061 11.1 33,512 24.6 Coal 13,230 36.1 73,298 54.0 Hydro and Pumped Storage 3,851 10.5 3,044 2.7 Natural Gas 12,668 34.6 23,884 15.9 Other 1 - - 18 * Other Renewable1 637 1.7 3,181 2.2 Petroleum 2,189 6.0 641 0.5

  10. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Illinois Nuclear Profile 2010 Illinois profile Illinois total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 11,441 25.9 96,190 47.8 Coal 15,551 35.2 93,611 46.5 Hydro and Pumped Storage 34 0.1 119 0.1 Natural Gas 13,771 31.2 5,724 2.8 Other 1 145 0.3 461 0.2 Other Renewable1 2,078 4.7 5,138 2.6 Petroleum 1,106 2.5 110

  11. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Louisiana Nuclear Profile 2010 Louisiana profile Louisiana total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (nw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand nwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 2,142 8.0 18,639 18.1 Coal 3,417 12.8 23,924 23.3 Hydro and Pumped Storage 192 0.7 1,109 1.1 Natural Gas 19,574 73.2 51,344 49.9 Other 1 213 0.8 2,120 2.1 Other Renewable1 325 1.2 2,468 2.4 Petroleum 881 3.3

  12. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Maryland Nuclear Profile 2010 Maryland profile Maryland total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (Percent) Nuclear 1,705 13.6 13,994 32.1 Coal 4,886 39.0 23,668 54.3 Hydro and Pumped Storage 590 4.7 1,667 3.8 Natural Gas 2,041 16.3 2,897 6.6 Other 1 152 1.2 485 1.1 Other Renewable1 209 1.7 574 1.3 Petroleum 2,933 23.4 322

  13. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Massachusetts Nuclear Profile 2010 Massachusetts profile Massachusetts total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 685 5.0 5,918 13.8 Coal 1,669 12.2 8,306 19.4 Hydro and Pumped Storage 1,942 14.2 659 1.5 Natural Gas 6,063 44.3 25,582 59.8 Other 1 3 * 771 1.8 Other Renewable1 304 2.2 1,274 3.0 Petroleum 3,031

  14. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Michigan Nuclear Profile 2010 Michigan profile Michigan total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 3,947 13.2 29,625 26.6 Coal 11,531 38.7 65,604 58.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 2,109 7.1 228 0.2 Natural Gas 11,033 37.0 12,249 11.0 Other 1 - - 631 0.6 Other Renewable1 571 1.9 2,832 2.5 Petroleum 640 2.1 382 0.3

  15. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Minnesota Nuclear Profile 2010 Minnesota profile Minnesota total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,549 10.8 13,478 25.1 Coal 4,789 32.5 28,083 52.3 Hydro and Pumped Storage 193 1.3 840 1.6 Natural Gas 4,936 33.5 4,341 8.1 Other 1 13 0.1 258 0.5 Other Renewable1 2,395 16.3 6,640 12.4 Petroleum 795 5.4 31

  16. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Hampshire Nuclear Profile 2010 New Hampshire profile New Hampshire total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,247 29.8 10,910 49.2 Coal 546 13.1 3,083 13.9 Hydro and Pumped Storage 489 11.7 1,478 6.7 Natural Gas 1,215 29.1 5,365 24.2 Other 1 - - 57 0.3 Other Renewable1 182 4.4 1,232 5.6 Petroleum 501 12.0

  17. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Jersey Nuclear Profile 2010 New Jersey profile New Jersey total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 4,108 22.3 32,771 49.9 Coal 2,036 11.1 6,418 9.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 404 2.2 -176 -0.3 Natural Gas 10,244 55.6 24,902 37.9 Other 1 56 0.3 682 1.0 Other Renewable1 226 1.2 850 1.3 Petroleum 1,351 7.3 235

  18. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    York Nuclear Profile 2010 New York profile New York total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 5,271 13.4 41,870 30.6 Coal 2,781 7.1 13,583 9.9 Hydro and Pumped Storage 5,714 14.5 24,942 18.2 Natural Gas 17,407 44.2 48,916 35.7 Other 1 45 0.1 832 0.6 Other Renewable1 1,719 4.4 4,815 3.5 Petroleum 6,421 16.3

  19. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    North Carolina Nuclear Profile 2010 North Carolina profile North Carolina total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 4,958 17.9 40,740 31.7 Coal 12,766 46.1 71,951 55.9 Hydro and Pumped Storage 2,042 7.4 4,757 3.7 Natural Gas 6,742 24.4 8,447 6.6 Other 1 50 0.2 407 0.3 Other Renewable1 543 2.0 2,083 1.6

  20. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Pennsylvania Nuclear Profile 2010 Pennsylvania profile Pennsylvania total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 9,540 20.9 77,828 33.9 Coal 18,481 40.6 110,369 48.0 Hydro and Pumped Storage 2,268 5.0 1,624 0.7 Natural Gas 9,415 20.7 33,718 14.7 Other 1 100 0.2 1,396 0.6 Other Renewable1 1,237 2.7 4,245 1.8

  1. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Alabama Nuclear Profile 2010 Alabama profile Alabama total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 5,043 15.6 37,941 24.9 Coal 11,441 35.3 63,050 41.4 Hydro and Pumped Storage 3,272 10.1 8,704 5.7 Natural Gas 11,936 36.8 39,235 25.8 Other1 100 0.3 643 0.4 Other Renewable1 583 1.8 2,377 1.6 Petroleum 43 0.1 200

  2. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Arkansas Nuclear Profile 2010 Arkansas profile Arkansas total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State ttal (percent) Nuclear 1,835 11.5 15,023 24.6 Coal 4,535 28.4 28,152 46.2 Hydro and Pumped Storage 1,369 8.6 3,658 6.0 Natural Gas 7,894 49.4 12,469 20.4 Other 1 - - 28 * Other Renewable1 326 2.0 1,624 2.7 Petroleum 22 0.1 45 0.1 Total

  3. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    California Nuclear Profile 2010 California profile California total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 4,390 6.5 32,201 15.8 Coal 374 0.6 2,100 1.0 Hydro and Pumped Storage 13,954 20.7 33,260 16.3 Natural Gas 41,370 61.4 107,522 52.7 Other 1 220 0.3 2,534 1.2 Other Renewable1 6,319 9.4 25,450 12.5 Petroleum

  4. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Connecticut Nuclear Profile 2010 Connecticut profile Connecticut total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 2,103 25.4 16,750 50.2 Coal 564 6.8 2,604 7.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 151 1.8 400 1.2 Natural Gas 2,292 27.7 11,716 35.1 Other 1 27 0.3 730 2.2 Other Renewable1 159 1.9 740 2.2 Petroleum 2,989 36.1 409

  5. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Florida Nuclear Profile 2010 Florida profile Florida total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary Energy Source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 3,924 6.6 23,936 10.4 Coal 9,975 16.9 59,897 26.1 Hydro and Pumped Storage 55 0.1 177 0.1 Natural Gas 31,563 53.4 128,634 56.1 Other1 544 0.9 2,842 1.2 Other Renewable1 1,053 1.8 4,487 2.0 Petroleum 12,033 20.3

  6. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Georgia Nuclear Profile 2010 Georgia profile Georgia total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 4,061 11.1 33,512 24.6 Coal 13,230 36.1 73,298 54.0 Hydro and Pumped Storage 3,851 10.5 3,044 2.7 Natural Gas 12,668 34.6 23,884 15.9 Other 1 - - 18 * Other Renewable1 637 1.7 3,181 2.2 Petroleum 2,189 6.0 641 0.5

  7. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Illinois Nuclear Profile 2010 Illinois profile Illinois total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 11,441 25.9 96,190 47.8 Coal 15,551 35.2 93,611 46.5 Hydro and Pumped Storage 34 0.1 119 0.1 Natural Gas 13,771 31.2 5,724 2.8 Other 1 145 0.3 461 0.2 Other Renewable1 2,078 4.7 5,138 2.6 Petroleum 1,106 2.5 110

  8. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Louisiana Nuclear Profile 2010 Louisiana profile Louisiana total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (nw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand nwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 2,142 8.0 18,639 18.1 Coal 3,417 12.8 23,924 23.3 Hydro and Pumped Storage 192 0.7 1,109 1.1 Natural Gas 19,574 73.2 51,344 49.9 Other 1 213 0.8 2,120 2.1 Other Renewable1 325 1.2 2,468 2.4 Petroleum 881 3.3

  9. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Maryland Nuclear Profile 2010 Maryland profile Maryland total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (Percent) Nuclear 1,705 13.6 13,994 32.1 Coal 4,886 39.0 23,668 54.3 Hydro and Pumped Storage 590 4.7 1,667 3.8 Natural Gas 2,041 16.3 2,897 6.6 Other 1 152 1.2 485 1.1 Other Renewable1 209 1.7 574 1.3 Petroleum 2,933 23.4 322

  10. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Massachusetts Nuclear Profile 2010 Massachusetts profile Massachusetts total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 685 5.0 5,918 13.8 Coal 1,669 12.2 8,306 19.4 Hydro and Pumped Storage 1,942 14.2 659 1.5 Natural Gas 6,063 44.3 25,582 59.8 Other 1 3 * 771 1.8 Other Renewable1 304 2.2 1,274 3.0 Petroleum 3,031

  11. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Michigan Nuclear Profile 2010 Michigan profile Michigan total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 3,947 13.2 29,625 26.6 Coal 11,531 38.7 65,604 58.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 2,109 7.1 228 0.2 Natural Gas 11,033 37.0 12,249 11.0 Other 1 - - 631 0.6 Other Renewable1 571 1.9 2,832 2.5 Petroleum 640 2.1 382 0.3

  12. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Minnesota Nuclear Profile 2010 Minnesota profile Minnesota total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,549 10.8 13,478 25.1 Coal 4,789 32.5 28,083 52.3 Hydro and Pumped Storage 193 1.3 840 1.6 Natural Gas 4,936 33.5 4,341 8.1 Other 1 13 0.1 258 0.5 Other Renewable1 2,395 16.3 6,640 12.4 Petroleum 795 5.4 31

  13. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Hampshire Nuclear Profile 2010 New Hampshire profile New Hampshire total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,247 29.8 10,910 49.2 Coal 546 13.1 3,083 13.9 Hydro and Pumped Storage 489 11.7 1,478 6.7 Natural Gas 1,215 29.1 5,365 24.2 Other 1 - - 57 0.3 Other Renewable1 182 4.4 1,232 5.6 Petroleum 501 12.0

  14. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Jersey Nuclear Profile 2010 New Jersey profile New Jersey total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 4,108 22.3 32,771 49.9 Coal 2,036 11.1 6,418 9.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 404 2.2 -176 -0.3 Natural Gas 10,244 55.6 24,902 37.9 Other 1 56 0.3 682 1.0 Other Renewable1 226 1.2 850 1.3 Petroleum 1,351 7.3 235

  15. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    York Nuclear Profile 2010 New York profile New York total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 5,271 13.4 41,870 30.6 Coal 2,781 7.1 13,583 9.9 Hydro and Pumped Storage 5,714 14.5 24,942 18.2 Natural Gas 17,407 44.2 48,916 35.7 Other 1 45 0.1 832 0.6 Other Renewable1 1,719 4.4 4,815 3.5 Petroleum 6,421 16.3

  16. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    North Carolina Nuclear Profile 2010 North Carolina profile North Carolina total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 4,958 17.9 40,740 31.7 Coal 12,766 46.1 71,951 55.9 Hydro and Pumped Storage 2,042 7.4 4,757 3.7 Natural Gas 6,742 24.4 8,447 6.6 Other 1 50 0.2 407 0.3 Other Renewable1 543 2.0 2,083 1.6

  17. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Pennsylvania Nuclear Profile 2010 Pennsylvania profile Pennsylvania total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 9,540 20.9 77,828 33.9 Coal 18,481 40.6 110,369 48.0 Hydro and Pumped Storage 2,268 5.0 1,624 0.7 Natural Gas 9,415 20.7 33,718 14.7 Other 1 100 0.2 1,396 0.6 Other Renewable1 1,237 2.7 4,245 1.8

  18. Nuclear Navy

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1994-12-31

    This video tells the story of the Navy`s development of nuclear power and its application in long-range submarines and the growing nuclear surface force. Narrated by Frank Blair.

  19. Nuclear Energy!

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

    more about Nuclear Energy When: Saturday, October 19 | 1:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. Where: Aiken ... an IndyCar driver, see the Nuclear Clean Air Energy race car and receive a special ...

  20. The Role of the Sellafield Ltd Centres of Expertise in Engaging with the Science, Environment and Technology Supply Chain and University Sector to Support Site Operations and Decommissioning in the UK Nuclear Industry - 13018

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Butcher, Ed; Connor, Donna; Keighley, Debbie

    2013-07-01

    The development and maintenance of the broad range of the highly technical skills required for safe and successful management of nuclear sites is of vital importance during routine operations, decommissioning and waste treatment activities.. In order to maintain a core team of technical experts, across all of the disciplines required for these tasks, the approach which has been taken by the Sellafield Ltd has been the formation of twenty five Centres of Expertise (CoE), each covering key aspects of the technical skills required for nuclear site operations. Links with the Specialist University Departments: The CoE leads are also responsible for establishing formal links with university departments with specialist skills and facilities relevant to their CoE areas. The objective of these links is to allow these very specialist capabilities within the university sector to be more effectively utilized by the nuclear industry, which benefits both sectors. In addition to the utilization of specialist skills, the university links are providing an important introduction to the nuclear industry for students and researchers. This is designed to develop the pipeline of potential staff, who will be required in the future by both the academic and industrial sectors. (authors)

  1. Environment, Safety and Health Reporting

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

    2012-01-01

    To ensure timely collection, reporting, analysis, and dissemination of information on environment, safety, and health issues as required by law or regulations or as needed to ensure that the Department of Energy (DOE) and National Nuclear Security Administration are kept fully informed on a timely basis about events that could adversely affect the health and safety of the public or the workers, the environment, the intended purpose of DOE facilities, or the credibility of the Department. Cancels DOE O 210.1, DOE O 231.1, DOE O 232.1A. Canceled by DOE O 231.1B. DOE O 231.1B cancels all portions pertaining to environment, safety, and health reporting. Occurrence reporting and processing of operations information provisions remain in effect until January 1, 2012.

