National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for nuclear environment total

  1. environment | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    environment Pantex makes paper into compost Every year, NNSA's Pantex Plant uses thousands of pounds of paper that must be destroyed to protect sensitive information. For the vast majority of that paper, a trip through the shredder is not the end of its purpose, but only a beginning. After spending a few weeks composting in a pile of feedlot... DOE celebrates Earth Day DOE today celebrated Earth Day with Community Day on the DOE Pavilion. More than 20 local green exhibitors, including various

  2. Concern for the Environment | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    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 Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program. From the beginning, the Program

  3. Concern for the Environment | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    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 Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program. From the beginning, the Program

  4. Nuclear Power and the Environment - Energy Explained, Your Guide To

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

    Understanding Energy - Energy Information Administration Nuclear > Nuclear Power & the Environment Energy Explained - Home What Is Energy? Forms of Energy Sources of Energy Laws of Energy Units and Calculators Energy Conversion Calculators British Thermal Units (Btu) Degree-Days U.S. Energy Facts State and U.S. Territory Data Use of Energy In Industry For Transportation In Homes In Commercial Buildings Efficiency and Conservation Energy and the Environment Greenhouse Gases Effect on

  5. Total

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

    Cell shipments Total Inventory, start-of-year 328,658 Manufactured during reporting year ... Table 5. Source and disposition of photovoltaic cell shipments, 2013 (peak kilowatts) ...

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

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

    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

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

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

    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 ...

  8. 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

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

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

    . 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........................................................... 23.8 4.6 3.6 1.1 1,000 to 1,499..................................................... 20.8 2.8 2.2 0.6 1,500 to 1,999..................................................... 15.4 1.9 1.4 0.5 2,000 to 2,499..................................................... 12.2 2.3 1.7 0.5 2,500 to

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

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

    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........................................................... 23.8 3.9 2.4 1.5 1,000 to 1,499..................................................... 20.8 4.4 3.2 1.2 1,500 to 1,999..................................................... 15.4 3.5 2.4 1.1 2,000 to 2,499..................................................... 12.2 3.2 2.1 1.1 2,500 to

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

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

    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

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

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

    4.2 7.6 16.6 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500................................................... 3.2 1.0 0.2 0.8 500 to 999........................................................... 23.8 6.3 1.4 4.9 1,000 to 1,499..................................................... 20.8 5.0 1.6 3.4 1,500 to 1,999..................................................... 15.4 4.0 1.4 2.6 2,000 to 2,499..................................................... 12.2 2.6 0.9 1.7 2,500 to

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

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

    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

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

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

    .. 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

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

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

    .. 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

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

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

    Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500............................................ 3.2 0.4 Q 0.6 1.7 0.4 500 to 999................................................... 23.8 4.8 1.4 4.2 10.2 3.2 1,000 to 1,499............................................. 20.8 10.6 1.8 1.8 4.0 2.6 1,500 to 1,999............................................. 15.4 12.4 1.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 2,000 to 2,499............................................. 12.2 10.7 1.0 0.2 Q Q 2,500 to

  17. 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.......................................................... 23.8 1.5 5.4 5.5 6.1 5.3 1,000 to 1,499.................................................... 20.8 1.4 4.0 5.2 5.0 5.2 1,500 to 1,999.................................................... 15.4 1.4 3.1 3.5 3.6 3.8 2,000 to 2,499.................................................... 12.2 1.4 3.2 3.0 2.3 2.3

  18. 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........................................................... 23.8 4.6 3.9 9.0 6.3 1,000 to 1,499..................................................... 20.8 2.8 4.4 8.6 5.0 1,500 to 1,999..................................................... 15.4 1.9 3.5 6.0 4.0 2,000 to 2,499..................................................... 12.2 2.3 3.2 4.1

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

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

    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...........................................................

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

    26.7 28.8 20.6 13.1 22.0 16.6 38.6 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500................................... 3.2 1.9 0.9 Q Q Q 1.3 2.3 500 to 999........................................... 23.8 10.5 7.3 3.3 1.4 1.2 6.6 12.9 1,000 to 1,499..................................... 20.8 5.8 7.0 3.8 2.2 2.0 3.9 8.9 1,500 to 1,999..................................... 15.4 3.1 4.2 3.4 2.0 2.7 1.9 5.0 2,000 to 2,499..................................... 12.2 1.7 2.7 2.9 1.8 3.2 1.1 2.8

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

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

    (HRMS) PIA - Savannah River Nuclear Solution (SRNS) Procurement Cycle System (PCS) PIA - Savannah River Nuclear Solution SRNS Electronic Document Workflow RECORDS System (EDWS

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. Nucleus-nucleus total reaction cross sections, and the nuclear interaction radius

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Abu-Ibrahim, Badawy

    2011-04-15

    We study the nucleus-nucleus total reaction cross sections for stable nuclei, in the energy region from 30A MeV to about 1A GeV, and find them to be in proportion to ({radical}({sigma}{sub pp}{sup tot}Z{sub 1}{sup 2/3}+{sigma}{sub pn}{sup tot}N{sub 1}{sup 2/3})+{radical}({sigma}{sub pp}{sup tot}Z{sub 2}{sup 2/3}+{sigma}{sub pn}{sup tot}N{sub 2}{sup 2/3})) {sup 2} in the mass range 8 to 100. Also, we find a parameter-free relation that enables us to predict a total reaction cross section for any nucleus-nucleus within 10% uncertainty at most, using the experimental value of the total reaction cross section of a given nucleus-nucleus. The power of the relation is demonstrated by several examples. The energy dependence of the nuclear interaction radius is deduced; it is found to be almost constant in the energy range from about 200A MeV to about 1A GeV; in this energy range and for nuclei with N=Z, R{sub I}(A)=(1.14{+-}0.02)A{sup 1/3} fm.

  6. 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...

  7. Computational Systems & Software Environment | National Nuclear Security

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Administration Computational Systems & Software Environment The mission of this national sub-program is to build integrated, balanced, and scalable computational capabilities to meet the predictive simulation requirements of NNSA. This sub-program strives to provide users of ASC computing resources a stable and seamless computing environment for all ASC-deployed platforms. Along with these powerful systems that ASC will maintain and field the supporting software infrastructure that the

  8. Evolution of the Business Environment Surrounding the UK's Nuclear Site Cleanup Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Miskimin, P.A.; Lees, P.M.; Wall, C.E.E.

