National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for nuclear net generation

  1. 1,"Braidwood Generation Station","Nuclear","Exelon Nuclear",2330

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

    Illinois" ,"Plant","Primary energy source","Operating company","Net summer capacity (MW)" 1,"Braidwood Generation Station","Nuclear","Exelon Nuclear",2330 2,"Byron Generating ...

  2. Renewable Generation Effect on Net Regional Energy Interchange: Preprint

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Diakov, Victor; Brinkman, Gregory; Denholm, Paul; Jenkin, Thomas; Margolis, Robert

    2015-07-30

    Using production-cost model (PLEXOS), we simulate the Western Interchange (WECC) at several levels of the yearly renewable energy (RE) generation, between 13% and 40% of the total load for the year. We look at the overall energy exchange between a region and the rest of the system (net interchange, NI), and find it useful to examine separately (i) (time-)variable and (ii) year-average components of the NI. Both contribute to inter-regional energy exchange, and are affected by wind and PV generation in the system. We find that net load variability (in relatively large portions of WECC) is the leading factor affecting the variable component of inter-regional energy exchange, and the effect is quantifiable: higher regional net load correlation with the rest of the WECC lowers net interchange variability. Further, as the power mix significantly varies between WECC regions, effects of ‘flexibility import’ (regions ‘borrow’ ramping capability) are also observed.

  3. Texas Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net ...

  4. California Nuclear Profile - San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station

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

    San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 2,"1,070","6,989",74.6,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  5. Tennessee Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    Tennessee nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear ...

  6. FY 2003 Generation Audited Accumlated Net Revenues, March 2004

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

    3rd Quarter Review Forecast FY 2003 Actual Results 1 FY 2000 PBL Actual Modified Net Revenue 252 252 2 Energy Northwest Debt Service Adjustment for FY 2000 (82) (82) 3 SFAS...

  7. Community Net Energy Metering: How Novel Policies Expand Benefits of Net Metering to Non-Generators

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rose, James; Varnado, Laurel

    2009-04-01

    As interest in community solutions to renewable energy grows, more states are beginning to develop policies that encourage properties with more than one meter to install shared renewable energy systems. State net metering policies are evolving to allow the aggregation of multiple meters on a customer???¢????????s property and to dissolve conventional geographical boundaries. This trend means net metering is expanding out of its traditional function as an enabling incentive to offset onsite customer load at a single facility. This paper analyzes community net energy metering (CNEM) as an emerging vehicle by which farmers, neighborhoods, and municipalities may more easily finance and reap the benefits of renewable energy. Specifically, it aims to compare and contrast the definition of geographical boundaries among different CNEM models and examine the benefits and limitations of each approach. As state policies begin to stretch the geographic boundaries of net metering, they allow inventive solutions to encourage renewable energy investment. This paper attempts to initiate the conversation on this emerging policy mechanism and offers recommendations for further development of these policies.

  8. NUCLEAR FLASH TYPE STEAM GENERATOR

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Johns, F.L.; Gronemeyer, E.C.; Dusbabek, M.R.

    1962-09-01

    A nuclear steam generating apparatus is designed so that steam may be generated from water heated directly by the nuclear heat source. The apparatus comprises a pair of pressure vessels mounted one within the other, the inner vessel containing a nuclear reactor heat source in the lower portion thereof to which water is pumped. A series of small ports are disposed in the upper portion of the inner vessel for jetting heated water under pressure outwardly into the atmosphere within the interior of the outer vessel, at which time part of the jetted water flashes into steam. The invention eliminates the necessity of any intermediate heat transfer medium and components ordinarily required for handling that medium. (AEC)

  9. U.S. Nuclear Generation of Electricity

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

    U.S. Nuclear Generation and Generating Capacity Data Released: May 26, 2016 Data for: ... 2004 XLS 2003 XLS P Preliminary U.S. Nuclear Generation: 1957 to latest available EIA ...

  10. Neural net controlled tag gas sampling system for nuclear reactors

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Gross, Kenneth C.; Laug, Matthew T.; Lambert, John D. B.; Herzog, James P.