  2. STATEOFNEWMEXICO ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION,

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

    STATEOFNEWMEXICO ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION, HAZARDOUS WASTE BUREAU, Complainant UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, and NUCLEAR WASTE PARTNERSIDP, LLC Respondents WASTE ISOLATION PILOT PLANT EDDY COUNTY, NEW MEXICO ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Compliance Order No. HWB-14-21 ORDER GRANTING AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AN ANSWER AND REQUEST FOR HEARING Responde~ts United States Department of Energy and Nuclear Waste Partnership, LLC, on December 22, 2014, filed an unopposed

  3. Total Number of Operable Refineries

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

    Data Series: Total Number of Operable Refineries Number of Operating Refineries Number of Idle Refineries Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Operable Capacity (B/CD) Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Operating Capacity (B/CD) Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Idle Capacity (B/CD) Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Operable Capacity (B/SD) Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Operating Capacity (B/SD) Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Idle Capacity (B/SD) Vacuum Distillation Downstream Charge

  4. Total Energy Outcome City Pilot

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

    Total Energy Outcome City Pilot 2014 Building Technologies Office Peer Review Targeted Energy Outcomes A New City Energy Policy for Buildings Ken Baker - kbaker@neea.org Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance Project Summary Timeline: Key Partners: Start date: 09/01/2012 Planned end date: 08/31/2015 Key Milestones 1. Produce outcome based marketing collateral; 04/03/14 New Buildings Institute Two to three NW cities 2. Quantify and define participating city actions; 04/03/14 3. Quantify ongoing

  5. Total Estimated Contract Cost: Performance Period Total Fee Paid

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Total Fee Paid FY2008 $134,832 FY2009 $142,578 FY2010 $299,878 FY2011 $169,878 Cumulative Fee Paid $747,166 Contract Period: September 2007 - October 2012 $31,885,815 C/P/E Environmental Services, LLC DE-AM09-05SR22405/DE-AT30-07CC60011/SL14 Contractor: Contract Number: Contract Type: Cost Plus Award Fee $357,223 $597,797 $894,699 EM Contractor Fee Site: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC) Contract Name: SLAC Environmental Remediation December 2012 $1,516,646 Fee Available $208,620 Fee

  6. Buildings and Climate-Environment | Argonne National Laboratory

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

    Buildings and Climate-Environment Buildings and Climate-Environment Buildings consume over 40% of our nation's total energy and over 75% of its electricity. In order to meet carbon...

  7. Nuclear Fabrication Consortium

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Levesque, Stephen

    2013-04-05

    This report summarizes the activities undertaken by EWI while under contract from the Department of Energy (DOE) – Office of Nuclear Energy (NE) for the management and operation of the Nuclear Fabrication Consortium (NFC). The NFC was established by EWI to independently develop, evaluate, and deploy fabrication approaches and data that support the re-establishment of the U.S. nuclear industry: ensuring that the supply chain will be competitive on a global stage, enabling more cost-effective and reliable nuclear power in a carbon constrained environment. The NFC provided a forum for member original equipment manufactures (OEM), fabricators, manufacturers, and materials suppliers to effectively engage with each other and rebuild the capacity of this supply chain by : • Identifying and removing impediments to the implementation of new construction and fabrication techniques and approaches for nuclear equipment, including system components and nuclear plants. • Providing and facilitating detailed scientific-based studies on new approaches and technologies that will have positive impacts on the cost of building of nuclear plants. • Analyzing and disseminating information about future nuclear fabrication technologies and how they could impact the North American and the International Nuclear Marketplace. • Facilitating dialog and initiate alignment among fabricators, owners, trade associations, and government agencies. • Supporting industry in helping to create a larger qualified nuclear supplier network. • Acting as an unbiased technology resource to evaluate, develop, and demonstrate new manufacturing technologies. • Creating welder and inspector training programs to help enable the necessary workforce for the upcoming construction work. • Serving as a focal point for technology, policy, and politically interested parties to share ideas and concepts associated with fabrication across the nuclear industry. The report the objectives and summaries of the Nuclear Fabrication Consortium projects. Full technical reports for each of the projects have been submitted as well.

  8. Materials challenges for nuclear systems

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Allen, Todd; Busby, Jeremy; Meyer, Mitch; Petti, David

    2010-11-26

    The safe and economical operation of any nuclear power system relies to a great extent, on the success of the fuel and the materials of construction. During the lifetime of a nuclear power system which currently can be as long as 60 years, the materials are subject to high temperature, a corrosive environment, and damage from high-energy particles released during fission. The fuel which provides the power for the reactor has a much shorter life but is subject to the same types of harsh environments. This article reviews the environments in which fuels and materials from current and proposed nuclear systems operate and then describes how the creation of the Advanced Test Reactor National Scientific User Facility is allowing researchers from across the U.S. to test their ideas for improved fuels and materials.

  9. Advanced Instrumentation for Extreme Environments

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Melin, Alexander M; Kisner, Roger; Fugate, David L

    2013-01-01

    The Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Nuclear Energy (NE) is pursuing embedded instrumentation and controls (I&C) technology for next generation nuclear power generation applications. Embedded systems encompass a wide range of configurations and technologies; we define embedding in this instance as the integration of the sensors and the control system design into the component design using a systems engineering process. Embedded I&C systems are often an essential part of developing new capabilities, improving reliability, enhancing performance, and reducing operational costs. The new intrinsically safe, more efficient, and cost effective reactor technologies (Next Generation Nuclear Plant and Small Modular Reactors) require the development and application of new I&C technologies. These new designs raise extreme environmental challenges such as high temperatures (over 700 C) and material compatibility (e.g., molten salts). The desired reliability and functionality requires measurements in these extreme conditions including high radiation environments which were not previously monitored in real time. The DOE/NE Nuclear Energy Enabling Technologies (NEET) program currently has several projects investigating I&C technologies necessary to make these reactor designs realizable. The project described in this paper has the specific goal of investigating embedded I&C with the following objectives: 1.Explore and quantify the potential gains from embedded I&C improved reliability, increased performance, and reduced cost 2.Identify practical control, sensing, and measurement techniques for the extreme environments found in high-temperature reactors 3.Design and fabricate a functional prototype high-temperature cooling pump for molten salts represents target demonstration of improved performance, reliability, and widespread usage There are many engineering challenges in the design of a high-temperature liquid salt cooling pump. The pump and motor are in direct contact with molten fluoride salt at 700 C (1,292 F) as part of a reactor cooling loop. The motor-pump combination during normal operation would be red-hot (Figure 1). This environment challenges every facet of the design including seals, wiring, magnetic materials, and sensors. In this paper, we discuss the challenges of sensor design in extreme environments and specifically the sensor design for a high-temperature fluoride salt coolant pump. This pump will be used as a test-bed for embedded I&C development and validation in extreme environments.

  10. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    South Carolina profile South Carolina total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 6,486 27.0 51,988 49.9 Coal 7,230 30.1 37,671 36.2 Hydro and Pumped Storage 4,006 16.7 1,442 1.4 Natural Gas 5,308 22.1 10,927 10.5 Other 1 - - 61 0.1 Other Renewable1 284 1.2 1,873 1.8 Petroleum 670 2.8 191 0.2 Total 23,982

  11. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Tennessee profile Tennessee total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 3,401 15.9 27,739 33.7 Coal 8,805 41.1 43,670 53.0 Hydro and Pumped Storage 4,277 20.0 7,416 9.0 Natural Gas 4,655 21.7 2,302 2.8 Other 1 - - 16 * Other Renewable1 222 1.0 988 1.2 Petroleum 58 0.3 217 0.3 Total 21,417 100.0 82,349 100.0

  12. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Texas profile Texas total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 4,966 4.6 41,335 10.0 Coal 22,335 20.6 150,173 36.5 Hydro and Pumped Storage 689 0.6 1,262 0.3 Natural Gas 69,291 64.0 186,882 45.4 Other 1 477 0.4 3,630 0.9 Other Renewable1 10,295 9.5 27,705 6.7 Petroleum 204 0.2 708 0.2 Total 108,258 100.0

  13. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Virginia profile Virginia total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 3,501 14.5 26,572 36.4 Coal 5,868 24.3 25,459 34.9 Hydro and Pumped Storage 4,107 17.0 10 * Natural Gas 7,581 31.4 16,999 23.3 Other 1 - - 414 0.6 Other Renewable1 621 2.6 2,220 3.0 Petroleum 2,432 10.1 1,293 1.8 Total 24,109 100.0 72,966

  14. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Washington profile Washington total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,097 3.6 9,241 8.9 Coal 1,340 4.4 8,527 8.2 Hydro and Pumped Storage 21,495 70.5 68,342 66.0 Natural Gas 3,828 12.6 10,359 10.0 Other 1 - - 354 0.3 Other Renewable1 2,703 8.9 6,617 6.4 Petroleum 15 * 32 * Total 30,478 100.0 103,473

  15. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Wisconsin profile Wisconsin total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,584 8.9 13,281 20.7 Coal 8,063 45.2 40,169 62.5 Hydro and Pumped Storage 492 2.8 2,112 3.3 Natural Gas 6,110 34.3 5,497 8.5 Other 1 21 0.1 63 0.1 Other Renewable1 775 4.3 2,474 3.8 Petroleum 790 4.4 718 1.1 Total 17,836 100.0 64,314

  16. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    South Carolina profile South Carolina total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 6,486 27.0 51,988 49.9 Coal 7,230 30.1 37,671 36.2 Hydro and Pumped Storage 4,006 16.7 1,442 1.4 Natural Gas 5,308 22.1 10,927 10.5 Other 1 - - 61 0.1 Other Renewable1 284 1.2 1,873 1.8 Petroleum 670 2.8 191 0.2 Total 23,982

  17. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Tennessee profile Tennessee total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 3,401 15.9 27,739 33.7 Coal 8,805 41.1 43,670 53.0 Hydro and Pumped Storage 4,277 20.0 7,416 9.0 Natural Gas 4,655 21.7 2,302 2.8 Other 1 - - 16 * Other Renewable1 222 1.0 988 1.2 Petroleum 58 0.3 217 0.3 Total 21,417 100.0 82,349 100.0

  18. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Texas profile Texas total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 4,966 4.6 41,335 10.0 Coal 22,335 20.6 150,173 36.5 Hydro and Pumped Storage 689 0.6 1,262 0.3 Natural Gas 69,291 64.0 186,882 45.4 Other 1 477 0.4 3,630 0.9 Other Renewable1 10,295 9.5 27,705 6.7 Petroleum 204 0.2 708 0.2 Total 108,258 100.0

  19. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Virginia profile Virginia total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 3,501 14.5 26,572 36.4 Coal 5,868 24.3 25,459 34.9 Hydro and Pumped Storage 4,107 17.0 10 * Natural Gas 7,581 31.4 16,999 23.3 Other 1 - - 414 0.6 Other Renewable1 621 2.6 2,220 3.0 Petroleum 2,432 10.1 1,293 1.8 Total 24,109 100.0 72,966

  20. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Washington profile Washington total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,097 3.6 9,241 8.9 Coal 1,340 4.4 8,527 8.2 Hydro and Pumped Storage 21,495 70.5 68,342 66.0 Natural Gas 3,828 12.6 10,359 10.0 Other 1 - - 354 0.3 Other Renewable1 2,703 8.9 6,617 6.4 Petroleum 15 * 32 * Total 30,478 100.0 103,473

  1. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    Wisconsin profile Wisconsin total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,584 8.9 13,281 20.7 Coal 8,063 45.2 40,169 62.5 Hydro and Pumped Storage 492 2.8 2,112 3.3 Natural Gas 6,110 34.3 5,497 8.5 Other 1 21 0.1 63 0.1 Other Renewable1 775 4.3 2,474 3.8 Petroleum 790 4.4 718 1.1 Total 17,836 100.0 64,314

  2. U.S. Total Stocks

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Stock Type: Total Stocks Strategic Petroleum Reserve Non-SPR Refinery Tank Farms and Pipelines Leases Alaskan in Transit Bulk Terminal Pipeline Natural Gas Processing Plant Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Product Stock Type Area Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 View History Crude Oil and Petroleum Products 1,968,618 1,991,182 2,001,135 2,009,097 2,021,553 2,014,788 1956-2015 Crude Oil

  3. U.S. Total Exports

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

    International Falls, MN Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Alamo, TX El Paso, TX Galvan Ranch, TX Hidalgo, TX McAllen, TX Penitas, TX LNG Imports from Algeria Cove Point, MD Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG

  4. Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Civilian Nuclear...

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

    Nuclear Materials Convention on Supplementary Compensation Rulemaking See also Price Anderson Act. Contact Us Energy Policy Litigation, Regulation and Enforcement Environment and...

  5. Nuclear Physics

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

    Science Programs » Office of Science » Nuclear Physics /science-innovation/_assets/images/icon-science.jpg Nuclear Physics Enabling remarkable discoveries and tools that transform our understanding of energy and matter and advance national, economic, and energy security. Isotopes» A roadmap of matter that will help unlock the secrets of how the universe is put together The DOE Office of Science's Nuclear Physics (NP) program supports the experimental and theoretical research needed to create

  6. Nuclear Counterterrorism

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

    2013-08-26

    The Order defines requirements for the protection of sensitive improvised nuclear device information and provides a framework to support DOE activities related to nuclear counterterrorism. (A supplemental DOE Manual, Control of and Access to Improvised Nuclear Device Information, provides requirements and procedures for protecting Sigma 20 information.) Appendices A and B are Official Use Only. Point of contact is Adam Boyd (NA-82), 202-586-0010. Supersedes DOE O 457.1 and DOE M 457.1-1.

  7. nuclear smuggling

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    13, 2015

    SHANGHAI, CHINA - Today, the Nuclear Security Administration's (NNSA) Principal Assistant Deputy Administrator for Defense...

  8. nuclear material

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    width"300" >WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Department of Energy's (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), in partnership with the Defense Threat Reduction...

  9. nuclear weapons

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    09, 2015

    WASHINGTON, D.C. - The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and United States Air Force completed eight successful...

  10. nuclear controls

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    which "international safeguards are fully integrated into the design process of a new nuclear facility from the initial planning through design, construction, operation, and...

  11. nuclear forensics

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    serves as the premier technical leader in responding to and successfully resolving nuclear and radiological threats worldwide. When the need arises, NNSA is prepared to...