    2006-07-01

    In April 2005 twenty civil nuclear sites in the United Kingdom became the responsibility of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), a new organization created by the British Government to manage the cleanup of these sites. As a key part of this transition, the NDA became the owner and manager of these sites, which formerly were owned by the site operators, British Nuclear Fuels Limited plc (BNFL) and the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA). This was one of the most significant events in the history of the United Kingdom's nuclear industry and represented a true sea change, affecting many aspects of life and business on and around these sites as well as nationally. The NDA's budget for the cleanup of the twenty sites and the management of the overall cleanup program is approximately pounds 2 Billion per annum, almost $4 Billion. It is important to note that approximately half of this amount is spent with the supply chains which serve the management and operations contractors, including pounds 500 million at Sellafield alone. Additionally, the site management and operations contractors receive most of the pounds 2 Billion through contracts between the NDA and the various site management companies. This represents a lot of government money moving through contracts between entities, which invokes procurement and contracting rules and regulations, that while not new, have not previously been this broadly applied to nuclear site cleanup activities throughout the UK. The current estimate for the total life cycle cleanup costs for all twenty civil nuclear sites is pounds 56 Billion, a figure that is likely to increase further. The first rules to mention are the European Union Procurement Guidelines, which are designed to help ensure that procurements involving government funds are conducted in an open, fair, and transparent environment. While it is difficult to argue with the intent of these rules, at least for now they are having a slowing down effect on placing contracts via the major procurements being conducted in support of the nuclear site cleanup program. The next most powerful influence is the NDA itself, which has oversight responsibility for procurements conducted by the site management and operations contractors. The NDA must, of necessity, maintain some level of review over major procurements, but how best to do so with a limited number of staff, without slowing down the awarding of contracts? More dramatic in their impact on the UK's nuclear industry will be the competitive procurements to be conducted by the NDA to select the best site operators for the twenty sites. These major procurements, while common in the USA and elsewhere, will be new to the NDA's nuclear site cleanup program. Considering the large contract values expected, the procurements should attract some of the best talent in nuclear site cleanup. It is anticipated that these procurements will necessitate contractors to compete at the highest level, leaving no stone unturned to maximize the chance of being selected. Contract awards are expected to be in the range of 100 million pounds to several billion pounds. The first such procurement is currently planned to begin in April 2006, according to the NDA's draft strategy document. Lastly, the business relationships with local suppliers to the nuclear sites are also changing. These suppliers will be required to compete, primarily for contracts let by subcontractors to the site management and operations contractors, and even by sub-sub contractors, rather than directly from the site management and operations contractors. The benign paternalism previously practiced at some sites by the management and operations contractors should also cease, of necessity. Many other business aspects will evolve as well, such as contract awards being based on best value, rather than on lowest price or lowest hourly rate. Electronic commerce is expected to become more widely used. Even as late as 2003, little electronic commerce was being utilized at the nuclear sites now being managed by the NDA. Contracting terms are expected to move toward a more commercial orientation, a process already begun. This paper will examine the changing procurement and contracting environment under the NDA's leadership and will provide information of interest to contractors wishing to win their share (and more) of business in the emerging nuclear site cleanup program in the United Kingdom. (authors)

  9. Nuclear waste package materials testing report: basaltic and tuffaceous environments

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bradley, D.J.; Coles, D.G.; Hodges, F.N.; McVay, G.L.; Westerman, R.E.

    1983-03-01

    The disposal of high-level nuclear wastes in underground repositories in the continental United States requires the development of a waste package that will contain radionuclides for a time period commensurate with performance criteria, which may be up to 1000 years. This report addresses materials testing in support of a waste package for a basalt (Hanford, Washington) or a tuff (Nevada Test Site) repository. The materials investigated in this testing effort were: sodium and calcium bentonites and mixtures with sand or basalt as a backfill; iron and titanium-based alloys as structural barriers; and borosilicate waste glass PNL 76-68 as a waste form. The testing also incorporated site-specific rock media and ground waters: Reference Umtanum Entablature-1 basalt and reference basalt ground water, Bullfrog tuff and NTS J-13 well water. The results of the testing are discussed in four major categories: Backfill Materials: emphasizing water migration, radionuclide migration, physical property and long-term stability studies. Structural Barriers: emphasizing uniform corrosion, irradiation-corrosion, and environmental-mechanical testing. Waste Form Release Characteristics: emphasizing ground water, sample surface area/solution volume ratio, and gamma radiolysis effects. Component Compatibility: emphasizing solution/rock, glass/rock, glass/structural barrier, and glass/backfill interaction tests. This area also includes sensitivity testing to determine primary parameters to be studied, and the results of systems tests where more than two waste package components were combined during a single test.

  10. 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.

  11. 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.

  12. 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.

  13. Nuclides.net: A Web-Based Environment for Nuclear Data and Applications

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Galy, J.; Magill, J.

    2005-05-24

    An interactive multimedia tool, Nuclides.net, has been developed at the Institute for Transuranium Elements. The Nuclides.net 'integrated environment' is a suite of computer programs ranging from a powerful user-friendly interface, which allows the user to navigate the nuclides chart and explore the properties of nuclides, to various computational modules. Through this powerful interface, the user can access a wide variety of nuclear data including, e.g., radioactive decay data, cross sections, fission yields, etc. from international recognized sources.

  14. 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.

  15. 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

  16. 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

  17. 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 Publications Social Media Videos Fact Sheets 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

  18. 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...

  19. Composite Materials under Extreme Radiation and Temperature Environments of the Next Generation Nuclear Reactors

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Simos, N.

    2011-05-01

    In the nuclear energy renaissance, driven by fission reactor concepts utilizing very high temperatures and fast neutron spectra, materials with enhanced performance that exceeds are expected to play a central role. With the operating temperatures of the Generation III reactors bringing the classical reactor materials close to their performance limits there is an urgent need to develop and qualify new alloys and composites. Efforts have been focused on the intricate relations and the high demands placed on materials at the anticipated extreme states within the next generation fusion and fission reactors which combine high radiation fluxes, elevated temperatures and aggressive environments. While nuclear reactors have been in operation for several decades, the structural materials associated with the next generation options need to endure much higher temperatures (1200 C), higher neutron doses (tens of displacements per atom, dpa), and extremely corrosive environments, which are beyond the experience on materials accumulated to-date. The most important consideration is the performance and reliability of structural materials for both in-core and out-of-core functions. While there exists a great body of nuclear materials research and operating experience/performance from fission reactors where epithermal and thermal neutrons interact with materials and alter their physio-mechanical properties, a process that is well understood by now, there are no operating or even experimental facilities that will facilitate the extreme conditions of flux and temperature anticipated and thus provide insights into the behaviour of these well understood materials. Materials, however, still need to be developed and their interaction and damage potential or lifetime to be quantified for the next generation nuclear energy. Based on material development advances, composites, and in particular ceramic composites, seem to inherently possess properties suitable for key functions within the operating envelope of both fission and fusion reactors. In advanced fission reactors composite materials are being designed in an effort to extend the life and improve the reliability of fuel rod cladding as well as structural materials. Composites are being considered for use as core internals in the next generation of gas-cooled reactors. Further, next-generation plasma-fusion reactors, such as the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) will rely on the capabilities of advanced composites to safely withstand extremely high neutron fluxes while providing superior thermal shock resistance.

  20. 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.

  1. 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...

  2. 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.

  3. “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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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

  6. 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.

  7. 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...

  8. 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.

  9. 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.

  10. Country Total

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

    Country Total Percent of U.S. total China 1,461,074 34 Republic of Korea 172,379 4 Taiwan 688,311 16 All others 1,966,263 46 Total 4,288,027 100 Note: All Others includes Canada, Czech Republic, Federal Republic of Germany, Malaysia, Mexico, Philippines and Singapore Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-63B, 'Annual Photovoltaic Cell/Module Shipments Report.' Table 7 . Photovoltaic module import shipments by country, 2013 (peak kilowatts)

  11. State Total

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

    State Total Percent of U.S. total Alabama 1,652 0.0 Alaska 152 0.0 Arizona 912,975 19.9 Arkansas 2,724 0.1 California 2,239,983 48.8 Colorado 49,903 1.1 Connecticut 33,627 0.7 Delaware 3,080 0.1 District of Columbia 1,746 0.0 Florida 22,061 0.5 Georgia 99,713 2.2 Guam 39 0.0 Hawaii 126,595 2.8 Idaho 1,423 0.0 Illinois 8,176 0.2 Indiana 12,912 0.3 Iowa 4,480 0.1 Kansas 523 0.0 Kentucky 2,356 0.1 Louisiana 27,704 0.6 Maine 993 0.0 Maryland 30,528 0.7 Massachusetts 143,539 3.1 Michigan 3,416 0.1

  12. 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...