    1997-01-01

    A method and system for providing a tag gas identifier to a nuclear fuel rod and analyze escaped tag gas to identify a particular failed nuclear fuel rod. The method and system include disposing a unique tag gas composition into a plenum of a nuclear fuel rod, monitoring gamma ray activity, analyzing gamma ray signals to assess whether a nuclear fuel rod has failed and is emitting tag gas, activating a tag gas sampling and analysis system upon sensing tag gas emission from a failed nuclear rod and evaluating the escaped tag gas to identify the particular failed nuclear fuel rod.

  11. Neural net controlled tag gas sampling system for nuclear reactors

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Gross, K.C.; Laug, M.T.; Lambert, J.B.; Herzog, J.P.

    1997-02-11

    A method and system are disclosed for providing a tag gas identifier to a nuclear fuel rod and analyze escaped tag gas to identify a particular failed nuclear fuel rod. The method and system include disposing a unique tag gas composition into a plenum of a nuclear fuel rod, monitoring gamma ray activity, analyzing gamma ray signals to assess whether a nuclear fuel rod has failed and is emitting tag gas, activating a tag gas sampling and analysis system upon sensing tag gas emission from a failed nuclear rod and evaluating the escaped tag gas to identify the particular failed nuclear fuel rod. 12 figs.

  12. Ohio Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Ohio" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",137494,138543,134878,119712,126652 " Coal",133400,133131,130694,113712,117828 " Petroleum",1355,1148,1438,1312,1442 " Natural Gas",2379,3975,2484,4650,7128 " Other Gases",360,289,261,37,254 "Nuclear",16847,15764,17514,15206,15805 "Renewables",1091,846,1010,1161,1129 "Pumped

  13. Oklahoma Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Oklahoma" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",68093,67765,70122,68700,65435 " Coal",35032,34438,36315,34059,31475 " Petroleum",64,160,23,9,18 " Natural Gas",32981,33144,33774,34631,33942 " Other Gases",16,22,10,"-","-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",2633,5195,6362,6482,6969 "Pumped

  14. Oregon Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Oregon" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",13621,19224,21446,19338,19781 " Coal",2371,4352,4044,3197,4126 " Petroleum",12,14,15,8,3 " Natural Gas",11239,14858,17387,16133,15651 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",39679,35816,37228,37306,35299 "Pumped

  15. Pennsylvania Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Pennsylvania" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",138173,143909,137862,136047,145210 " Coal",122558,122693,117583,105475,110369 " Petroleum",1518,1484,938,915,571 " Natural Gas",13542,19198,18731,29215,33718 " Other Gases",554,534,610,443,552 "Nuclear",75298,77376,78658,77328,77828 "Renewables",5317,4782,5353,6035,6577 "Pumped Storage",-698,-723,-354,-731,-708

  16. Louisiana Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Louisiana" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",69795,71028,72850,70155,80110 " Coal",24395,23051,24100,23067,23924 " Petroleum",1872,2251,2305,1858,3281 " Natural Gas",41933,43915,45344,44003,51344 " Other Gases",1595,1811,1101,1227,1561 "Nuclear",16735,17078,15371,16782,18639 "Renewables",3676,3807,3774,3600,3577 "Pumped

  17. Maine Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Maine" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",8214,7869,8264,7861,8733 " Coal",321,376,352,72,87 " Petroleum",595,818,533,433,272 " Natural Gas",7298,6675,7380,7355,8374 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",8246,7945,8515,8150,7963 "Pumped

  18. Maryland Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Maryland" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",32091,33303,29810,26529,27102 " Coal",29408,29699,27218,24162,23668 " Petroleum",581,985,406,330,322 " Natural Gas",1770,2241,1848,1768,2897 " Other Gases",332,378,338,269,215 "Nuclear",13830,14353,14679,14550,13994 "Renewables",2730,2256,2587,2440,2241 "Pumped Storage","-","-","-","-","-"