  12. NUCLEAR ENERGY

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    NUCLEAR ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ROADMAP Table of Contents List of Acronyms ................................................................................................... iii Executive Summary ............................................................................................... v 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 2. Background

  13. Total Imports of Residual Fuel

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 View History U.S. Total 4,471 6,479 7,281 4,217 5,941 6,842 1936-2015 PAD District 1 1,854 1,956 4,571 2,206 2,952 3,174 1981-2015 Connecticut 1995-2015 Delaware 204 678 85 1995-2015 Florida 677 351 299 932 836 1995-2015 Georgia 232 138 120 295 1995-2015 Maine 50 1995-2015 Maryland 1995-2015 Massachusetts 1995-2015 New Hampshire 1995-2015 New Jersey 1,328 780 1,575 400 1,131 1,712 1995-2015 New York 7 6 1,475 998 350 322 1995-2015 North Carolina

  14. 2014 Total Electric Industry- Customers

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Customers (Data from forms EIA-861- schedules 4A, 4B, 4D, EIA-861S and EIA-861U) State Residential Commercial Industrial Transportation Total New England 6,243,013 862,269 28,017 8 7,133,307 Connecticut 1,459,239 155,372 4,648 4 1,619,263 Maine 706,952 91,541 3,023 0 801,516 Massachusetts 2,720,128 398,717 14,896 3 3,133,744 New Hampshire 606,883 105,840 3,342 0 716,065 Rhode Island 438,879 58,346 1,884 1 499,110 Vermont 310,932 52,453 224 0 363,609 Middle Atlantic 15,806,914 2,247,455 44,397 17

  15. Total Adjusted Sales of Kerosene

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

    End Use: Total Residential Commercial Industrial Farm All Other Period: Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: End Use Area 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 View History U.S. 269,010 305,508 187,656 81,102 79,674 137,928 1984-2014 East Coast (PADD 1) 198,762 237,397 142,189 63,075 61,327 106,995 1984-2014 New England (PADD 1A) 56,661 53,363 38,448 15,983 15,991 27,500 1984-2014 Connecticut 8,800 7,437

  16. Total Imports of Residual Fuel

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

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History U.S. Total 133,646 119,888 93,672 82,173 63,294 68,265 1936-2015 PAD District 1 88,999 79,188 59,594 33,566 30,944 33,789 1981-2015 Connecticut 220 129 1995-2015 Delaware 748 1,704 510 1,604 2,479 1995-2015 Florida 15,713 11,654 10,589 8,331 5,055 7,013 1995-2015 Georgia 5,648 7,668 6,370 4,038 2,037 1,629 1995-2015 Maine 1,304 651 419 75 317 135 1995-2015 Maryland 3,638 1,779 1,238 433 938 539 1995-2015 Massachusetts 123 50 78 542 88 1995-2015 New

  17. Fast neutron environments.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Buchheit, Thomas Edward; Kotula, Paul Gabriel; Lu, Ping; Brewer, Luke N.; Goods, Steven Howard; Foiles, Stephen Martin; Puskar, Joseph David; Hattar, Khalid Mikhiel; Doyle, Barney Lee; Boyce, Brad Lee; Clark, Blythe G.

    2011-10-01

    The goal of this LDRD project is to develop a rapid first-order experimental procedure for the testing of advanced cladding materials that may be considered for generation IV nuclear reactors. In order to investigate this, a technique was developed to expose the coupons of potential materials to high displacement damage at elevated temperatures to simulate the neutron environment expected in Generation IV reactors. This was completed through a high temperature high-energy heavy-ion implantation. The mechanical properties of the ion irradiated region were tested by either micropillar compression or nanoindentation to determine the local properties, as a function of the implantation dose and exposure temperature. In order to directly compare the microstructural evolution and property degradation from the accelerated testing and classical neutron testing, 316L, 409, and 420 stainless steels were tested. In addition, two sets of diffusion couples from 316L and HT9 stainless steels with various refractory metals. This study has shown that if the ion irradiation size scale is taken into consideration when developing and analyzing the mechanical property data, significant insight into the structural properties of the potential cladding materials can be gained in about a week.

  18. nuclear | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Library Bios Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Photo Gallery Jobs Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Home /

  19. Nuclear safety information sharing agreement between NRC and DOE's Office

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

    of Environment, Health, Safety and Security | Department of Energy Nuclear safety information sharing agreement between NRC and DOE's Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security Nuclear safety information sharing agreement between NRC and DOE's Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security December 2014 agreement between NRC and DOE's Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security to establish a framework for DOE and NRC to exchange information related to safety issues

  20. Nuclear Science/Nuclear Chemistry

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

    Nuclear Science/Nuclear Chemistry Nuclear Physics The 10-MV tandem accelerator at CAMS provides a platform for conducting nuclear physics experiment both for basic science and lab mission-related programs. For example, we performed a new cross section measurement of the astrophysically important reaction 40Ca(a,g)44Ti in which high purity CaO targets were irradiated with helium ions at several different discrete energies. The reaction rate was measured on-line via prompt gamma ray spectroscopy

  1. Nuclear Weapons Journal

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

    Nuclear Weapons Journal Nuclear Weapons Journal The Nuclear Weapons Journal ceased publication after Issue 2, 2009. Below are Nuclear Weapons Journal archived issues. Issue 2, 2009 ...

  2. Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Policy

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

    2011-02-08

    It is the policy of the Department of Energy to design, construct, operate, and decommission its nuclear facilities in a manner that ensures adequate protection of workers, the public, and the environment. Supersedes SEN-35-91.

  3. NERSC User Environment

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

    Environment NERSC User Environment Home Directories, Shells and Dotfiles All NERSC systems use global home directories, which are are pre-populated with shell initialization files...

  4. Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty | National Nuclear Security Administra...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy ... Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons off ...

  5. Total-derivative supersymmetry breaking

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Haba, Naoyuki; Uekusa, Nobuhiro

    2010-05-15

    On an interval compactification in supersymmetric theory, boundary conditions for bulk fields must be treated carefully. If they are taken arbitrarily following the requirement that a theory is supersymmetric, the conditions could give redundant constraints on the theory. We construct a supersymmetric action integral on an interval by introducing brane interactions with which total-derivative terms under the supersymmetry transformation become zero due to a cancellation. The variational principle leads equations of motion and also boundary conditions for bulk fields, which determine boundary values of bulk fields. By estimating mass spectrum, spontaneous supersymmetry breaking in this simple setup can be realized in a new framework. This supersymmetry breaking does not induce a massless R axion, which is favorable for phenomenology. It is worth noting that fermions in hyper-multiplet, gauge bosons, and the fifth-dimensional component of gauge bosons can have zero-modes (while the other components are all massive as Kaluza-Klein modes), which fits the gauge-Higgs unification scenarios.

  6. Arkansas Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1, Unit 2","1,835","15,023",100.0,"Entergy Arkansas Inc" "1 Plant 2 Reactors","1,835","15,023",100.0

  7. California Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    California nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Diablo Canyon Unit 1, Unit 2","2,240","18,430",57.2,"Pacific Gas & Electric Co" "San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit 2, Unit

  8. Connecticut Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    Connecticut nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Millstone Unit 2, Unit 3","2,103","16,750",100.0,"Dominion Nuclear Conn Inc" "1 Plant 2 Reactors","2,103","16,750",100.0

  9. Illinois Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    Illinois nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Braidwood Generation Station Unit 1, Unit 2","2,330","19,200",20.0,"Exelon Nuclear" "Byron Generating Station Unit 1, Unit 2","2,300","19,856",20.6,"Exelon

  10. Kansas Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    Kansas nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Wolf Creek Generating Station Unit 1","1,160","9,556",100.0,"Wolf Creek Nuclear Optg Corp" "1 Plant 1 Reactor","1,160","9,556",100.0

  11. Tennessee Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    Tennessee nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Sequoyah Unit 1, Unit 2","2,278","18,001",64.9,"Tennessee Valley Authority" "Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Unit 1","1,123","9,738",35.1,"Tennessee Valley

  12. Texas Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Comanche Peak Unit 1, Unit 2","2,406","20,208",48.9,"Luminant Generation Company LLC" "South Texas Project Unit 1, Unit 2","2,560","21,127",51.1,"STP Nuclear

  13. Pennsylvania Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    Pennsylvania nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Beaver Valley Unit 1, Unit 2","1,777","14,994",19.3,"FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company" "Limerick Unit 1, Unit 2","2,264","18,926",24.3,"Exelon

  14. Vermont Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Vermont Yankee Unit 1",620,"4,782",100.0,"Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee" "1 Plant 1 Reactor",620,"4,782",100.0

  15. Wisconsin Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    Wisconsin nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Kewaunee Unit 1",566,"4,990",37.6,"Dominion Energy Kewaunee Inc." "Point Beach Nuclear Plant Unit 1, Unit 2","1,018","8,291",62.4,"NextEra Energy Point Beach

  16. Arizona Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Palo Verde Unit 1, Unit 2, Unit 3","3,937","31,200",100.0,"Arizona Public Service Co" "1 Plant 3 Reactors","3,937","31,200",100.0 "Note: Totals may not equal sum of

  17. Missouri Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Callaway Unit 1","1,190","8,996",100.0,"Union Electric Co" "1 Plant 1 Reactor","1,190","8,996",100.0 "Note: Totals may not equal sum of components due to

  18. J.B. (comp.) 63 RADIATION, THERMAL, AND OTHER ENVIRON. POLLUTANT...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    AND OTHER ENVIRON. POLLUTANT EFFECTS ON LIVING ORGS. AND BIOL. MAT.; 62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE; 99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUSMATHEMATICS, COMPUTING, AND INFORMATION...

  19. Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook-

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

    Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey: Energy End-Use Consumption Tables Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing Other Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing...

  20. Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook-

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Released: September, 2008 Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing Other Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing Other All Buildings* ... 1,870 1,276...

  1. Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook-

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Energy Consumption Survey: Energy End-Use Consumption Tables Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing Other Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing Other All...

  2. Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook-

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Released: September, 2008 Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing Other Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing Other All Buildings* ... 1,602 1,397...

  3. Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook-

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Released: September, 2008 Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing Other Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing Other All Buildings ... 2,037...

  4. IN THE MATTER OF: STATE OF NEW MEXICO ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT

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

    MATTER OF: STATE OF NEW MEXICO ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT ) ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER UNDER THE NEW MEXICO HAZARDOUS WASTE ACT§ 74-4-13 OF ENERGY AND NUCLEAR ) WASTE PARTNERSHIP LLC ) ) ) WASTE ISOLATION PILOT PLANT ) EDDY COUNTY, NEW MEXICO ) ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER Pursuant to NMSA 1978, Section 74-4-13(A) ofthe Hazardous Waste Act ("HWA"), the New Mexico Environment Department ("NMED") hereby orders the Department of Energy ("DOE"), and Nuclear

  5. Energy Department Announces New Nuclear Energy Innovation Investments

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

    Reactor Materials (total 7.9 million, 9 projects) to conduct research into advanced reactor materials for piping, wiring cladding and other related structures in nuclear...

  6. Maintaining the Stockpile | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Maintaining the Stockpile Maintaining the Stockpile NNSA Hosts NPT Parties at Los Alamos and Sandia National Laboratories WASHINGTON D.C. - On March 25-27, 2015, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) hosted representatives from 11 States Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Flight Test of Weapons System Body by Navy Successful Third Flight Demonstrated Dynamics and Functional Performance in Flight EnvironmentWASHINGTON, D.C. - The National Nuclear Security

  7. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    5 Iowa Iowa total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 601 4.1 4,451 7.7 Coal 6,956 47.7 41,283 71.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 144 1.0 948 1.6 Natural Gas 2,299 15.8 1,312 2.3 Other Renewable 1 3,584 24.6 9,360 16.3 Petroleum 1,007 6.9 154 0.3 Total 14,592 100.0 57,509 100.0 Source: Form EIA-860, "Annual Electric Generator Report," and Form EIA-923, "Power Plant Operations Report." Share of State total (percent) 1

  8. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7 Nebraska Nebraska total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 1,245 15.8 11,054 30.2 Coal 3,932 50.0 23,363 63.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 278 3.5 1,314 3.6 Natural Gas 1,849 23.5 375 1.0 Other Renewable 1 165 2.1 493 1.3 Petroleum 387 4.9 31 0.1 Total 7,857 100.0 36,630 100.0 Source: Form EIA-860, "Annual Electric Generator Report," and Form EIA-923, "Power Plant Operations Report." Share of State total (percent) 1

  9. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    60 Vermont Vermont total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 620 55.0 4,782 72.2 Hydro and Pumped Storage 324 28.7 1,347 20.3 Natural Gas - - 4 0.1 Other Renewable 1 84 7.5 482 7.3 Petroleum 100 8.9 5 0.1 Total 1,128 100.0 6,620 100.0 - = No data reported. Source: Form EIA-860, "Annual Electric Generator Report," and Form EIA-923, "Power Plant Operations Report." Share of State total (percent) 1 Municipal Solid Waste net

  10. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    5 Iowa Iowa total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 601 4.1 4,451 7.7 Coal 6,956 47.7 41,283 71.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 144 1.0 948 1.6 Natural Gas 2,299 15.8 1,312 2.3 Other Renewable 1 3,584 24.6 9,360 16.3 Petroleum 1,007 6.9 154 0.3 Total 14,592 100.0 57,509 100.0 Source: Form EIA-860, "Annual Electric Generator Report," and Form EIA-923, "Power Plant Operations Report." Share of State total (percent) 1

  11. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    7 Nebraska Nebraska total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 1,245 15.8 11,054 30.2 Coal 3,932 50.0 23,363 63.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 278 3.5 1,314 3.6 Natural Gas 1,849 23.5 375 1.0 Other Renewable 1 165 2.1 493 1.3 Petroleum 387 4.9 31 0.1 Total 7,857 100.0 36,630 100.0 Source: Form EIA-860, "Annual Electric Generator Report," and Form EIA-923, "Power Plant Operations Report." Share of State total (percent) 1

  12. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    60 Vermont Vermont total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 620 55.0 4,782 72.2 Hydro and Pumped Storage 324 28.7 1,347 20.3 Natural Gas - - 4 0.1 Other Renewable 1 84 7.5 482 7.3 Petroleum 100 8.9 5 0.1 Total 1,128 100.0 6,620 100.0 - = No data reported. Source: Form EIA-860, "Annual Electric Generator Report," and Form EIA-923, "Power Plant Operations Report." Share of State total (percent) 1 Municipal Solid Waste net

  13. Dynamic Analysis of Nuclear Energy System Strategies

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2004-06-17

    DANESS is an integrated process model for nuclear energy systems allowing the simulation of multiple reactors and fuel cycles in a continuously changing nuclear reactor park configuration. The model is energy demand driven and simulates all nuclear fuel cycle facilites, up to 10 reactors and fuels. Reactor and fuel cycle facility history are traced and the cost of generating energy is calculated per reactor and for total nuclear energy system. The DANESS model aims atmore » performing dynamic systems analysis of nuclear energy development used for integrated analysis of development paths for nuclear energy, parameter scoping for new nuclear energy systems, economic analysis of nuclear energy, government role analysis, and education.« less

  14. Nuclear Counterterrorism

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

    2006-02-07

    The Order defines requirements for the protection of sensitive improvised nuclear device information and provides a framework to support DOE activities related to nuclear counterterrorism. (A supplemental DOE Manual, Control of and Access to Improvised Nuclear Device Information, provides requirements and procedures for protecting Sigma 20 information. The Manual is Official Use Only, and is not available on the Directives Portal. The point of contact for the Manual is Randall Weidman, NA-121.2, 202-586-4582.) Canceled by DOE O 457.1A

  15. Primer on nuclear exchange models

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hafemeister, David

    2014-05-09

    Basic physics is applied to nuclear force exchange models between two nations. Ultimately, this scenario approach can be used to try and answer the age old question of 'how much is enough?' This work is based on Chapter 2 of Physics of Societal Issues: Calculations on National Security, Environment and Energy (Springer, 2007 and 2014)

  16. WIRELESS FOR A NUCLEAR FACILITY

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shull, D; Joe Cordaro, J

    2007-03-28

    The introduction of wireless technology into a government site where nuclear material is processed and stored brings new meaning to the term ''harsh environment''. At SRNL, we are attempting to address not only the harsh RF and harsh physical environment common to industrial facilities, but also the ''harsh'' regulatory environment necessitated by the nature of the business at our site. We will discuss our concepts, processes, and expected outcomes in our attempts to surmount the roadblocks and reap the benefits of wireless in our ''factory''.