  13. 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...

  14. Quarterly Nuclear Deployment Scorecard - January 2016 | Department...

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

    January 2016 Quarterly Nuclear Deployment Scorecard - January 2016 News Updates The ... have received COLs; six (totaling 10 nuclear reactors) remain under active Nuclear ...

  15. QUARTERLY NUCLEAR POWER DEPLOYMENT SUMMARY OCTOBER 2015

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

    January 2016 Page 1 News Updates The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued an ... have received COLs; six (totaling 10 nuclear reactors) remain under active Nuclear ...

  16. Quarterly Nuclear Deployment Scorecard - April 2015 | Department...

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

    5 Quarterly Nuclear Deployment Scorecard - April 2015 News Updates SCANA corporation ... have received COLs; eight (totaling 12 nuclear reactors) remain under active Nuclear ...

  17. 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

  18. 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.

  19. ,"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...

  20. hrp | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    hrp Personnel Security Program NNSA is responsible for managing national nuclear security and supports several key program areas including Defense, Nuclear Nonproliferation, Naval Reactors, Emergency Operations, Infrastructure and Environment, Nuclear Security, Management and Administration and the Office of the Administrator.

  1. $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...

  2. nuclear bombs | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    nuclear bombs

  3. nuclear fusion | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    nuclear fusion

  4. nuclear reactors | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    nuclear reactors

  5. Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems Construction Cost Reductions through the Use of Virtual Environments - Task 4 Report: Virtual Mockup Maintenance Task Evaluation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Timothy Shaw; Anthony Baratta; Vaughn Whisker

    2005-02-28

    Task 4 report of 3 year DOE NERI-sponsored effort evaluating immersive virtual reality (CAVE) technology for design review, construction planning, and maintenance planning and training for next generation nuclear power plants. Program covers development of full-scale virtual mockups generated from 3D CAD data presented in a CAVE visualization facility. This report focuses on using Full-scale virtual mockups for nuclear power plant training applications.

  6. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Minnesota Nuclear Profile 2010 Minnesota profile Minnesota total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer ...

  7. 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...

  8. 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...

  9. ,"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...

  10. ,"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...

  11. ,"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"...

  12. 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...

  13. ,"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...

  14. ,"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...

  15. 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...

  16. 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*...

  17. FY 2012 Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, PER Summary |...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    12 Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, PER Summary SUMMARY OF FY 2012 SAVANNAH RIVER NUCLEAR SOLUTIONS, LLC, AWARD FEE DETERMINATION Total Available Fee Total Fee Earned % ...

  18. FY 2010 Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, PER Summary |...

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

    0 Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, PER Summary SUMMARY OF FY 2010 SAVANNAH RIVER NUCLEAR SOLUTIONS, LLC, AWARD FEE DETERMINATION Total Available Fee Total Fee Earned % ...

  19. FY 2009 Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, PER Summary |...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    FY 2009 Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, PER Summary SUMMARY OF FY 2009 SAVANNAH RIVER NUCLEAR SOLUTIONS, LLC, AWARD FEE DETERMINATION Total Available Fee Total Fee Earned % ...

  20. FY 2011 Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, PER Summary |...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    FY 2011 Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, PER Summary SUMMARY OF FY 2011 SAVANNAH RIVER NUCLEAR SOLUTIONS, LLC, AWARD FEE DETERMINATION Total Available Fee Total Fee Earned % ...

  1. FY 2010 Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, PER Summary |...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    FY 2010 Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, PER Summary SUMMARY OF FY 2010 SAVANNAH RIVER NUCLEAR SOLUTIONS, LLC, AWARD FEE DETERMINATION Total Available Fee Total Fee Earned % ...

  2. 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.

  3. 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

  4. Country/Continent Total

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

    peak kilowatts) Country/Continent Total Percent of U.S. total Africa 14,279 3.7 Asia/Australia 330,200 86.2 Europe 19,771 5.1 South/Central America 7,748 2.0 Canada 5,507 1.4 Mexico 5,747 1.5 Total 383,252 100.0 Table 8. Destination of photovoltaic module export shipments, 2013 Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-63B, 'Annual Photovoltaic Cell/Module Shipments Report.'

  5. Quarterly Nuclear Deployment Scorecard - July 2012 | Department...

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

    July 2012 Quarterly Nuclear Deployment Scorecard - July 2012 News Updates The final ruling ... Eighteen COL applications have been docketed, ten of which (totaling 16 nuclear reactors) ...

  6. Quarterly Nuclear Power Deployment Scorecard - January 2013 ...

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

    January 2013 Quarterly Nuclear Power Deployment Scorecard - January 2013 News Updates On ... been docketed, ten of which (totaling 16 nuclear reactors) remain under active NRC review. ...

  7. QUARTERLY NUCLEAR POWER DEPLOYMENT SUMMARY JANUARY 2016

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

    COLs; six (totaling 10 nuclear reactors) remain under active Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) review, 9 were suspended 1 due to utility economic or other considerations. ...

  8. 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...

  9. 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

  10. 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.

  11. 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...

  12. Total DOE/NNSA

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    8 Actuals 2009 Actuals 2010 Actuals 2011 Actuals 2012 Actuals 2013 Actuals 2014 Actuals 2015 Actuals Total DOE/NNSA 4,385 4,151 4,240 4,862 5,154 5,476 7,170 7,593 Total non-NNSA 3,925 4,017 4,005 3,821 3,875 3,974 3,826 3765 Total Facility 8,310 8,168 8,245 8,683 9,029 9,450 10,996 11,358 non-NNSA includes DOE offices and Strategic Parternship Projects (SPP) employees NNSA M&O Employee Reporting

  13. 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...

  14. Probing the Oxygen Environment in UO22+ by Solid-State O-17 Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy and Relativistic Density Functional Calculations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cho, Herman M.; De Jong, Wibe A.; Soderquist, Chuck Z.

    2010-02-28

    A combined theoretical and solid-state O-17 NMR study of the electronic structure of the uranyl ion UO22+ in (NH4)4UO2(CO3)3 and rutherfordine UO2CO3 is presented, the former representing a system with a hydrogen-bonding environment around the uranyl oxygens, and the latter exemplifying a uranyl environment without hydrogens. A fully relativistic ab initio treatment reveals unique features of the U-O covalent bond, including the finding of O-17 chemical shift anisotropies that are among the largest ever reported (>1200 ppm). Computational results for the oxygen electric field gradient tensor are found to be consistently larger in magnitude than experimental solid-state O-17 NMR measurements in a 7.05 T magnetic field indicate. A modified version of the Solomon theory of the two-spin echo amplitude for a spin-5/2 nucleus is developed and applied to the analysis of the O-17 echo signal of UO22+. The William R. Wiley environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory is a US Department of Energy national scientific user facility located at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) in Richland, Washington. PNNL is operated by Battelle for the US Department of Energy.

  15. 21 briefing pages total

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    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

  16. 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%

  17. 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

  18. 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

  19. 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

  20. 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

  1. TOTAL WORKFORCE Males

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    33 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

  2. 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

  3. 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.

  4. Contribution of atom-probe tomography to a better understanding of glass alteration mechanisms: application to a nuclear glass specimen altered 25 years in a granitic environment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gin, Stephane; Ryan, Joseph V.; Schreiber, Daniel K.; Neeway, James J.; Cabie, M.

    2013-06-26

    We report and discuss results of atom probe tomography (APT) and energy-filtered transmission electron microscopy (EFTEM) applied to a borosilicate glass sample of nuclear interest altered for nearly 26 years at 90°C in a confined granitic medium in order to better understand the rate-limiting mechanisms under conditions representative of a deep geological repository for vitrified radioactive waste. The APT technique allows the 3D reconstruction of the elemental distribution at the reactive interphase with sub-nanometer precision. Profiles of the B distribution at pristine glass/hydrated glass interface obtained by different techniques are compared to show the challenge of accurate measurements of diffusion profiles at this buried interface on the nanometer length scale. Our results show that 1) Alkali from the glass and hydrogen from the solution exhibit anti-correlated 15 ± 3 nm wide gradients located between the pristine glass and the hydrated glass layer, 2) boron exhibits an unexpectedly sharp profile located just at the outside of the alkali/H interdiffusion layer; this sharp profile is more consistent with a dissolution front than a diffusion-controlled release of boron. The resulting apparent diffusion coefficients derived from the Li and H profiles are DLi = 1.5 × 10-22 m2.s-1 and DH = 6.8 × 10-23 m2.s-1. These values are around two orders of magnitude lower than those observed at the very beginning of the alteration process, which suggests that interdiffusion is slowed at high reaction progress by local conditions that could be related to the porous structure of the interphase. As a result, the accessibility of water to the pristine glass could be the rate-limiting step in these conditions. More generally, these findings strongly support the importance of interdiffusion coupled with hydrolysis reactions of the silicate network on the long-term dissolution rate, contrary to what has been suggested by recent interfacial dissolution-precipitation models for silicate minerals.

  5. Contribution of atom-probe tomography to a better understanding of glass alteration mechanisms: application to a nuclear glass specimen altered 25 years in a granitic environment

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

    Gin, Stephane; Ryan, Joseph V.; Schreiber, Daniel K.; Neeway, James J.; Cabie, M.

    2013-06-26

    We report and discuss results of atom probe tomography (APT) and energy-filtered transmission electron microscopy (EFTEM) applied to a borosilicate glass sample of nuclear interest altered for nearly 26 years at 90°C in a confined granitic medium in order to better understand the rate-limiting mechanisms under conditions representative of a deep geological repository for vitrified radioactive waste. The APT technique allows the 3D reconstruction of the elemental distribution at the reactive interphase with sub-nanometer precision. Profiles of the B distribution at pristine glass/hydrated glass interface obtained by different techniques are compared to show the challenge of accurate measurements of diffusionmore » profiles at this buried interface on the nanometer length scale. Our results show that 1) Alkali from the glass and hydrogen from the solution exhibit anti-correlated 15 ± 3 nm wide gradients located between the pristine glass and the hydrated glass layer, 2) boron exhibits an unexpectedly sharp profile located just at the outside of the alkali/H interdiffusion layer; this sharp profile is more consistent with a dissolution front than a diffusion-controlled release of boron. The resulting apparent diffusion coefficients derived from the Li and H profiles are DLi = 1.5 × 10-22 m2.s-1 and DH = 6.8 × 10-23 m2.s-1. These values are around two orders of magnitude lower than those observed at the very beginning of the alteration process, which suggests that interdiffusion is slowed at high reaction progress by local conditions that could be related to the porous structure of the interphase. As a result, the accessibility of water to the pristine glass could be the rate-limiting step in these conditions. More generally, these findings strongly support the importance of interdiffusion coupled with hydrolysis reactions of the silicate network on the long-term dissolution rate, contrary to what has been suggested by recent interfacial dissolution-precipitation models for silicate minerals.« less

  6. Tennessee Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    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 ...

  7. Texas Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

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

    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 ...

  8. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation ... Station Unit 1, Unit 2 2,330 19,200 20.0 Exelon Nuclear Byron Generating Station Unit 1, ...

  9. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation ... Limerick Unit 1, Unit 2 2,264 18,926 24.3 Exelon Nuclear PPL Susquehanna Unit 1, Unit 2 ...

  10. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) New Jersey nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010 Oyster Creek Unit 1 615 4,601 14.0 Exelon ...

  11. 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.

  12. Naval Nuclear Propulsion | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Naval Nuclear Propulsion

  13. NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Carter, J.C.; Armstrong, R.H.; Janicke, M.J.

    1963-05-14

    A nuclear power plant for use in an airless environment or other environment in which cooling is difficult is described. The power plant includes a boiling mercury reactor, a mercury--vapor turbine in direct cycle therewith, and a radiator for condensing mercury vapor. (AEC)

  14. QUARTERLY NUCLEAR POWER DEPLOYMENT SUMMARY OCTOBER 2013 News...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    close its single unit Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant in late 2014; sustained low ... IN PROGRESS Submitted Docketed Issued Safety 4 Environ. 5 Issued Southern Nuclear ...

  15. Nuclear safety information sharing agreement between NRC and...

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

    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 ...

  16. sitemap | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Home sitemap Front page Front page of National Nuclear Security Administration Main menu People Mission Powering the Nuclear Navy Concern for the Environment Protection of People Naval Nuclear Propulsion Plants Management and Administration Public Affairs More About NNSA's Naval Reactors Office Emergency Response Counterterrorism Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Preventing Proliferation Managing the Stockpile Dismantlement and Disposition Stockpile Stewardship Program Quarterly Experiments

  17. 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.

  18. Powering the Nuclear Navy | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Powering the Nuclear Navy The Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program provides militarily effective nuclear propulsion plants and ensures their safe, reliable and long-lived operation. NNSA's Naval Reactors Program provides the design, development and operational support required to provide militarily effective nuclear propulsion plants and ensure their safe, reliable and long-lived operation. Learn More USS George H.W. Bush conducts flight operations Concern for the Environment Protection of People

  19. 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...

  20. Quarterly Nuclear Power Deployment Scorecard - April 2013 | Department...

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

    April 2013 Quarterly Nuclear Power Deployment Scorecard - April 2013 News Updates On ... been docketed, ten of which (totaling 16 nuclear reactors) remain under active NRC review. ...

  1. Environment, Safety & Health | National Nuclear Security Administratio...

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

    and Health Program; oversees the Environmental Management System, and provides oversight and direction for SNL waste management, water, air, and pollution prevention programs

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

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    unique mission-driven need for scalability, parallelism, performance, and reliability. ... and quality and reliability activities, as well as industrial and academic collaborations. ...

  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. Nuclear Astrophysics

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

    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 Current Issues & Trends See more › Updated EIA survey provides data on spent nuclear fuel in the United

  5. 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...

  6. Total

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

    Fuel Kerosene Distillate Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil, 15 ppm Sulfur and Under Distillate Fuel Oil, Greater than 15 ppm to 500 ppm Sulfur Distillate Fuel Oil, Greater than 500 ppm ...

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

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

    5 or More Units Mobile Homes Energy Information Administration 2005 Residential Energy Consumption Survey: Preliminary Housing Characteristics Tables Million U.S. Housing Units ...