  17. National Nuclear Security Administration | National Nuclear Security...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    National Nuclear Security Administration | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing...

  18. RADIOCHEMISTRY, AND NUCLEAR CHEMISTRY; NUCLEAR MEDICINE; HISTORICAL

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    The early days Richards, P. 38 RADIATION CHEMISTRY, RADIOCHEMISTRY, AND NUCLEAR CHEMISTRY; NUCLEAR MEDICINE; HISTORICAL ASPECTS; TECHNETIUM 99; COLLOIDS; MOLYBDENUM...

  19. nuclear navy

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    7%2A en Powering the Nuclear Navy http:nnsa.energy.govourmissionpoweringnavy

    Page...

  20. nuclear navy

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    7%2A en Powering the Nuclear Navy http:www.nnsa.energy.govourmissionpoweringnavy

    Page...

  1. Nuclear Nonproliferation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Atkins-Duffin, C E

    2008-12-10

    With an explosion equivalent of about 20kT of TNT, the Trinity test was the first demonstration of a nuclear weapon. Conducted on July 16, 1945 in Alamogordo, NM this site is now a Registered National Historic Landmark. The concept and applicability of nuclear power was demonstrated on December 20, 1951 with the Experimental Breeder Reactor Number One (EBR-1) lit four light bulbs. This reactor is now a Registered National Historic Landmark, located near Arco, ID. From that moment forward it had been clearly demonstrated that nuclear energy has both peaceful and military applications and that the civilian and military fuel cycles can overlap. For the more than fifty years since the Atoms for Peace program, a key objective of nuclear policy has been to enable the wider peaceful use of nuclear energy while preventing the spread of nuclear weapons. Volumes have been written on the impact of these two actions on the world by advocates and critics; pundits and practioners; politicians and technologists. The nations of the world have woven together a delicate balance of treaties, agreements, frameworks and handshakes that are representative of the timeframe in which they were constructed and how they have evolved in time. Collectively these vehicles attempt to keep political will, nuclear materials and technology in check. This paper captures only the briefest abstract of the more significant aspects on the Nonproliferation Regime. Of particular relevance to this discussion is the special nonproliferation sensitivity associated with the uranium isotope separation and spent fuel reprocessing aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle.

  2. Nuclear Astrophysics

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

    Nuclear Astrophysics One of the great scientific challenges is understanding how elements form. This process, called nucleosynthesis, occurs at extreme stellar temperatures and pressures, making it difficult to simulate in the laboratory. The conditions produced by NIF experiments, however, are well matched to the conditions that exist in stars in several phases of their evolution. As a result, NIF is a powerful tool for exploring nuclear physics. Elements heavier than iron are formed either

  3. Nuclear Data

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    White, Morgan C.

    2014-01-23

    PowerPoint presentation targeted for educational use. Nuclear data comes from a variety of sources and in many flavors. Understanding where the data you use comes from and what flavor it is can be essential to understand and interpret your results. This talk will discuss the nuclear data pipeline with particular emphasis on providing links to additional resources that can be used to explore the issues you will encounter.

  4. Salt disposal of heat-generating nuclear waste.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Leigh, Christi D.; Hansen, Francis D.

    2011-01-01

    This report summarizes the state of salt repository science, reviews many of the technical issues pertaining to disposal of heat-generating nuclear waste in salt, and proposes several avenues for future science-based activities to further the technical basis for disposal in salt. There are extensive salt formations in the forty-eight contiguous states, and many of them may be worthy of consideration for nuclear waste disposal. The United States has extensive experience in salt repository sciences, including an operating facility for disposal of transuranic wastes. The scientific background for salt disposal including laboratory and field tests at ambient and elevated temperature, principles of salt behavior, potential for fracture damage and its mitigation, seal systems, chemical conditions, advanced modeling capabilities and near-future developments, performance assessment processes, and international collaboration are all discussed. The discussion of salt disposal issues is brought current, including a summary of recent international workshops dedicated to high-level waste disposal in salt. Lessons learned from Sandia National Laboratories' experience on the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant and the Yucca Mountain Project as well as related salt experience with the Strategic Petroleum Reserve are applied in this assessment. Disposal of heat-generating nuclear waste in a suitable salt formation is attractive because the material is essentially impermeable, self-sealing, and thermally conductive. Conditions are chemically beneficial, and a significant experience base exists in understanding this environment. Within the period of institutional control, overburden pressure will seal fractures and provide a repository setting that limits radionuclide movement. A salt repository could potentially achieve total containment, with no releases to the environment in undisturbed scenarios for as long as the region is geologically stable. Much of the experience gained from United States repository development, such as seal system design, coupled process simulation, and application of performance assessment methodology, helps define a clear strategy for a heat-generating nuclear waste repository in salt.

  5. Categorization of Used Nuclear Fuel Inventory in Support of a Comprehensive

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    National Nuclear Fuel Cycle Strategy | Department of Energy Categorization of Used Nuclear Fuel Inventory in Support of a Comprehensive National Nuclear Fuel Cycle Strategy Categorization of Used Nuclear Fuel Inventory in Support of a Comprehensive National Nuclear Fuel Cycle Strategy The Office of Nuclear Energy has conducted a technical review and assessment of the total current inventory [~70,150 MTHM as of 2011] of domestic discharged used nuclear fuel (UNF) and estimated an amount to be

  6. Materials challenges for nuclear systems

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

    Allen, Todd; Busby, Jeremy; Meyer, Mitch; Petti, David

    2010-11-26

    The safe and economical operation of any nuclear power system relies to a great extent, on the success of the fuel and the materials of construction. During the lifetime of a nuclear power system which currently can be as long as 60 years, the materials are subject to high temperature, a corrosive environment, and damage from high-energy particles released during fission. The fuel which provides the power for the reactor has a much shorter life but is subject to the same types of harsh environments. This article reviews the environments in which fuels and materials from current and proposed nuclearmore » systems operate and then describes how the creation of the Advanced Test Reactor National Scientific User Facility is allowing researchers from across the U.S. to test their ideas for improved fuels and materials.« less

  7. Alabama Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","5,043",15.6,"37,941",24.9 "Coal","11,441",35.3,"63,050",41.4 "Hydro and Pumped

  8. Arizona Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (nw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear",3937,14.9,"31,200",27.9 "Coal","6,233",23.6,"43,644",39.1 "Hydro and Pumped Storage","2,937",11.1,"6,831",6.1

  9. Arkansas Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","1,835",11.5,"15,023",24.6 "Coal","4,535",28.4,"28,152",46.2 "Hydro and Pumped

  10. California Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","4,390",6.5,"32,201",15.8 "Coal",374,0.6,"2,100",1.0 "Hydro and Pumped Storage","13,954",20.7,"33,260",16.3

  11. Connecticut Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","2,103",25.4,"16,750",50.2 "Coal",564,6.8,"2,604",7.8 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",151,1.8,400,1.2 "Natural

  12. Florida Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (nw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","3,924",6.6,"23,936",10.4 "Coal","9,975",16.9,"59,897",26.1 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",55,0.1,177,0.1 "Natural

  13. Georgia Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","4,061",11.1,"33,512",24.4 "Coal","13,230",36.1,"73,298",53.3 "Hydro and Pumped

  14. Illinois Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","11,441",25.9,"96,190",47.8 "Coal","15,551",35.2,"93,611",46.5 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",34,0.1,119,0.1 "Natural

  15. Iowa Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear",601,4.1,"4,451",7.7 "Coal","6,956",47.7,"41,283",71.8 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",144,1.0,948,1.6 "Natural

  16. Kansas Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","1,160",9.2,"9,556",19.9 "Coal","5,179",41.3,"32,505",67.8 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",3,"*",13,"*"

  17. Louisiana Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","2,142",8.0,"18,639",18.1 "Coal","3,417",12.8,"23,924",23.3 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",192,0.7,"1,109",1.1

  18. Maryland Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","1,705",13.6,"13,994",32.1 "Coal","4,886",39.0,"23,668",54.3 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",590,4.7,"1,667",3.8

  19. Massachusetts Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, smmer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear",685,5.0,"5,918",13.8 "Coal","1,669",12.2,"8,306",19.4 "Hydro and Pumped Storage","1,942",14.2,659,1.5 "Natural

  20. Michigan Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy Source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","3,947",13.2,"29,625",26.6 "Coal","11,531",38.7,"65,604",58.8 "Hydro and Pumped Storage","2,109",7.1,228,0.2

  1. Minnesota Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","1,594",10.8,"13,478",25.1 "Coal","4,789",32.5,"28,083",52.3 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",193,1.3,840,1.6 "Natural

  2. Mississippi Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","1,251",8.0,"9,643",17.7 "Coal","2,526",16.1,"13,629",25.0 "Natural Gas","11,640",74.2,"29,619",54.4

  3. Nebraska Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","1,245",15.8,"11,054",30.2 "Coal","3,932",50.0,"23,363",63.8 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",278,3.5,"1,314",3.6

  4. Tennessee Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","3,401",15.9,"27,739",33.7 "Coal","8,805",41.1,"43,670",53.0 "Hydro and Pumped

  5. Texas Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","4,966",4.6,"41,335",10.0 "Coal","22,335",20.6,"150,173",36.5 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",689,0.6,"1,262",0.3

  6. Ohio Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","2,134",6.5,"15,805",11.0 "Coal","21,360",64.6,"117,828",82.1 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",101,0.3,429,0.3 "Natural

  7. Pennsylvania Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","9,540",20.9,"77,828",33.9 "Coal","18,481",40.6,"110,369",48.0 "Hydro and Pumped

  8. Vermont Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear",620,55.0,"4,782",72.2 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",324,28.7,"1,347",20.3 "Natural Gas","-","-",4,0.1 "Other

  9. Virginia Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","3,501",14.5,"26,572",36.4 "Coal","5,868",24.3,"25,459",34.9 "Hydro and Pumped Storage","4,107",17.0,10,"*"

  10. Wisconsin Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (nw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","1,584",8.9,"13,281",20.7 "Coal","8,063",45.2,"40,169",62.5 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",492,2.8,"2,112",3.3

  11. Environment | Department of Energy

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

    Environment Environment Environment The U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) complies with all applicable environmental laws and regulations and establishes its own environmental requirements to ensure workers, the public, and the environment is protected from hazards associated with all Department operations. DOE provides assistance to the field to implement these policies, works in resolving environmental protection issues, and provides feedback to enhance environmental performance throughout the

  12. A position paper for a central procurement organization for the nuclear power industry

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hendricks, J.R.

    1996-06-01

    This paper integrates the results of numerous nuclear utility industry meetings with commercial business practices. The Central Procurement Organization (CPO) is designed to achieve an immediate 30%--50% reduction in total procurement, engineering qualification, warehousing, and distribution cost. Three (3) areas define a CPO success criteria: (1) Lean, credible, and cost-effective issues discussed include facility cost, operational cost, staff expertise, product priorities, warehousing, and distribution, (2) Common technical, commercial, and quality requirement issues discussed include current industry practices and proposed future methodologies, and (3) Financial survivability issues which are the most critical since the CPO must exist during changing internal and external utility environments.

  13. Nuclear Models

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fossion, Ruben [Instituto de Ciencias Nucleares, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Apartado Postal 70-543, Mexico D. F., C.P. 04510 (Mexico)

    2010-09-10

    The atomic nucleus is a typical example of a many-body problem. On the one hand, the number of nucleons (protons and neutrons) that constitute the nucleus is too large to allow for exact calculations. On the other hand, the number of constituent particles is too small for the individual nuclear excitation states to be explained by statistical methods. Another problem, particular for the atomic nucleus, is that the nucleon-nucleon (n-n) interaction is not one of the fundamental forces of Nature, and is hard to put in a single closed equation. The nucleon-nucleon interaction also behaves differently between two free nucleons (bare interaction) and between two nucleons in the nuclear medium (dressed interaction).Because of the above reasons, specific nuclear many-body models have been devised of which each one sheds light on some selected aspects of nuclear structure. Only combining the viewpoints of different models, a global insight of the atomic nucleus can be gained. In this chapter, we revise the the Nuclear Shell Model as an example of the microscopic approach, and the Collective Model as an example of the geometric approach. Finally, we study the statistical properties of nuclear spectra, basing on symmetry principles, to find out whether there is quantum chaos in the atomic nucleus. All three major approaches have been rewarded with the Nobel Prize of Physics. In the text, we will stress how each approach introduces its own series of approximations to reduce the prohibitingly large number of degrees of freedom of the full many-body problem to a smaller manageable number of effective degrees of freedom.