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

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

    111.1 86.6 2,720 1,970 1,310 1,941 1,475 821 1,059 944 554 Census Region and Division Northeast.................................... 20.6 13.9 3,224 2,173 836 2,219 1,619 583 903 830 Q New England.......................... 5.5 3.6 3,365 2,154 313 2,634 1,826 Q 951 940 Q Middle Atlantic........................ 15.1 10.3 3,167 2,181 1,049 2,188 1,603 582 Q Q Q Midwest...................................... 25.6 21.0 2,823 2,239 1,624 2,356 1,669 1,336 1,081 961 778 East North

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

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

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

    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..............................

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

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

    ,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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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 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

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

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

    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

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

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

    111.1 26.7 28.8 20.6 13.1 22.0 16.6 38.6 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment....... 1.2 0.5 0.3 0.2 Q 0.2 0.3 0.6 Have Main Space Heating Equipment.......... 109.8 26.2 28.5 20.4 13.0 21.8 16.3 37.9 Use Main Space Heating Equipment............ 109.1 25.9 28.1 20.3 12.9 21.8 16.0 37.3 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It.............. 0.8 0.3 0.3 Q Q N 0.4 0.6 Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas.................................................. 58.2 12.2 14.4 11.3 7.1 13.2 7.6 18.3 Central

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

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

    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.................................................................

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

    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.................................................................

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

    26.7 28.8 20.6 13.1 22.0 16.6 38.6 Cooking Appliances Frequency of Hot Meals Cooked 3 or More Times A Day.............................. 8.2 2.9 2.5 1.3 0.5 1.0 2.4 4.6 2 Times A Day........................................... 24.6 6.5 7.0 4.3 3.2 3.6 4.8 10.3 Once a Day................................................ 42.3 8.8 9.8 8.7 5.1 10.0 5.0 12.9 A Few Times Each Week........................... 27.2 5.6 7.2 4.7 3.3 6.3 3.2 7.5 About Once a Week................................... 3.9 1.1 1.1

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

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

    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

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

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

    . 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...................................................................

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

    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....................................................................

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

    14.7 7.4 12.5 12.5 18.9 18.6 17.3 9.2 Household Size 1 Person.......................................................... 30.0 4.6 2.5 3.7 3.2 5.4 5.5 3.7 1.6 2 Persons......................................................... 34.8 4.3 1.9 4.4 4.1 5.9 5.3 5.5 3.4 3 Persons......................................................... 18.4 2.5 1.3 1.7 1.9 2.9 3.5 2.8 1.6 4 Persons......................................................... 15.9 1.9 0.8 1.5 1.6 3.0 2.5 3.1 1.4 5

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    Cooking Appliances Frequency of Hot Meals Cooked 3 or More Times A Day................................................. 8.2 3.0 1.6 0.3 1.1 2 Times A Day.............................................................. 24.6 8.3 4.2 1.3 2.7 Once a Day................................................................... 42.3 15.0 8.1 2.7 4.2 A Few Times Each Week............................................. 27.2 10.9 6.0 1.8 3.1 About Once a Week..................................................... 3.9

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

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

    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

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

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

    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

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

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

    Cooking Appliances Frequency of Hot Meals Cooked 3 or More Times A Day................................................. 8.2 3.7 1.6 1.4 1.5 2 Times A Day.............................................................. 24.6 10.8 4.1 4.3 5.5 Once a Day................................................................... 42.3 17.0 7.2 8.7 9.3 A Few Times Each Week............................................. 27.2 11.4 4.7 6.4 4.8 About Once a Week.....................................................

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

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

    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

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

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

    ..... 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

  17. Total

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

    Administration, Form EIA-63B, 'Annual Photovoltaic CellModule Shipments Report.'rounding. ... Form EIA-63B, 'Annual Photovoltaic CellModule Shipments Report.' CellModule ...

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

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

    ... 41.8 2,603 2,199 1,654 941 795 598 1-Car Garage...... 9.5 2,064 1,664 1,039 775 624 390 2-Car Garage......

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

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

    ... Type of Glass in Windows Single-pane Glass...... 27.4 ... Q Q N Q N N Proportion of Windows Replaced All......

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

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

    ... Type of Glass in Windows Single-pane Glass......Q Q Q Q Proportion of Windows Replaced All......

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

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

    Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System...... 65.9 25.8 10.9 16.6 12.5 Without a Heat Pump......

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

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

    Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System...... 65.9 6.0 17.3 32.1 10.5 Without a Heat Pump......

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

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

    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 ...

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

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

    Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System...... 65.9 32.1 17.6 5.2 9.3 Without a Heat Pump......

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

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

    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 ...

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

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

    ... 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 ...

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

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

    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 ...

  8. FY 2007 Total System Life Cycle Cost, Pub 2008 | Department of Energy

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

    FY 2007 Total System Life Cycle Cost, Pub 2008 FY 2007 Total System Life Cycle Cost, Pub 2008 The Analysis of the Total System Life Cycle Cost (TSLCC) of the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program presents the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management's (OCRWM) May 2007 total system cost estimate for the disposal of the Nation's spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste (HLW). The TSLCC analysis provides a basis for assessing the adequacy of the Nuclear Waste Fund

  9. Nuclear Waste Partnership, LLC

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Nuclear Waste Partnership, LLC Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Report from the Department of Energy Voluntary Protection Program Onsite Review March 17-27, 2015 U.S. Department of Energy Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security Office of Health and Safety Office of Worker Safety and Health Assistance Washington, DC 20585 Nuclear Waste Partnership, LLC DOE-VPP Onsite Review WIPP March 2015 i Foreword The Department of Energy (DOE) recognizes that true excellence can be encouraged and guided

  10. 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

  11. Quarterly Nuclear Deployment Summary, January 2013 | Department...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    January 2013 Quarterly Nuclear Deployment Summary, January ... decommission its Kewaunee Power Station located in Carlton, ... IN PROGRESS Submitted Docketed Issued Safety 4 Environ.5 ...

  12. QUARTERLY NUCLEAR POWER DEPLOYMENT SUMMARY APRIL 2014

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Power Company and Oglethorpe Power Company for the construction of two new nuclear reactors at the Alvin W. ... Submitted Docketed Issued Safety 3 Environ. 4 Issued Southern ...

  13. QUARTERLY NUCLEAR POWER DEPLOYMENT SUMMARY JANUARY 2015

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    The Vermont Yankee nuclear energy facility has closed. ... closure. Georgia Power has notified the Securities ... Submitted Docketed Issued Safety 3 Environ. 4 Issued ...

  14. QUARTERLY NUCLEAR POWER DEPLOYMENT SUMMARY JULY 2015

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    to grant the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation authority to issue a full power operating license to ... Submitted Docketed Issued Safety 3 Environ. 4 Issued Southern ...

  15. Site Information | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Site Information Facilities & Projects Nuclear Operations Environment, Safety & Health Safeguards & Security Performance & Quality Assurance Programs NEPA Reading Room

  16. 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...

  17. Risk Analysis Virtual ENvironment

    SciTech Connect (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 status 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.

  18. 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

  19. 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

  20. 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

  1. 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)

  2. 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

  3. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

  4. User Environment

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

    Getting Started Configuration User Environment Programming Running Jobs File Storage Software and Tools Performance and Optimization Retirement Plans Jesup Dirac Edison Phase I Euclid - Retired 01/31/2013 Franklin - Retired 04/30/12 Bassi Storage & File Systems Data & Analytics Connecting to NERSC Queues and Scheduling Job Logs & Statistics Application Performance Training & Tutorials Software Policies User Surveys NERSC Users Group User Announcements Help Staff Blogs Request

  5. 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

  6. 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...