  14. Computing environment logbook

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Osbourn, Gordon C; Bouchard, Ann M

    2012-09-18

    A computing environment logbook logs events occurring within a computing environment. The events are displayed as a history of past events within the logbook of the computing environment. The logbook provides search functionality to search through the history of past events to find one or more selected past events, and further, enables an undo of the one or more selected past events.

  15. Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook-

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

    Tables Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing Other Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing Other All Buildings* ... 634 578 46 1 Q 116.4 106.3...

  16. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Alaska - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S2. Summary statistics for natural gas - Alaska, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 269 277 185 R 159 170 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 127,417 112,268

  17. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Connecticut - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S7. Summary statistics for natural gas - Connecticut, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil

  18. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 District of Columbia - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S9. Summary statistics for natural gas - District of Columbia, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  19. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Indiana - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S16. Summary statistics for natural gas - Indiana, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 620 914 819 R 921 895 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 6,802 9,075

  20. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Maryland - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S22. Summary statistics for natural gas - Maryland, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 7 8 9 7 7 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 43 34 44 32 20 From Oil

  1. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Massachusetts - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S23. Summary statistics for natural gas - Massachusetts, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0

  2. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Minnesota - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S25. Summary statistics for natural gas - Minnesota, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil

  3. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Nebraska - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S29. Summary statistics for natural gas - Nebraska, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 276 322 270 R 357 310 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 2,092 1,854

  4. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 New Hampshire - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S31. Summary statistics for natural gas - New Hampshire, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0

  5. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 North Carolina - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S35. Summary statistics for natural gas - North Carolina, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0

  6. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    50 North Dakota - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S36. Summary statistics for natural gas - North Dakota, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 188 239 211 200 200 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  7. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 South Carolina - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S42. Summary statistics for natural gas - South Carolina, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0

  8. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Washington - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S49. Summary statistics for natural gas - Washington, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil

  9. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    80 Wisconsin - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S51. Summary statistics for natural gas - Wisconsin, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil

  10. Total System Performance Assessment Peer Review Panel

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Total System Performance Assessment (TSPA) Peer Review Panel for predicting the performance of a repository at Yucca Mountain.

  11. Synergistic Smart Fuel For In-pile Nuclear Reactor Measurements

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    James A. Smith; Dale K. Kotter; Randall A. Ali; Steven L . Garrett

    2013-10-01

    In March 2011, an earthquake of magnitude 9.0 on the Richter scale struck Japan with its epicenter on the northeast coast, near the Tohoku region. In addition to the immense physical destruction and casualties across the country, several nuclear power plants (NPP) were affected. It was the Fukushima Daiichi NPP that experienced the most severe and irreversible damage. The earthquake brought the reactors at Fukushima to an automatic shutdown and because the power transmission lines were damaged, emergency diesel generators (EDGs) were activated to ensure that there was continued cooling of the reactors and spent fuel pools. The situation was being successfully managed until the tsunami hit about forty-five minutes later with a maximum wave height of approximately 15 m. The influx of water submerged the EDGs, the electrical switchgear, and dc batteries, resulting in the total loss of power to the reactors.2 At this point, the situation became critical. There was a loss of the sensors and instrumentation within the reactor that could have provided valuable information to guide the operators to make informed decisions and avoid the unfortunate events that followed. In the light of these events, we have developed and tested a potential self-powered thermoacoustic system, which will have the ability to serve as a temperature sensor and can transmit data independently of electronic networks. Such a device is synergistic with the harsh environment of the nuclear reactor as it utilizes the heat from the nuclear fuel to provide the input power.

  12. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Alabama Alabama total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 5,043 15.6 37,941 24.9 Coal 11,441 35.3 63,050 41.4 Hydro and Pumped Storage 3,272 10.1 8,704 5.7 Natural Gas 11,936 36.8 39,235 25.8 Other 1 100 0.3 643 0.4 Other Renewable 1 583 1.8 2,377 1.6 Petroleum 43 0.1 200 0.1 Total 32,417 100.0 152,151 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture

  13. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Arizona Arizona Total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 3,937 14.9 31,200 27.9 Coal 6,233 23.6 43,644 39.1 Hydro and Pumped Storage 2,937 11.1 6,831 6.1 Natural Gas 13,012 49.3 29,676 26.6 Other 1 - - 15 * Other Renewable 1 181 0.7 319 0.3 Petroleum 93 0.4 66 0.1 Total 26,392 100.0 111,751 100.0 * = Absolute percentage less than 0.05. - = No data reported. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid

  14. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Arkansas Arkansas total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 1,835 11.5 15,023 24.6 Coal 4,535 28.4 28,152 46.2 Hydro and Pumped Storage 1,369 8.6 3,658 6.0 Natural Gas 7,894 49.4 12,469 20.4 Other 1 - - 28 * Other Renewable 1 326 2.0 1,624 2.7 Petroleum 22 0.1 45 0.1 Total 15,981 100.0 61,000 100.0 * = Absolute percentage less than 0.05. - = No data reported. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid

  15. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7 California California total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 4,390 6.5 32,201 15.8 Coal 374 0.6 2,100 1.0 Hydro and Pumped Storage 13,954 20.7 33,260 16.3 Natural Gas 41,370 61.4 107,522 52.7 Other 1 220 0.3 2,534 1.2 Other Renewable 1 6,319 9.4 25,450 12.5 Petroleum 701 1.0 1,059 0.5 Total 67,328 100.0 204,126 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste,

  16. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    9 Connecticut Connecticut total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 2,103 25.4 16,750 50.2 Coal 564 6.8 2,604 7.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 151 1.8 400 1.2 Natural Gas 2,292 27.7 11,716 35.1 Other 1 27 0.3 730 2.2 Other Renewable 1 159 1.9 740 2.2 Petroleum 2,989 36.1 409 1.2 Total 8,284 100.0 33,350 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture

  17. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    1 Florida Florida total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 3,924 6.6 23,936 10.4 Coal 9,975 16.9 59,897 26.1 Hydro and Pumped Storage 55 0.1 177 0.1 Natural Gas 31,563 53.4 128,634 56.1 Other 1 544 0.9 2,842 1.2 Other Renewable 1 1,053 1.8 4,487 2.0 Petroleum 12,033 20.3 9,122 4.0 Total 59,147 100.0 229,096 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture

  18. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    3 Georgia Georgia total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 4,061 11.1 33,512 24.4 Coal 13,230 36.1 73,298 53.3 Hydro and Pumped Storage 3,851 10.5 3,044 2.2 Natural Gas 12,668 34.6 23,884 17.4 Other 1 - - 18 * Other Renewable 1 637 1.7 3,181 2.3 Petroleum 2,189 6.0 641 0.5 Total 36,636 100.0 137,577 100.0 * = Absolute percentage less than 0.05. - = No data reported. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal

  19. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7 Illinois Illinois total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 11,441 25.9 96,190 47.8 Coal 15,551 35.2 93,611 46.5 Hydro and Pumped Storage 34 0.1 119 0.1 Natural Gas 13,771 31.2 5,724 2.8 Other 1 145 0.3 461 0.2 Other Renewable 1 2,078 4.7 5,138 2.6 Petroleum 1,106 2.5 110 0.1 Total 44,127 100.0 201,352 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture

  20. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    20 Kansas Kansas total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 1,160 9.2 9,556 19.9 Coal 5,179 41.3 32,505 67.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 3 * 13 * Natural Gas 4,573 36.5 2,287 4.8 Other Renewable 1 1,079 8.6 3,459 7.2 Petroleum 550 4.4 103 0.2 Total 12,543 100.0 47,924 100.0 * = Absolute percentage less than 0.05. Source: Form EIA-860, "Annual Electric Generator Report," and Form EIA-923, "Power Plant Operations Report."

  1. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    21 Louisiana Louisiana total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 2,142 8.0 18,639 18.1 Coal 3,417 12.8 23,924 23.3 Hydro and Pumped Storage 192 0.7 1,109 1.1 Natural Gas 19,574 73.2 51,344 49.9 Other 1 213 0.8 2,120 2.1 Other Renewable 1 325 1.2 2,468 2.4 Petroleum 881 3.3 3,281 3.2 Total 26,744 100.0 102,885 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture

  2. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    5 Maryland Maryland total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 1,705 13.6 13,994 32.1 Coal 4,886 39.0 23,668 54.3 Hydro and Pumped Storage 590 4.7 1,667 3.8 Natural Gas 2,041 16.3 2,897 6.6 Other 1 152 1.2 485 1.1 Other Renewable 1 209 1.7 574 1.3 Petroleum 2,933 23.4 322 0.7 Total 12,516 100.0 43,607 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture

  3. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    3 Massachusetts Massachusetts total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 685 5.0 5,918 13.8 Coal 1,669 12.2 8,306 19.4 Hydro and Pumped Storage 1,942 14.2 659 1.5 Natural Gas 6,063 44.3 25,582 59.8 Other 1 3 * 771 1.8 Other Renewable 1 304 2.2 1,274 3.0 Petroleum 3,031 22.1 296 0.7 Total 13,697 100.0 42,805 100.0 * = Absolute percentage less than 0.05. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste,

  4. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7 Michigan Michigan total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 3,947 13.2 29,625 26.6 Coal 11,531 38.7 65,604 58.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 2,109 7.1 228 0.2 Natural Gas 11,033 37.0 12,249 11.0 Other 1 - - 631 0.6 Other Renewable 1 571 1.9 2,832 2.5 Petroleum 640 2.1 382 0.3 Total 29,831 100.0 111,551 100.0 - = No data reported. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste,

  5. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    9 Minnesota Minnesota total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 1,594 10.8 13,478 25.1 Coal 4,789 32.5 28,083 52.3 Hydro and Pumped Storage 193 1.3 840 1.6 Natural Gas 4,936 33.5 4,341 8.1 Other 1 13 0.1 258 0.5 Other Renewable 1 2,395 16.3 6,640 12.4 Petroleum 795 5.4 31 0.1 Total 14,715 100.0 53,670 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture

  6. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    3 Mississippi Mississippi total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 1,251 8.0 9,643 17.7 Coal 2,526 16.1 13,629 25.0 Natural Gas 11,640 74.2 29,619 54.4 Other 1 4 * 10 * Other Renewable 1 235 1.5 1,504 2.8 Petroleum 35 0.2 81 0.1 Total 15,691 100.0 54,487 100.0 * = Absolute percentage less than 0.05. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture byproducts,

  7. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    1 Missouri Missouri total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 1,190 5.5 8,996 9.7 Coal 12,070 55.5 75,047 81.3 Hydro and Pumped Storage 1,221 5.6 2,427 2.6 Natural Gas 5,579 25.7 4,690 5.1 Other 1 - - 39 * Other Renewable 1 466 2.1 988 1.1 Petroleum 1,212 5.6 126 0.1 Total 21,739 100.0 92,313 100.0 * = Absolute percentage less than 0.05. - = No data reported. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid

  8. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    9 New Hampshire New Hampshire total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 1,247 29.8 10,910 49.2 Coal 546 13.1 3,083 13.9 Hydro and Pumped Storage 489 11.7 1,478 6.7 Natural Gas 1,215 29.1 5,365 24.2 Other 1 - - 57 0.3 Other Renewable 1 182 4.4 1,232 5.6 Petroleum 501 12.0 72 0.3 Total 4,180 100.0 22,196 100.0 - = No data reported. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge

  9. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    41 New Jersey New Jersey total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by source, 2010 Nuclear 4,108 22.3 32,771 49.9 Coal 2,036 11.1 6,418 9.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 404 2.2 -176 -0.3 Natural Gas 10,244 55.6 24,902 37.9 Other 1 56 0.3 682 1.0 Other Renewable 1 226 1.2 850 1.3 Petroleum 1,351 7.3 235 0.4 Total 18,424 100.0 65,682 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture byproducts,

  10. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    3 New York New York total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 5,271 13.4 41,870 30.6 Coal 2,781 7.1 13,583 9.9 Hydro and Pumped Storage 5,714 14.5 24,942 18.2 Natural Gas 17,407 44.2 48,916 35.7 Other 1 45 0.1 832 0.6 Other Renewable 1 1,719 4.4 4,815 3.5 Petroleum 6,421 16.3 2,005 1.5 Total 39,357 100.0 136,962 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste,

  11. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    34 North Carolina North Carolina total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 4,958 17.9 40,740 31.7 Coal 12,766 46.1 71,951 55.9 Hydro and Pumped Storage 2,042 7.4 4,757 3.7 Natural Gas 6,742 24.4 8,447 6.6 Other 1 50 0.2 407 0.3 Other Renewable 1 543 2.0 2,083 1.6 Petroleum 573 2.1 293 0.2 Total 27,674 100.0 128,678 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste,

  12. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Ohio Ohio total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 2,134 6.5 15,805 11.0 Coal 21,360 64.6 117,828 82.1 Hydro and Pumped Storage 101 0.3 429 0.3 Natural Gas 8,203 24.8 7,128 5.0 Other 1 123 0.4 266 0.2 Other Renewable 1 130 0.4 700 0.5 Petroleum 1,019 3.1 1,442 1.0 Total 33,071 100.0 143,598 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture byproducts,

  13. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    48 Pennsylvania Pennsylvania total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 9,540 20.9 77,828 33.9 Coal 18,481 40.6 110,369 48.0 Hydro and Pumped Storage 2,268 5.0 1,624 0.7 Natural Gas 9,415 20.7 33,718 14.7 Other 1 100 0.2 1,396 0.6 Other Renewable 1 1,237 2.7 4,245 1.8 Petroleum 4,534 9.9 571 0.2 Total 45,575 100.0 229,752 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste,

  14. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    1 South Carolina South Carolina total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 6,486 27.0 51,988 49.9 Coal 7,230 30.1 37,671 36.2 Hydro and Pumped Storage 4,006 16.7 1,442 1.4 Natural Gas 5,308 22.1 10,927 10.5 Other 1 - - 61 0.1 Other Renewable 1 284 1.2 1,873 1.8 Petroleum 670 2.8 191 0.2 Total 23,982 100.0 104,153 100.0 - = No data reported. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas,

  15. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Tennessee Tennessee total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 3,401 15.9 27,739 33.7 Coal 8,805 41.1 43,670 53.0 Hydro and Pumped Storage 4,277 20.0 7,416 9.0 Natural Gas 4,655 21.7 2,302 2.8 Other 1 - - 16 * Other Renewable 1 222 1.0 988 1.2 Petroleum 58 0.3 217 0.3 Total 21,417 100.0 82,349 100.0 * = Absolute percentage less than 0.05. - = No data reported. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid

  16. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Texas Texas total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 4,966 4.6 41,335 10.0 Coal 22,335 20.6 150,173 36.5 Hydro and Pumped Storage 689 0.6 1,262 0.3 Natural Gas 69,291 64.0 186,882 45.4 Other 1 477 0.4 3,630 0.9 Other Renewable 1 10,295 9.5 27,705 6.7 Petroleum 204 0.2 708 0.2 Total 108,258 100.0 411,695 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture

  17. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Virginia Virginia total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 3,501 14.5 26,572 36.4 Coal 5,868 24.3 25,459 34.9 Hydro and Pumped Storage 4,107 17.0 10 * Natural Gas 7,581 31.4 16,999 23.3 Other 1 - - 414 0.6 Other Renewable 1 621 2.6 2,220 3.0 Petroleum 2,432 10.1 1,293 1.8 Total 24,109 100.0 72,966 100.0 * = Absolute percentage less than 0.05. - = No data reported. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal

  18. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    63 Wisconsin Wisconsin total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 1,584 8.9 13,281 20.7 Coal 8,063 45.2 40,169 62.5 Hydro and Pumped Storage 492 2.8 2,112 3.3 Natural Gas 6,110 34.3 5,497 8.5 Other 1 21 0.1 63 0.1 Other Renewable 1 775 4.3 2,474 3.8 Petroleum 790 4.4 718 1.1 Total 17,836 100.0 64,314 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture

  19. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    Alabama Alabama total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 5,043 15.6 37,941 24.9 Coal 11,441 35.3 63,050 41.4 Hydro and Pumped Storage 3,272 10.1 8,704 5.7 Natural Gas 11,936 36.8 39,235 25.8 Other 1 100 0.3 643 0.4 Other Renewable 1 583 1.8 2,377 1.6 Petroleum 43 0.1 200 0.1 Total 32,417 100.0 152,151 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture

  20. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    Arizona Arizona Total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 3,937 14.9 31,200 27.9 Coal 6,233 23.6 43,644 39.1 Hydro and Pumped Storage 2,937 11.1 6,831 6.1 Natural Gas 13,012 49.3 29,676 26.6 Other 1 - - 15 * Other Renewable 1 181 0.7 319 0.3 Petroleum 93 0.4 66 0.1 Total 26,392 100.0 111,751 100.0 * = Absolute percentage less than 0.05. - = No data reported. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid

  1. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    Arkansas Arkansas total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 1,835 11.5 15,023 24.6 Coal 4,535 28.4 28,152 46.2 Hydro and Pumped Storage 1,369 8.6 3,658 6.0 Natural Gas 7,894 49.4 12,469 20.4 Other 1 - - 28 * Other Renewable 1 326 2.0 1,624 2.7 Petroleum 22 0.1 45 0.1 Total 15,981 100.0 61,000 100.0 * = Absolute percentage less than 0.05. - = No data reported. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid

  2. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    7 California California total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 4,390 6.5 32,201 15.8 Coal 374 0.6 2,100 1.0 Hydro and Pumped Storage 13,954 20.7 33,260 16.3 Natural Gas 41,370 61.4 107,522 52.7 Other 1 220 0.3 2,534 1.2 Other Renewable 1 6,319 9.4 25,450 12.5 Petroleum 701 1.0 1,059 0.5 Total 67,328 100.0 204,126 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste,

  3. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    9 Connecticut Connecticut total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 2,103 25.4 16,750 50.2 Coal 564 6.8 2,604 7.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 151 1.8 400 1.2 Natural Gas 2,292 27.7 11,716 35.1 Other 1 27 0.3 730 2.2 Other Renewable 1 159 1.9 740 2.2 Petroleum 2,989 36.1 409 1.2 Total 8,284 100.0 33,350 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture

  4. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    1 Florida Florida total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 3,924 6.6 23,936 10.4 Coal 9,975 16.9 59,897 26.1 Hydro and Pumped Storage 55 0.1 177 0.1 Natural Gas 31,563 53.4 128,634 56.1 Other 1 544 0.9 2,842 1.2 Other Renewable 1 1,053 1.8 4,487 2.0 Petroleum 12,033 20.3 9,122 4.0 Total 59,147 100.0 229,096 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture

  5. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    3 Georgia Georgia total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 4,061 11.1 33,512 24.4 Coal 13,230 36.1 73,298 53.3 Hydro and Pumped Storage 3,851 10.5 3,044 2.2 Natural Gas 12,668 34.6 23,884 17.4 Other 1 - - 18 * Other Renewable 1 637 1.7 3,181 2.3 Petroleum 2,189 6.0 641 0.5 Total 36,636 100.0 137,577 100.0 * = Absolute percentage less than 0.05. - = No data reported. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal

  6. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    7 Illinois Illinois total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 11,441 25.9 96,190 47.8 Coal 15,551 35.2 93,611 46.5 Hydro and Pumped Storage 34 0.1 119 0.1 Natural Gas 13,771 31.2 5,724 2.8 Other 1 145 0.3 461 0.2 Other Renewable 1 2,078 4.7 5,138 2.6 Petroleum 1,106 2.5 110 0.1 Total 44,127 100.0 201,352 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture

  7. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    20 Kansas Kansas total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 1,160 9.2 9,556 19.9 Coal 5,179 41.3 32,505 67.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 3 * 13 * Natural Gas 4,573 36.5 2,287 4.8 Other Renewable 1 1,079 8.6 3,459 7.2 Petroleum 550 4.4 103 0.2 Total 12,543 100.0 47,924 100.0 * = Absolute percentage less than 0.05. Source: Form EIA-860, "Annual Electric Generator Report," and Form EIA-923, "Power Plant Operations Report."

  8. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    21 Louisiana Louisiana total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 2,142 8.0 18,639 18.1 Coal 3,417 12.8 23,924 23.3 Hydro and Pumped Storage 192 0.7 1,109 1.1 Natural Gas 19,574 73.2 51,344 49.9 Other 1 213 0.8 2,120 2.1 Other Renewable 1 325 1.2 2,468 2.4 Petroleum 881 3.3 3,281 3.2 Total 26,744 100.0 102,885 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture

  9. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    5 Maryland Maryland total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 1,705 13.6 13,994 32.1 Coal 4,886 39.0 23,668 54.3 Hydro and Pumped Storage 590 4.7 1,667 3.8 Natural Gas 2,041 16.3 2,897 6.6 Other 1 152 1.2 485 1.1 Other Renewable 1 209 1.7 574 1.3 Petroleum 2,933 23.4 322 0.7 Total 12,516 100.0 43,607 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture

  10. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    3 Massachusetts Massachusetts total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 685 5.0 5,918 13.8 Coal 1,669 12.2 8,306 19.4 Hydro and Pumped Storage 1,942 14.2 659 1.5 Natural Gas 6,063 44.3 25,582 59.8 Other 1 3 * 771 1.8 Other Renewable 1 304 2.2 1,274 3.0 Petroleum 3,031 22.1 296 0.7 Total 13,697 100.0 42,805 100.0 * = Absolute percentage less than 0.05. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste,

  11. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    7 Michigan Michigan total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 3,947 13.2 29,625 26.6 Coal 11,531 38.7 65,604 58.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 2,109 7.1 228 0.2 Natural Gas 11,033 37.0 12,249 11.0 Other 1 - - 631 0.6 Other Renewable 1 571 1.9 2,832 2.5 Petroleum 640 2.1 382 0.3 Total 29,831 100.0 111,551 100.0 - = No data reported. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste,

  12. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    9 Minnesota Minnesota total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 1,594 10.8 13,478 25.1 Coal 4,789 32.5 28,083 52.3 Hydro and Pumped Storage 193 1.3 840 1.6 Natural Gas 4,936 33.5 4,341 8.1 Other 1 13 0.1 258 0.5 Other Renewable 1 2,395 16.3 6,640 12.4 Petroleum 795 5.4 31 0.1 Total 14,715 100.0 53,670 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture

  13. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    3 Mississippi Mississippi total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 1,251 8.0 9,643 17.7 Coal 2,526 16.1 13,629 25.0 Natural Gas 11,640 74.2 29,619 54.4 Other 1 4 * 10 * Other Renewable 1 235 1.5 1,504 2.8 Petroleum 35 0.2 81 0.1 Total 15,691 100.0 54,487 100.0 * = Absolute percentage less than 0.05. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture byproducts,

  14. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    1 Missouri Missouri total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 1,190 5.5 8,996 9.7 Coal 12,070 55.5 75,047 81.3 Hydro and Pumped Storage 1,221 5.6 2,427 2.6 Natural Gas 5,579 25.7 4,690 5.1 Other 1 - - 39 * Other Renewable 1 466 2.1 988 1.1 Petroleum 1,212 5.6 126 0.1 Total 21,739 100.0 92,313 100.0 * = Absolute percentage less than 0.05. - = No data reported. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid

  15. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    9 New Hampshire New Hampshire total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 1,247 29.8 10,910 49.2 Coal 546 13.1 3,083 13.9 Hydro and Pumped Storage 489 11.7 1,478 6.7 Natural Gas 1,215 29.1 5,365 24.2 Other 1 - - 57 0.3 Other Renewable 1 182 4.4 1,232 5.6 Petroleum 501 12.0 72 0.3 Total 4,180 100.0 22,196 100.0 - = No data reported. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge

  16. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    41 New Jersey New Jersey total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by source, 2010 Nuclear 4,108 22.3 32,771 49.9 Coal 2,036 11.1 6,418 9.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 404 2.2 -176 -0.3 Natural Gas 10,244 55.6 24,902 37.9 Other 1 56 0.3 682 1.0 Other Renewable 1 226 1.2 850 1.3 Petroleum 1,351 7.3 235 0.4 Total 18,424 100.0 65,682 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture byproducts,

  17. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    3 New York New York total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 5,271 13.4 41,870 30.6 Coal 2,781 7.1 13,583 9.9 Hydro and Pumped Storage 5,714 14.5 24,942 18.2 Natural Gas 17,407 44.2 48,916 35.7 Other 1 45 0.1 832 0.6 Other Renewable 1 1,719 4.4 4,815 3.5 Petroleum 6,421 16.3 2,005 1.5 Total 39,357 100.0 136,962 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste,

  18. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    34 North Carolina North Carolina total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 4,958 17.9 40,740 31.7 Coal 12,766 46.1 71,951 55.9 Hydro and Pumped Storage 2,042 7.4 4,757 3.7 Natural Gas 6,742 24.4 8,447 6.6 Other 1 50 0.2 407 0.3 Other Renewable 1 543 2.0 2,083 1.6 Petroleum 573 2.1 293 0.2 Total 27,674 100.0 128,678 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste,

  19. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    48 Pennsylvania Pennsylvania total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 9,540 20.9 77,828 33.9 Coal 18,481 40.6 110,369 48.0 Hydro and Pumped Storage 2,268 5.0 1,624 0.7 Natural Gas 9,415 20.7 33,718 14.7 Other 1 100 0.2 1,396 0.6 Other Renewable 1 1,237 2.7 4,245 1.8 Petroleum 4,534 9.9 571 0.2 Total 45,575 100.0 229,752 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste,

  20. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    1 South Carolina South Carolina total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 6,486 27.0 51,988 49.9 Coal 7,230 30.1 37,671 36.2 Hydro and Pumped Storage 4,006 16.7 1,442 1.4 Natural Gas 5,308 22.1 10,927 10.5 Other 1 - - 61 0.1 Other Renewable 1 284 1.2 1,873 1.8 Petroleum 670 2.8 191 0.2 Total 23,982 100.0 104,153 100.0 - = No data reported. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas,

  1. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    4 Tennessee Tennessee total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 3,401 15.9 27,739 33.7 Coal 8,805 41.1 43,670 53.0 Hydro and Pumped Storage 4,277 20.0 7,416 9.0 Natural Gas 4,655 21.7 2,302 2.8 Other 1 - - 16 * Other Renewable 1 222 1.0 988 1.2 Petroleum 58 0.3 217 0.3 Total 21,417 100.0 82,349 100.0 * = Absolute percentage less than 0.05. - = No data reported. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid

  2. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    6 Texas Texas total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 4,966 4.6 41,335 10.0 Coal 22,335 20.6 150,173 36.5 Hydro and Pumped Storage 689 0.6 1,262 0.3 Natural Gas 69,291 64.0 186,882 45.4 Other 1 477 0.4 3,630 0.9 Other Renewable 1 10,295 9.5 27,705 6.7 Petroleum 204 0.2 708 0.2 Total 108,258 100.0 411,695 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture

  3. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    8 Virginia Virginia total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 3,501 14.5 26,572 36.4 Coal 5,868 24.3 25,459 34.9 Hydro and Pumped Storage 4,107 17.0 10 * Natural Gas 7,581 31.4 16,999 23.3 Other 1 - - 414 0.6 Other Renewable 1 621 2.6 2,220 3.0 Petroleum 2,432 10.1 1,293 1.8 Total 24,109 100.0 72,966 100.0 * = Absolute percentage less than 0.05. - = No data reported. Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal

  4. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    63 Wisconsin Wisconsin total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Nuclear 1,584 8.9 13,281 20.7 Coal 8,063 45.2 40,169 62.5 Hydro and Pumped Storage 492 2.8 2,112 3.3 Natural Gas 6,110 34.3 5,497 8.5 Other 1 21 0.1 63 0.1 Other Renewable 1 775 4.3 2,474 3.8 Petroleum 790 4.4 718 1.1 Total 17,836 100.0 64,314 100.0 Other Renewable: Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture

  5. 2013 Nuclear Workforce Development ...

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

    Nuclear Energy Impact Topics: Today's & Tomorrow's New Nuclear Energy Construction & the Workforce Outlook Current New Nuclear Energy Construction Projects Small Modular...

  6. Nuclear Science & Technology

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

    Nuclear Science & Technology Nuclear Science & Technology1354608000000Nuclear Science & TechnologySome of these resources are LANL-only and will require Remote Access. No...