  7. Determination of Total Solids in Biomass and Total Dissolved...

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

    ... The published moisture loss on drying for sodium tartrate is 15.62% (84.38% total solids). 14.6 Sample size: Determined by sample matrix. 14.7 Sample storage: Samples should be ...

  8. 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)

  9. nuclear enterprise

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

    The...

  10. 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 Thursday, March 26, 2015. This will be provided by Rogue Wave Software staff members. The training will include a lecture and demo sessions in the morning, followed by a hands-on parallel debugging session in the afternoon. Location This event will be presented online using WebEx technology and in person at NERSC Oakland

  11. 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

  12. 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

  13. 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

  14. 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

  15. 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

  16. 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

  17. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

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

    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

  18. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

  19. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

  20. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

  1. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

  2. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

  3. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

  4. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

  5. 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...

  6. U.S. Total Exports

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

    CA Otay Mesa, CA Alamo, TX Clint, TX Del Rio, TX Eagle Pass, TX El Paso, TX Freeport, TX Hidalgo, TX Laredo, TX McAllen, TX Penitas, TX Rio Bravo, TX Rio Grande, TX Roma, TX Total ...

  7. 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...

  8. 2014 Total Electric Industry- Customers

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

    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 ...

  9. "2014 Total Electric Industry- Customers"

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

    Customers" "(Data from forms EIA-861- schedules 4A, 4B, 4D, EIA-861S and EIA-861U)" "State","Residential","Commercial","Industrial","Transportation","Total" "New England",6243013,8...

  10. nuclear | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    nuclear Nuclear Science Week releases 2015 Impact Report and 2016 Request for Proposal Last week the Nuclear Science Week (NSW) National Steering Committee released its impact report from the 2015 event, detailing the many ways people were educated about all things nuclear as a result of the event. Nuclear Science Week is an international weeklong celebration to focus interest on... U.S-, Japan Exchange Best Practices on Nuclear Emergency Response Washington D.C.--The Department of Energy's

  11. 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.

  12. Nuclear Energy!

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

    Nuclear Energy Technical Assistance Nuclear Energy Technical Assistance "The United States will continue to promote the safe and secure use of nuclear power worldwide through a variety of bilateral and multilateral engagements. For example, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission advises international partners on safety and regulatory best practices, and the Department of Energy works with international partners on research and development, nuclear waste and storage, training, regulations,

  13. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (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 ...

  14. 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.

  15. 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.

  16. Our Programs | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    About Our Programs NNSA's program support is divided into several key program areas including Defense, Nuclear Nonproliferation, Naval Reactors, Emergency Operations, Infrastructure and Environment, Nuclear Security, Management and Administration and the Office of the Administrator. Each program area is focused on specific challenges. NNSA's program support is divided into several key program areas including Defense, Nuclear Nonproliferation, Naval Reactors, Emergency Operations, Infrastructure

  17. Environment control system

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Sammarone, Dino G.

    1978-01-01

    A system for controlling the environment of an enclosed area in nuclear reactor installations. The system permits the changing of the environment from nitrogen to air, or from air to nitrogen, without the release of any radioactivity or process gas to the outside atmosphere. In changing from a nitrogen to an air environment, oxygen is inserted into the enclosed area at the same rate which the nitrogen-oxygen gas mixture is removed from the enclosed area. The nitrogen-oxygen gas mixture removed from the enclosed area is mixed with hydrogen, the hydrogen recombining with the oxygen present in the gas to form water. The water is then removed from the system and, if it contains any radioactive products, can be utilized to form concrete, which can then be transferred to a licensed burial site. The process gas is purified further by stripping it of carbon dioxide and then distilling it to remove any xenon, krypton, and other fission or non-condensable gases. The pure nitrogen is stored as either a cryogenic liquid or a gas. In changing from an air to nitrogen environment, the gas is removed from the enclosed area, mixed with hydrogen to remove the oxygen present, dried, passed through adsorption beds to remove any fission gases, and reinserted into the enclosed area. Additionally, the nitrogen stored during the nitrogen to air change, is inserted into the enclosed area, the nitrogen from both sources being inserted into the enclosed area at the same rate as the removal of the gas from the containment area. As designed, the amount of nitrogen stored during the nitrogen to air change substantially equals that required to replace oxygen removed during an air to nitrogen change.

  18. 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.

  19. 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.

  20. CATEGORY Total Procurement Total Small Business Small Disadvantaged

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    CATEGORY Total Procurement Total Small Business Small Disadvantaged Business Woman Owned Small Business HubZone Small Business Veteran-Owned Small Business Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business FY 2013 Dollars Accomplished $1,049,087,940 $562,676,028 $136,485,766 $106,515,229 $12,080,258 $63,473,852 $28,080,960 FY 2013 % Accomplishment 54.40% 13.00% 10.20% 1.20% 6.60% 2.70% FY 2014 Dollars Accomplished $868,961,755 $443,711,175 $92,478,522 $88,633,031 $29,867,820 $43,719,452 $26,826,374

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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

  8. 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

  9. 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

  10. 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

  11. 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

  12. 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

  13. 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

  14. 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

  15. 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

  16. 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

  17. 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

  18. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

  19. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

  20. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

  1. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

  9. Nuclear Materials Management & Safeguards System | National Nuclear...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    About Our Programs Nuclear Security Nuclear Materials Management & Safeguards System NMMSS U.S. Department of Energy U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nuclear Materials ...

  10. 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.

  11. Ohio Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    Ohio 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" "Davis Besse Unit 1",894,"5,185",32.8,"FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company" "Perry Unit 1","1,240","10,620",67.2,"FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company" "2

  12. Nuclear Energy

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

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

  13. 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)

  14. 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.

  15. 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

  16. 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.

  17. 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...

  18. 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

  19. Total Imports of Residual Fuel

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

    Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 Jan-16 Feb-16 View History U.S. Total 7,281 4,217 5,941 6,842 9,010 5,030 1936-2016 PAD District 1 4,571 2,206 2,952 3,174 3,127 2,664 1981-2016 Connecticut 1995-2015 Delaware 678 85 1995-2015 Florida 351 299 932 836 858 649 1995-2016 Georgia 120 295 210 262 1995-2016 Maine 1995-2015 Maryland 1995-2015 Massachusetts 1995-2015 New Hampshire 1995-2015 New Jersey 1,575 400 1,131 1,712 1,283 843 1995-2016 New York 1,475 998 350 322 234 824 1995-2016 North Carolina

  20. 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

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

  7. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

  8. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

  9. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

  10. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    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

  11. 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.

  12. 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.

  13. Nuclear Physics

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

    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 this roadmap. This quest requires a broad

  14. 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.

  15. Welcome to the Livermore Field Office | National Nuclear Security...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    workers, and the environment within nuclear, high explosive, biological, and moderate chemical hazard facilities; Responsible for all waste and materials transportation on-site at ...

  16. nuclear smuggling

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    13, 2015

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

  17. 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...

  18. 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...

  19. 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...

  20. 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...

  1. NUCLEAR ENERGY

    Energy Savers [EERE]

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

  2. 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.

  3. ,"West Virginia Natural Gas Total Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","West Virginia Natural Gas Total Consumption ... AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: West Virginia Natural Gas Total Consumption (MMcf)" ...