  7. Nuclear and Radiological Field Training Center | Y-12 National Security

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

    Complex ... Nuclear and Radiological Field Training Center A site used for nuclear research in Oak Ridge, Tennessee during the Manhattan Project is now the Y-12 National Security Complex's Nuclear and Radiological Field Training Center - the only facility of its kind in the world. The Center provides world-class nuclear and radiological training in a safe, secure, realistic environment using expert instruction and personnel to serve as observers/evaluators for customer training. For military

  8. Nuclear Safety Research and Development Annual Report, December 2014 |

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

    Department of Energy Research and Development Annual Report, December 2014 Nuclear Safety Research and Development Annual Report, December 2014 December 8, 2014 - 1:22pm Addthis Nuclear Safety Research and Development Annual Report, December 2014 This document is the first annual report of DOE's Nuclear Safety Research and Development (NSR&D) Program, managed by the Office of Nuclear Safety in the Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security. The report includes a description of

  9. Nuclear Safety Research and Development Annual Report, December 2014 |

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Research and Development Annual Report, December 2014 Nuclear Safety Research and Development Annual Report, December 2014 December 8, 2014 This document is the first annual report of DOE's Nuclear Safety Research and Development (NSR&D) Program, managed by the Office of Nuclear Safety in the Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security. The report includes a description of the program and summaries of R&D projects related to DOE (including

  10. Office of Nuclear Safety and Environmental Assessments | Department of

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

    Energy Nuclear Safety and Environmental Assessments Office of Nuclear Safety and Environmental Assessments MISSION The Office of Nuclear Safety and Environmental Assessments conducts assessments to provide critical feedback and objective information on programs and performance in protecting our workers, the public and environment from radiological hazards with a focus on hazardous nuclear facilities and operations.This information provides assurance to our stakeholders and identifies areas

  11. Nuclear Technology Programs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Harmon, J.E.

    1990-10-01

    This document reports on the work done by the Nuclear Technology Programs of the Chemical Technology Division, Argonne National Laboratory, in the period April--September 1988. These programs involve R D in three areas: applied physical chemistry, separation science and technology, and nuclear waste management. The work in applied physical chemistry includes investigations into the processes that control the release and transport of fission products under accident-like conditions, the thermophysical properties of selected materials in environments simulating those of fusion energy systems. In the area of separation science and technology, the bulk of the effort is concerned with developing and implementing processes for the removal and concentration of actinides from waste streams contaminated by transuranic elements. Another effort is concerned with examining the feasibility of substituting low-enriched for high-enriched uranium in the production of fission-product {sup 99}Mo. In the area of waste management, investigations are underway on the performance of materials in projected nuclear repository conditions to provide input to the licensing of the nation's high-level waste repositories.

  12. New Jersey Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Oyster Creek Unit 1",615,"4,601",14.0,"Exelon Nuclear" "PSEG Hope Creek Generating Station Unit 1","1,161","9,439",28.8,"PSEG Nuclear LLC" "PSEG Salem Generating

  13. Sensitivity of UO2 Stability in a Reducing Environment on Radiolysis Model Parameters

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wittman, Richard S.; Buck, Edgar C.

    2012-09-01

    Results for a radiolysis model sensitivity study of radiolytically produced H2O2 are presented as they relate to Spent (or Used) Light Water Reactor uranium oxide (UO2) nuclear fuel (UNF) oxidation in a low oxygen environment. The model builds on previous reaction kinetic studies to represent the radiolytic processes occurring at the nuclear fuel surface. Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) is the dominant oxidant for spent nuclear fuel in an O2-depleted water environment.

  14. Nuclear power generation and fuel cycle report 1997

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1997-09-01

    Nuclear power is an important source of electric energy and the amount of nuclear-generated electricity continued to grow as the performance of nuclear power plants improved. In 1996, nuclear power plants supplied 23 percent of the electricity production for countries with nuclear units, and 17 percent of the total electricity generated worldwide. However, the likelihood of nuclear power assuming a much larger role or even retaining its current share of electricity generation production is uncertain. The industry faces a complex set of issues including economic competitiveness, social acceptance, and the handling of nuclear waste, all of which contribute to the uncertain future of nuclear power. Nevertheless, for some countries the installed nuclear generating capacity is projected to continue to grow. Insufficient indigenous energy resources and concerns over energy independence make nuclear electric generation a viable option, especially for the countries of the Far East.

  15. Nuclear and Radiological Material Security | National Nuclear...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    This includes NNSA's work to advance physical protection standards for nuclear facilities and to strengthen nuclear safeguards, which are criteria for the physical security and the ...

  16. nuclear safeguards | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Home nuclear safeguards nuclear safeguards Working With PNNL Mentors, Engineering Students Deliver Prototype Safeguards Fixtures Earlier this month, Washington State University...

  17. Nuclear Suppliers Group & Regimes | National Nuclear Security...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency ...

  18. Nuclear Energy Systems Laboratory (NESL) / Transient Nuclear...

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

    Transient Nuclear Fuels Testing - Sandia Energy Energy Search Icon Sandia Home Locations ... Safety, Security & Resilience of the Energy Infrastructure Energy Storage Nuclear Power & ...

  19. Nuclear / Radiological Advisory Team | National Nuclear Security...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency ...

  20. nuclear material | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response ...

  1. Nuclear Forensics | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Forensics | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy ...

  2. Nuclear Incident Team | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Incident Team | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear ...

  3. nuclear weapons | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    weapons | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy ...

  4. Audit Report National Nuclear Security Administration Nuclear...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    National Nuclear Security Administration Nuclear Weapons Systems Configuration Management DOEIG-0902 March 2014 U.S. Department of Energy Office of Inspector General Office of ...

  5. Nuclear reactions from lattice QCD

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

    Briceño, Raúl A.; Davoudi, Zohreh; Luu, Thomas C.

    2015-01-13

    In this study, one of the overarching goals of nuclear physics is to rigorously compute properties of hadronic systems directly from the fundamental theory of strong interactions, Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD). In particular, the hope is to perform reliable calculations of nuclear reactions which will impact our understanding of environments that occur during big bang nucleosynthesis, the evolution of stars and supernovae, and within nuclear reactors and high energy/density facilities. Such calculations, being truly ab initio, would include all two-nucleon and three- nucleon (and higher) interactions in a consistent manner. Currently, lattice QCD provides the only reliable option for performing calculationsmore » of some of the low-energy hadronic observables. With the aim of bridging the gap between lattice QCD and nuclear many-body physics, the Institute for Nuclear Theory held a workshop on Nuclear Reactions from Lattice QCD on March 2013. In this review article, we report on the topics discussed in this workshop and the path planned to move forward in the upcoming years.« less

  6. Nuclear reactions from lattice QCD

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Briceño, Raúl A.; Davoudi, Zohreh; Luu, Thomas C.

    2015-01-13

    In this study, one of the overarching goals of nuclear physics is to rigorously compute properties of hadronic systems directly from the fundamental theory of strong interactions, Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD). In particular, the hope is to perform reliable calculations of nuclear reactions which will impact our understanding of environments that occur during big bang nucleosynthesis, the evolution of stars and supernovae, and within nuclear reactors and high energy/density facilities. Such calculations, being truly ab initio, would include all two-nucleon and three- nucleon (and higher) interactions in a consistent manner. Currently, lattice QCD provides the only reliable option for performing calculations of some of the low-energy hadronic observables. With the aim of bridging the gap between lattice QCD and nuclear many-body physics, the Institute for Nuclear Theory held a workshop on Nuclear Reactions from Lattice QCD on March 2013. In this review article, we report on the topics discussed in this workshop and the path planned to move forward in the upcoming years.

  7. Modules Software Environment

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

    Environment » Modules Environment Modules Software Environment NERSC uses the module utility to manage nearly all software. There are two huge advantages of the module approach: NERSC can provide many different versions and/or installations of a single software package on a given machine, including a default version as well as several older and newer versions; and Users can easily switch to different versions or installations without having to explicitly specify different paths. With modules,

  8. Spent Nuclear Fuel

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Nuclear & Uranium Glossary › FAQS › Overview Data Status of U.S. Nuclear Outages (interactive) Summary Uranium & nuclear fuel Nuclear power plants Spent nuclear fuel International All nuclear data reports Analysis & Projections Major Topics Most popular Nuclear plants and reactors Projections Recurring Uranium All reports Browse by Tag Alphabetical Frequency Tag Cloud Previous releases 2002 1998 Spent Nuclear Fuel Release date: December 7, 2015 Next release date: Late 2018 Spent

  9. Nuclear | Department of Energy

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

    Nuclear Nuclear Radioisotope Power Systems, a strong partnership between the Energy Department's Office of Nuclear Energy and NASA, has been providing the energy for deep space exploration. Nuclear power is the use of sustained nuclear fission to generate heat and electricity. Nuclear power plants provide about 6 percent of the world's energy and 13-14 percent of the world's electricity. Featured Moving Forward to Address Nuclear Waste Storage and Disposal Three trucks transport nuclear waste

  10. Alabama Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Browns Ferry Unit 1, Unit 2, Unit 3","3,309","24,771",65.3,"Tennessee Valley Authority" "Joseph M Farley Unit 1, Unit 2","1,734","13,170",34.7,"Alabama Power

  11. Florida Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    Florida nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Crystal River Unit 3",860,0,"--","Progress Energy Florida Inc" "St Lucie Unit 1, Unit 2","1,678","12,630",52.8,"Florida Power & Light Co" "Turkey Point

  12. Georgia Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Edwin I Hatch Unit 1, Unit 2","1,759","13,902",41.5,"Georgia Power Co" "Vogtle Unit 1, Unit 2","2,302","19,610",58.5,"Georgia Power Co" "2 Plants 4

  13. Iowa Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    Iowa nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Duane Arnold Energy Center Unit 1",601,"4,451",100.0,"NextEra Energy Duane Arnold LLC" "1 Plant 1 Reactor",601,"4,451",100.0

  14. Louisiana Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    Louisiana nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant Name/Total Reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (Pprcent)","Owner" "River Bend Unit 1",974,"8,363",44.9,"Entergy Gulf States - LA LLC" "Waterford 3 Unit 3","1,168","10,276",55.1,"Entergy Louisiana Inc" "2 Plants 2

  15. Michigan Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Donald C Cook Unit 1, Unit 2","2,069","15,646",52.8,"Indiana Michigan Power Co" "Fermi Unit 2","1,085","7,738",26.1,"Detroit Edison Co" "Palisades Unit

  16. Minnesota Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    Minnesota nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Monticello Unit 1",554,"4,695",34.8,"Northern States Power Co - Minnesota" "Prairie Island Unit 1, Unit 2","1,040","8,783",65.2,"Northern States Power Co -

  17. Mississippi Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    Mississippi nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Grand Gulf Unit 1","1,251","9,643",100.0,"System Energy Resources, Inc" "1 Plant 1 Reactor","1,251","9,643",100.0

  18. Nebraska Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    Nebraska nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Cooper Unit 1",767,"6,793",61.4,"Nebraska Public Power District" "Fort Calhoun Unit 1",478,"4,261",38.6,"Omaha Public Power District" "2 Plants 2

  19. Virginia Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "North Anna Unit 1, Unit 2","1,863","13,399",50.4,"Virginia Electric & Power Co" "Surry Unit 1, Unit 2","1,638","13,172",49.6,"Virginia Electric & Power

  20. Washington Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    Washington nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Columbia Generating Station Unit 2","1,097","9,241",100.0,"Energy Northwest" "1 Plant 1 Reactor","1,097","9,241",100.0

  1. STAR Test Environment

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

    STAR Test Environment STAR Test Environment These instructions describe how to set up the STAR environment independent of the production environment in order to test different installations in $OPTSTAR and $GROUP_DIR. If you want to modify those installations you will need access to the starofl account. Bypass STAR envionment login Edit your ~/.pdsf_setup file changing the STAR_LINUX_SETUP to "use_none" and start a new session. You should not see all the STAR environmental variables

  2. XML Engineering Environment

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2006-07-27

    The XML Engineering Environment is a reconfigurable software system that allows users to translate, enhance and route data from sources to sinks.

  3. Extreme Environments (EFree) Center

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

    Extreme Environments (EFree ) Center LLNL Co-PI: Jonathon Crowhurst e-mail bio Novel materials for energy applications Ultrafast reflectivity measurements under high pressure...

  4. Nuclear Forensics

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Forensics Role, State of the Art, and Program Needs Joint Working Group of the American Physical Society and the American Association for the Advancement of Science Nuclear Forensics Role, State of the Art, and Program Needs Joint Working Group of the American Physical Society and the American Association for the Advancement of Science Acknowledgments Many thanks to Linton Brooks, Raymond Jeanloz, and Robin Pitman for their thoughtful comments on this paper. The authors also thank William

  5. ARM - Measurement - Shortwave broadband total downwelling irradiance

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

    total downwelling 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 downwelling irradiance The total diffuse and direct radiant energy that comes from some continuous range of directions, at wavelengths between 0.4 and 4 {mu}m, that is being emitted downwards. Categories Radiometric Instruments The above measurement is considered scientifically relevant for the

  6. NUCLEAR REACTOR

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Grebe, J.J.

    1959-07-14

    High temperature reactors which are uniquely adapted to serve as the heat source for nuclear pcwered rockets are described. The reactor is comprised essentially of an outer tubular heat resistant casing which provides the main coolant passageway to and away from the reactor core within the casing and in which the working fluid is preferably hydrogen or helium gas which is permitted to vaporize from a liquid storage tank. The reactor core has a generally spherical shape formed entirely of an active material comprised of fissile material and a moderator material which serves as a diluent. The active material is fabricated as a gas permeable porous material and is interlaced in a random manner with very small inter-connecting bores or capillary tubes through which the coolant gas may flow. The entire reactor is divided into successive sections along the direction of the temperature gradient or coolant flow, each section utilizing materials of construction which are most advantageous from a nuclear standpoint and which at the same time can withstand the operating temperature of that particular zone. This design results in a nuclear reactor characterized simultaneously by a minimum critiral size and mass and by the ability to heat a working fluid to an extremely high temperature.

  7. Design Storm for Total Retention.pdf

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

    Storm Events for Select Western U.S. Cities (adapted from Energy Independence and Security Act Technical Guidance, USEPA, 2009) City 95th Percentile Event Rainfall Total...