  4. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Total Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Total Consumption ... AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: New Mexico Natural Gas Total Consumption (MMcf)" ...

  5. ARM - Measurement - Shortwave broadband total downwelling irradiance

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

    Measurement : Shortwave broadband total downwelling irradiance The total diffuse and direct radiant energy that comes from some continuous range of directions, at wavelengths ...

  6. 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...

  7. 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...

  8. 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...

  9. 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...

  10. 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...

  11. 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.

  12. 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

  13. Civilian Nuclear Program

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

    Civilian Nuclear Program Civilian Nuclear Program Los Alamos is committed to using its advanced nuclear expertise and unique facilities to meet the civilian nuclear national ...

  14. 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

  15. Nuclear Materials Management & Safeguards System | National Nuclear...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Nuclear Materials Management & Safeguards System NMMSS U.S. Department of Energy U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nuclear Materials Management & Safeguards System NMMSS ...

  16. Nuclear Structure and Nuclear Reactions | Argonne Leadership...

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

    Calculations were carried out using nuclear density functional theory. The collective ... Nuclear Structure and Nuclear Reactions PI Name: James Vary PI Email: jvary@iastate.edu ...

  17. Nuclear Operations | National Nuclear Security Administration

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

    Nuclear Operations The SFO Nuclear Operations office is responsible for direction, day-to-day oversight and contract administration activities regarding safe nuclear operations in ...

  18. Nuclear Verification | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Control Nuclear Verification Challenge: Maintain the U.S. ability to monitor and verify nuclear reduction agreements and detect violations of treaties and other nuclear ...

  19. Chernobyl Nuclear Accident | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Chernobyl Nuclear Accident Chernobyl Nuclear Accident Chernobyl, Ukraine A catastrophic nuclear accident occurs at Chernobyl Reactor 4 in the then Soviet Republic of Ukraine

  20. Nuclear Nonproliferation Program Offices | National Nuclear Security...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy ... and monitor nuclear weapons production, proliferation, and nuclear explosions worldwide. ...

  1. defense nuclear security | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

  2. Nuclear Material Removal | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Nuclear Material Removal Once weapons-usable nuclear material is no longer required, the Office of Nuclear Material Removal works with global partners and facilities to ...

  3. 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 ...

  4. Nuclear Nonproliferation, International Safeguards and Nuclear...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Conference: Nuclear Nonproliferation, International Safeguards and Nuclear Security in the Middle East Citation Details In-Document Search Title: Nuclear Nonproliferation, ...

  5. Nuclear Nonproliferation, International Safeguards and Nuclear...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Nuclear Nonproliferation, International Safeguards and Nuclear Security in the Middle East Citation Details In-Document Search Title: Nuclear Nonproliferation, International ...

  6. QUARTERLY NUCLEAR POWER DEPLOYMENT SUMMARY OCTOBER 2014

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Submitted Docketed Issued Safety 3 Environ. 4 Issued Southern Nuclear Vogtle GA AP1000 2 033108 05... B Completed Florida Power and Light Turkey Point FL AP1000 2 63009 9...

  7. Quarterly Nuclear Deployment Summary, October 2012 | Department...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    IN PROGRESS Submitted Docketed Issued Safety 4 Environ.5 Issued Southern Nuclear Vogtle GA AP1000 2 033108 ... AP1000 2 121307 22508 - Ph. B Ph. 2 Florida Power and Light Turkey ...

  8. 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.

  9. United States -Japan Joint Nuclear Energy Action Plan | Department of

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

    Energy -Japan Joint Nuclear Energy Action Plan United States -Japan Joint Nuclear Energy Action Plan President Bush of the United States and Prime Minister Koizumi of Japan have both stated their strong support for the contribution of nuclear power to energy security and the global environment. Japan was the first nation to endorse President Bush's Global Nuclear Energy Partnership. This describes a background of the partnership. PDF icon United States -Japan Joint Nuclear Energy Action Plan

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

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

    Department of Energy Nuclear Safety 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

  11. 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

  12. 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

  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. 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

  15. 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

  16. 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

  17. 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

  18. 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

  19. 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

  20. 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

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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

  8. 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...

  9. 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

  10. Collaboration inspires nuclear engineering student Alexis Kaplan

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

    Alexis Kaplan Collaboration inspires nuclear engineering student Alexis Kaplan Researcher designs a system that improves nuclear energy security August 27, 2013 Alexis Kaplan Alexis Kaplan has climbed many mountains: Wheeler Peak in New Mexico, 14-ners in Colorado, and Machu Picchu in Peru. When she is not doing science look for her outdoors or visiting another country. Inspired by the world-class nuclear research environment and invigorated by the small city's proximity to outdoor activities,

  11. sfo | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    sfo Sandia National Laboratory Sandia Field Office Contact the Field Office Contract Administration & Business Management Emergency Information Facilities & Projects Nuclear Operations Environment, Safety & Health Public Affairs Safeguards & Security Performance and Quality Assurance Programs NEPA Reading Room... Sandia National Laboratories

  12. 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)

  13. 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...

  14. 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...

  15. 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''.

  16. nuclear navy

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

    Page...

  17. nuclear navy

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

    Page...

  18. Nuclear option

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Olson, P.S.

    1983-03-01

    The energy demand complexion of this country is always changing and promises to change in the future. The nuclear industry is responding to changing energy demands through standards writing activities. Since the oil embargo of 1973, there has been a change in the mix of fuels contributing to energy growth in this country; virtually all of the energy growth has come from coal and nuclear power. The predicted expansion of coal use by 1985, over 1977 level, is 37%, while the use of oil is expected to decline by 17%. Use of nuclear power is expected to increase 62% from the 1977 level. The feasibility of using nuclear energy to meet the needs of the USA for electric power is discussed.

  19. 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.

  20. 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.

  1. 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.

  2. 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

  3. 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...

  4. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    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

  5. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    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

  6. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    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

  7. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    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

  8. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    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. Total System Performance Assessment Peer Review Panel

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  10. Total System Performance Assessment - License Application Methods and Approach

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    J. McNeish

    2003-12-08

    ''Total System Performance Assessment-License Application (TSPA-LA) Methods and Approach'' provides the top-level method and approach for conducting the TSPA-LA model development and analyses. The method and approach is responsive to the criteria set forth in Total System Performance Assessment Integration (TSPAI) Key Technical Issues (KTIs) identified in agreements with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the ''Yucca Mountain Review Plan'' (YMRP), ''Final Report'' (NRC 2003 [163274]), and the NRC final rule 10 CFR Part 63 (NRC 2002 [156605]). This introductory section provides an overview of the TSPA-LA, the projected TSPA-LA documentation structure, and the goals of the document. It also provides a brief discussion of the regulatory framework, the approach to risk management of the development and analysis of the model, and the overall organization of the document. The section closes with some important conventions that are used in this document.

  11. 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

  12. 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

  13. 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

  14. 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

  15. 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

  16. 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

  17. 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

  18. 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

  19. 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

  20. 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

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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

  8. 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

  9. 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,"*"

  10. 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

  11. 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,"*"

  12. 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

  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. 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.

  15. Nuclear reactor overflow line

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Severson, Wayne J.

    1976-01-01

    The overflow line for the reactor vessel of a liquid-metal-cooled nuclear reactor includes means for establishing and maintaining a continuous bleed flow of coolant amounting to 5 to 10% of the total coolant flow through the overflow line to prevent thermal shock to the overflow line when the reactor is restarted following a trip. Preferably a tube is disposed concentrically just inside the overflow line extending from a point just inside the reactor vessel to an overflow tank and a suction line is provided opening into the body of liquid metal in the reactor vessel and into the annulus between the overflow line and the inner tube.

  16. 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

  17. 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.

  18. Spent Nuclear Fuel

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

    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 Spent Nuclear Fuel Release date: December 7, 2015 Next release date: Late 2018 Spent nuclear fuel data are

  19. nuclear testing | National Nuclear Security Administration

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

    controls Nuclear Verification Challenge: Maintain the U.S. ability to monitor and verify nuclear reduction agreements and detect violations of treaties and other nuclear nonproliferation commitments. Solution: Develop and deploy measures to ensure verifiable compliance with treaties and other international agreements,... International Nuclear Safeguards Challenge: Detect/deter undeclared nuclear materials and activities. Solution: Build capacity of the International Atomic Energy Agency and

  20. 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

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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,

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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

  8. 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."

  9. 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

  10. 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

  11. 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,

  12. 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,

  13. 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

  14. 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,

  15. 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

  16. 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

  17. 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,

  18. 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,

  19. 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,

  20. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    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,

  1. 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,

  2. 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,

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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

  8. 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

  9. 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,

  10. 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

  11. 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

  12. 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

  13. 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."

  14. 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

  15. 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,

  16. 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,

  17. 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,

  18. 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

  19. 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

  20. 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,

  1. 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,

  2. 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,

  3. 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,

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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

  8. 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.

  9. 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...

  10. 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...

  11. NUCLEAR REACTOR

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Starr, C.

    1963-01-01

    This patent relates to a combination useful in a nuclear reactor and is comprised of a casing, a mass of graphite irapregnated with U compounds in the casing, and at least one coolant tube extending through the casing. The coolant tube is spaced from the mass, and He is irtroduced irto the space between the mass and the coolant tube. (AEC)

  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. Sandia National Laboratories: National Security Missions: Nuclear Weapons

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

    Programs Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Stewardship Ensuring the nation's nuclear weapons stockpile is safe, secure, and reliable. About Nuclear Weapons Since 1949, Sandia's scientists and engineers have conducted breakthrough research in weaponization. About Safety & Security Safe and secure nuclear weapons are of paramount importance in a changing global threat environment. Safety and Security Science & Technology Sandia provides the science and engineering to help maintain and certify the

  14. 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

  15. 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

  16. 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.

  17. 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 ...

  18. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    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

  19. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    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

  20. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    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

  1. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    4 Hawaii - 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 S13. Summary statistics for natural gas - Hawaii, 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

  2. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    6 Idaho - 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 S14. Summary statistics for natural gas - Idaho, 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

  3. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    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

  4. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    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

  5. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    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

  6. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    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

  7. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle ... due to independent rounding. Prices are in nominal dollars. ... Annual Consumption per Consumer (thousand cubic feet) ...

  8. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    from Electric Power to Industrial for years 2002 through ... Totals may not add due to independent rounding. Prices are ... Annual Consumption per Consumer (thousand cubic feet) ...

  9. Total Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity

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

    Storage Capacity Salt Caverns Storage Capacity Aquifers Storage Capacity Depleted Fields Storage Capacity Total Working Gas Capacity Working Gas Capacity of Salt Caverns Working...

  10. ARM - Measurement - Shortwave narrowband total downwelling irradiance

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

    Send Measurement : Shortwave narrowband total downwelling irradiance The rate at which radiant energy, in narrow bands of wavelengths shorter than approximately 4 mum, passes ...

  11. ARM - Measurement - Shortwave narrowband total upwelling irradiance

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

    Send Measurement : Shortwave narrowband total upwelling irradiance The rate at which radiant energy, in narrow bands of wavelengths shorter than approximately 4 mum, passes ...

  12. ARM - Measurement - Shortwave spectral total downwelling irradiance

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

    Send Measurement : Shortwave spectral total downwelling irradiance The rate at which radiant energy, at specrally-resolved wavelengths between 0.4 and 4 mum, is being emitted ...

  13. 2014 Total Electric Industry- Sales (Megawatthours

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

    EIA-861U)" "State","Residential","Commercial","Industrial","Transportation","Total" "New England",47211525,53107038,19107433,557463,119983459 "Connecticut",12777579,12893531,351479...

  14. Total Supplemental Supply of Natural Gas

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

    Product: Total Supplemental Supply Synthetic Propane-Air Refinery Gas Biomass Other Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & ...

  15. 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.

  16. nuclear forensics | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    NNSA chief visits New Mexico laboratories NNSA Hosts International Nuclear Forensics Workshop with Participants from Eight Countries Nuclear Forensics Operations Render Safe ...

  17. Nuclear Security Enterprise | National Nuclear Security Administration

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

    About Our Programs Defense Programs Nuclear Security Enterprise The Nuclear Security Enterprise (NSE) mission is to ensure the Nation sustains a safe, secure, and effective ...

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

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Nuclear Radiological Advisory Team (NRAT) provides an emergency response capability for on-scene scientific and technical advice for both domestic and international nuclear or ...

  19. Nuclear Forensics | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Nuclear Forensics Forensics Operations The National Technical Nuclear Forensics (NTNF) program is a Homeland Security Council and National Security Council-sponsored policy ...

  20. nuclear security | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    25M NNSA Grant for Nuclear Science and Security Research Working With PNNL Mentors, Engineering Students Deliver Prototype Safeguards Fixtures Shaping the future of nuclear ...

  1. nuclear science | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Nuclear Science Week releases 2015 Impact Report and 2016 Request for Proposal Consortium Led by University of California, Berkeley Awarded 25M NNSA Grant for Nuclear Science and ...

  2. Nuclear Smuggling Detection and Deterrence | National Nuclear...

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

    Nuclear Smuggling Detection and Deterrence The mission of the Nuclear Smuggling Detection and Deterrence program (NSDD) (formerly Second Line of Defense) is to strengthen the ...

  3. Nuclear Verification | National Nuclear Security Administration

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

    Challenge: Maintain the U.S. ability to monitor and verify nuclear reduction agreements and detect violations of treaties and other nuclear nonproliferation commitments. Solution: ...

  4. Nuclear Incident Team | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Incident Team NNSA houses the Nuclear Incident Team (NIT), which is responsible for deploying assets at the request of coordinating agencies in response to a nuclear or ...

  5. 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 ...

  6. Nuclear Controls | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

  7. nuclear safety | 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 ...

  8. 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 ...

  9. nuclear enterprise | 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 ...

  10. nuclear technology | 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 ...

  11. Nuclear Detonation Detection | National Nuclear Security Administratio...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Nuclear Forensics: Conducts R&D to advance analytic forensic capabilities related to nuclear detonations to improve the speed, accuracy, reliability, confidence, and specificity of ...

  12. 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 ...

  13. nuclear emergency | National Nuclear Security Administration

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

    Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Home nuclear emergency nuclear emergency Fukushima: Five Years Later After the March 11, 2011, Japan earthquake, tsunami, and ...

  14. Categorization of Used Nuclear Fuel Inventory in Support of a Comprehensive National Nuclear Fuel Cycle Strategy

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    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 considered for retention in support of research, development, demonstration, and national security interests.

  15. 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.

  16. 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.

  17. 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

  18. 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

  19. 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

  20. 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 -