  8. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Alabama - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S1. Summary statistics for natural gas - Alabama, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 7,026 7,063 6,327 R 6,165 6,118 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  9. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Arkansas - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S4. Summary statistics for natural gas - Arkansas, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 7,397 8,388 8,538 R 9,843 10,150 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  10. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 California - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S5. Summary statistics for natural gas - California, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 1,580 1,308 1,423 R 1,335 1,118 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  11. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Colorado - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S6. Summary statistics for natural gas - Colorado, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 28,813 30,101 32,000 R 32,468 38,346 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  12. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Florida - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S10. Summary statistics for natural gas - Florida, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 17,182 16,459 19,742

  13. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Georgia - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S11. Summary statistics for natural gas - Georgia, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells

  14. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Illinois - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S15. Summary statistics for natural gas - Illinois, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 50 40 40 R 34 36 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells E 1,697 2,114

  15. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Iowa - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S17. Summary statistics for natural gas - Iowa, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0

  16. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Kansas - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S18. Summary statistics for natural gas - Kansas, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 22,145 25,758 24,697 R 23,792 24,354 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  17. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Kentucky - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S19. Summary statistics for natural gas - Kentucky, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 17,670 14,632 17,936 R 19,494 19,256 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  18. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Louisiana - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S20. Summary statistics for natural gas - Louisiana, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 19,137 21,235 19,792 R 19,528 19,251 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  19. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Maine - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S21. Summary statistics for natural gas - Maine, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0

  20. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Michigan - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S24. Summary statistics for natural gas - Michigan, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 10,100 11,100 10,900 R 10,550 10,500 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  1. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Mississippi - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S26. Summary statistics for natural gas - Mississippi, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 1,979 5,732 1,669 R 1,967 1,645 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  2. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Missouri - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S27. Summary statistics for natural gas - Missouri, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 53 100 R 26 28 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 R 8 8 From

  3. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Montana - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S28. Summary statistics for natural gas - Montana, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 6,059 6,477 6,240 5,754 5,754 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  4. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Nevada - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S30. Summary statistics for natural gas - Nevada, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 R 4 4 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 3 From Oil Wells

  5. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 New Jersey - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S32. Summary statistics for natural gas - New Jersey, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil

  6. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 New Mexico - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S33. Summary statistics for natural gas - New Mexico, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 44,748 32,302 28,206 R 27,073 27,957 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From

  7. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 New York - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S34. Summary statistics for natural gas - New York, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 6,736 6,157 7,176 R 6,902 7,119 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  8. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Ohio - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S37. Summary statistics for natural gas - Ohio, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 34,931 46,717 35,104 R 32,664 32,967 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  9. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Oklahoma - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S38. Summary statistics for natural gas - Oklahoma, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 44,000 41,238 40,000 39,776 40,070 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  10. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Oregon - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S39. Summary statistics for natural gas - Oregon, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 26 24 27 R 26 28 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 1,407 1,344 770 770

  11. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Pennsylvania - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S40. Summary statistics for natural gas - Pennsylvania, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 44,500 54,347 55,136 R 53,762 70,400 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals

  12. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Rhode Island - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S41. Summary statistics for natural gas - Rhode Island, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From

  13. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Tennessee - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S44. Summary statistics for natural gas - Tennessee, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 230 210 212 R 1,089 1,024 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 5,144

  14. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Texas - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S45. Summary statistics for natural gas - Texas, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 95,014 100,966 96,617 97,618 98,279 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  15. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Utah - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S46. Summary statistics for natural gas - Utah, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 6,075 6,469 6,900 R 7,030 7,275 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 328,135

  16. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Vermont - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S47. Summary statistics for natural gas - Vermont, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells

  17. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Virginia - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S48. Summary statistics for natural gas - Virginia, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 7,470 7,903 7,843 R 7,956 7,961 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  18. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 West Virginia - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S50. Summary statistics for natural gas - West Virginia, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 52,498 56,813 50,700 R 54,920 60,000 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals

  19. Total Blender Net Input of Petroleum Products

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

    Input Product: Total Input Natural Gas Plant Liquids and Liquefied Refinery Gases Pentanes Plus Liquid Petroleum Gases Normal Butane Isobutane Other Liquids OxygenatesRenewables ...

  20. 2014 Total Electric Industry- Sales (Megawatthours

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

    and EIA-861U)" "State","Residential","Commercial","Industrial","Transportation","Total" "New England",47211525,53107038,19107433,557463,119983459 "Connecticut",12777579,12893531,3...

  1. ,"Total Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity "

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

    ...orcapaepg0sacmmcfm.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ... 1: Total Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity " "Sourcekey","N5290US2","NGMEP...

  2. Glossary of Nuclear Waste Terms

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

    Glossary of Nuclear Waste Terms Atom The basic component of all matter; it is the smallest part of an element having all the chemical properties of that element. Atoms are made up of protons and neutrons (in the nucleus) and electronics. Background Radiation Radiation arising from natural radioactive material and always present in the environment, including solar and cosmic radiation and radioactive elements in the upper atmosphere, the ground, building materials and the human body. Canister The

  3. National Center for Nuclear Security - NCNS

    ScienceCinema (OSTI)

    None

    2015-01-09

    As the United States embarks on a new era of nuclear arms control, the tools for treaty verification must be accurate and reliable, and must work at stand-off distances. The National Center for Nuclear Security, or NCNS, at the Nevada National Security Site, is poised to become the proving ground for these technologies. The center is a unique test bed for non-proliferation and arms control treaty verification technologies. The NNSS is an ideal location for these kinds of activities because of its multiple environments; its cadre of experienced nuclear personnel, and the artifacts of atmospheric and underground nuclear weapons explosions. The NCNS will provide future treaty negotiators with solid data on verification and inspection regimes and a realistic environment in which future treaty verification specialists can be trained. Work on warhead monitoring at the NCNS will also support future arms reduction treaties.

  4. National Center for Nuclear Security - NCNS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2014-11-12

    As the United States embarks on a new era of nuclear arms control, the tools for treaty verification must be accurate and reliable, and must work at stand-off distances. The National Center for Nuclear Security, or NCNS, at the Nevada National Security Site, is poised to become the proving ground for these technologies. The center is a unique test bed for non-proliferation and arms control treaty verification technologies. The NNSS is an ideal location for these kinds of activities because of its multiple environments; its cadre of experienced nuclear personnel, and the artifacts of atmospheric and underground nuclear weapons explosions. The NCNS will provide future treaty negotiators with solid data on verification and inspection regimes and a realistic environment in which future treaty verification specialists can be trained. Work on warhead monitoring at the NCNS will also support future arms reduction treaties.

  5. National Nuclear Security Administration | National Nuclear Security

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Administration National Nuclear Security Administration | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Library Bios Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Photo Gallery Jobs

  6. Building Informatics Environment

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2008-06-02

    The Building Informatics Environment is a modeling environment based on the Modelica language. The environment allows users to create a computer model of a building and its energy systems with various time scales and physical resolutions. The environment can be used for rapid development of, e.g., demand controls algorithms, new HVAC system solutions and new operational strategies (controls, fault detection and diagnostics). Models for building energy and control systems are made available in the environment.more » The models can be used as provided, or they can be changed and/or linked with each other in order to model the effects that a particular user is interested in.« less

  7. Concern for the Environment | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    After operating for 34 years and training over 14,000 sailors, the Department of Energy S1C Prototype Reactor Site in Windsor, Connecticut, was returned to "green field"...

  8. 2009 Total Energy Production by State | Department of Energy

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

    Total Energy Production by State 2009 Total Energy Production by State 2009 Total Energy Production by State...

  9. Nuclear Workforce Initiative - SRSCRO

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

    nuclear Nuclear Workforce Initiative The SRSCRO region of Georgia and South Carolina has the most unique nuclear industry capabilities in the nation. This region is at the forefront of new nuclear power production, environmental stewardship, innovative technology and national security. Long-term nuclear workforce demand is growing in the region as new nuclear reactors are under construction at the V.C Summer Nuclear Station in Fairfield County, SC and at Plant Vogtle in Waynesboro, GA. New

  10. STATE OF NEW MEXICO ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT IN THE MATTER OF:

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

    IN THE MATTER OF: UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT ) OF ENERGY AND NUCLEAR ) WASTE PARTNERSHIP LLC ) ) ) WASTE ISOLATION PILOT PLANT ) EDDY COUNTY, NEW MEXICO ) ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER UNDER THE NEW MEXICO HAZARDOUS WASTE ACT§ 74-4-13 ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER Pursuant to NMSA 1978, Section 74-4-13(A) of the Hazardous Waste Act ("HWA"), the New Mexico Environment Department ("Department") hereby orders the Department of Energy, ("DOE"), and Nuclear Waste Partnership LLC

  11. The Future of Energy from Nuclear Fission

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kim, Son H.; Taiwo, Temitope

    2013-04-13

    Nuclear energy is an important part of our current global energy system, and contributes to supplying the significant demand for electricity for many nations around the world. There are 433 commercial nuclear power reactors operating in 30 countries with an installed capacity of 367 GWe as of October 2011 (IAEA PRIS, 2011). Nuclear electricity generation totaled 2630 TWh in 2010 representing 14% the worlds electricity generation. The top five countries of total installed nuclear capacity are the US, France, Japan, Russia and South Korea at 102, 63, 45, 24, and 21 GWe, respectively (WNA, 2012a). The nuclear capacity of these five countries represents more than half, 68%, of the total global nuclear capacity. The role of nuclear power in the global energy system today has been motivated by several factors including the growing demand for electric power, the regional availability of fossil resources and energy security concerns, and the relative competitiveness of nuclear power as a source of base-load electricity. There is additional motivation for the use of nuclear power because it does not produce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions or local air pollutants during its operation and contributes to low levels of emissions throughout the lifecycle of the nuclear energy system (Beerten, J. et. al., 2009). Energy from nuclear fission primarily in the form of electric power and potentially as a source of industrial heat could play a greater role for meeting the long-term growing demand for energy worldwide while addressing the concern for climate change from rising GHG emissions. However, the nature of nuclear fission as a tremendously compact and dense form of energy production with associated high concentrations of radioactive materials has particular and unique challenges as well as benefits. These challenges include not only the safety and cost of nuclear reactors, but proliferation concerns, safeguard and storage of nuclear materials associated with nuclear fuel cycles. In March of 2011, an unprecedented earthquake of 9 magnitude and ensuing tsunami off the east coast of Japan caused a severe nuclear accident in Fukushima, Japan (Prime Minister of Japan and His Cabinet, 2011). The severity of the nuclear accident in Japan has brought about a reinvestigation of nuclear energy policy and deployment activities for many nations around the world, most notably in Japan and Germany (BBC, 2011; Reuter, 2011). The response to the accident has been mixed and its full impact may not be realized for many years to come. The nuclear accident in Fukushima, Japan has not directly affected the significant on-going nuclear deployment activities in many countries. China, Russia, India, and South Korea, as well as others, are continuing with their deployment plans. As of October 2011, China had the most reactors under construction at 27, while Russia, India, and South Korea had 11, 6, and 5 reactors under construction, respectively (IAEA PRIS, 2011). Ten other nations have one or two reactors currently under construction. Many more reactors are planned for future deployment in China, Russia, and India, as well as in the US. Based on the World Nuclear Associations data, the realization of Chinas deployment plan implies that China will surpass the US in total nuclear capacity some time in the future.

  12. Cell Total Activity Final Estimate.xls

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    WSSRAP Cell Total Activity Final Estimate (calculated September 2002, Fleming) (Waste streams & occupied cell volumes from spreadsheet titled "cell waste volumes-8.23.02 with macros.xls") Waste Stream a Volume (cy) Mass (g) 2 Radiological Profile 3 Nuclide Activity (Ci) 4 Total % of Total U-238 U-234 U-235 Th-228 Th-230 Th-232 Ra-226 Ra-228 Rn-222 5 Activity if > 1% Raffinate Pits Work Zone (Ci) Raffinate processed through CSS Plant 1 159990 1.49E+11 Raffinate 6.12E+01 6.12E+01

  13. Nuclear Weapons Complex reconfiguration study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1991-01-01

    Shortly after assuming duties as Secretary of Energy, I reviewed the Nuclear Weapons Complex Modernization Report'' submitted to the Congress in January 1989 as required by the National Defense Authorization Act of 1988 and 1989. My review showed that several of the report's assumptions needed to be re-evaluated. During this eighteen-month review, dramatic world changes forced further reassessments of the future Nuclear Weapons Complex. These changes are reflected in the new report. The new report presents a plan to achieve a reconfigured complex, called Complex-21. Complex-21 would be smaller, less diverse, and less expensive to operated than the Complex of today. Complex-21 would be able to safely and reliability support nuclear deterrent stockpile objectives set forth by the President and funded by the Congress. It would be consistent with realities of the emerging international security environment and flexible enough to accommodate the likely range of deterrent contingencies. In addition, Complex-21 would be constructed and operated to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and orders. Achieving Complex-21 will require significant resources. This report provides and organized approach toward selecting the most appropriate configuration for Complex-21, satisfying environmental requirements, and minimizing costs. The alternative -- to continue to use piecemeal fixes to run an antiquated complex -- will be more expensive and provide a less reliable Nuclear Weapons Complex. As a consequence, implementation of the Complex-21 plan is considered necessary to ensure continued viability of our nuclear deterrent.

  14. TotalView Parallel Debugger at NERSC

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

    The performance of the GUI can be greatly improved if used in conjunction with free NX software. The TotalView documentation web page is a good resource for learning more...

  15. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    as known volumes of natural gas that were the result of leaks, damage, accidents, migration, andor blow down. Notes: Totals may not add due to independent rounding. Prices are...

  16. EQUUS Total Return Inc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Jump to: navigation, search Name: EQUUS Total Return Inc Place: Houston, Texas Product: A business development company and VC investor that trades as a closed-end fund. EQUUS is...

  17. "2014 Total Electric Industry- Revenue (Thousands Dollars)"

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

    and EIA-861U)" "State","Residential","Commercial","Industrial","Transportation","Total" "New England",8414175.4,7806276.7,2262752.4,57837.4,18541041.8 "Connecticut",2523348.7,2004...

  18. Total Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Salt Caverns Storage Capacity Aquifers Storage Capacity Depleted Fields Storage Capacity Total Working Gas Capacity Working Gas Capacity of Salt Caverns Working Gas Capacity of Aquifers Working Gas Capacity of Depleted Fields Total Number of Existing Fields Number of Existing Salt Caverns Number of Existing Aquifers Number of Depleted Fields Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data

  19. Total Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity

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

    Salt Caverns Storage Capacity Aquifers Storage Capacity Depleted Fields Storage Capacity Total Working Gas Capacity Working Gas Capacity of Salt Caverns Working Gas Capacity of Aquifers Working Gas Capacity of Depleted Fields Total Number of Existing Fields Number of Existing Salt Caverns Number of Existing Aquifers Number of Depleted Fields Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data

  20. 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