  19. Massachusetts Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Massachusetts" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",36773,40001,34251,30913,34183 " Coal",11138,12024,10629,9028,8306 " Petroleum",2328,3052,2108,897,296 " Natural Gas",23307,24925,21514,20988,25582 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",5830,5120,5869,5396,5918 "Renewables",2791,2038,2411,2430,2270 "Pumped

  20. Michigan Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Michigan" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",80004,84933,80179,75869,78535 " Coal",67780,70811,69855,66848,65604 " Petroleum",402,699,458,399,382 " Natural Gas",11410,13141,9602,8420,12249 " Other Gases",412,282,264,203,299 "Nuclear",29066,31517,31484,21851,29625 "Renewables",3963,3687,3956,3995,4083 "Pumped Storage",-1039,-1129,-916,-857,-1023 "Other",563,303,286,344,332

  1. Mississippi Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Mississippi" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",34254,39184,37408,36266,43331 " Coal",18105,17407,16683,12958,13629 " Petroleum",399,399,76,17,81 " Natural Gas",15706,21335,20607,23267,29619 " Other Gases",44,42,40,25,2 "Nuclear",10419,9359,9397,10999,9643 "Renewables",1541,1493,1391,1424,1504 "Pumped Storage","-","-","-","-","-"

  2. Missouri Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Missouri" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",81245,80127,78788,75122,79870 " Coal",77450,75084,73532,71611,75047 " Petroleum",61,60,57,88,126 " Natural Gas",3729,4979,5196,3416,4690 " Other Gases",5,3,3,7,7 "Nuclear",10117,9372,9379,10247,8996 "Renewables",223,1234,2293,2391,2527 "Pumped Storage",48,383,545,567,888 "Other",54,37,24,27,32

  3. Montana Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Montana" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",17583,18960,18822,16181,19068 " Coal",17085,18357,18332,15611,18601 " Petroleum",419,479,419,490,409 " Natural Gas",68,106,66,78,57 " Other Gases",11,19,6,1,2 "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",10661,9971,10704,10422,10442 "Pumped

  4. Nebraska Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Nebraska" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",21461,20776,22273,23684,23769 " Coal",20683,19630,21480,23350,23363 " Petroleum",19,36,35,23,31 " Natural Gas",759,1110,758,312,375 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",9003,11042,9479,9435,11054 "Renewables",1207,625,622,883,1807 "Pumped

  5. Nevada Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Nevada" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",28459,29370,31801,33436,30702 " Coal",7254,7091,7812,7540,6997 " Petroleum",17,11,14,16,11 " Natural Gas",21184,22263,23972,25878,23688 " Other Gases",4,4,2,2,6 "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",3401,3300,3289,4269,4444 "Pumped

  6. Alabama Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Alabama" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",97827,101561,97376,87580,102762 " Coal",78109,77994,74605,55609,63050 " Petroleum",180,157,204,219,200 " Natural Gas",19407,23232,22363,31617,39235 " Other Gases",131,178,204,135,277 "Nuclear",31911,34325,38993,39716,37941 "Renewables",11136,7937,9493,15585,11081 "Pumped

  7. Alaska Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Alaska" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",5443,5519,5598,5365,5308 " Coal",617,641,618,631,620 " Petroleum",768,1010,978,1157,937 " Natural Gas",4058,3868,4002,3577,3750 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",1231,1302,1177,1337,1452 "Pumped

  8. Arizona Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Arizona" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",73385,79794,82715,74509,73386 " Coal",40443,41275,43840,39707,43644 " Petroleum",73,49,52,63,66 " Natural Gas",32869,38469,38822,34739,29676 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",24012,26782,29250,30662,31200 "Renewables",6846,6639,7400,6630,6941 "Pumped Storage",149,125,95,169,209

  9. Arkansas Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Arkansas" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",33626,34203,34639,36385,40667 " Coal",24183,25744,26115,25075,28152 " Petroleum",161,94,64,88,45 " Natural Gas",9282,8364,8461,11221,12469 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",15233,15486,14168,15170,15023 "Renewables",3273,4860,6173,5778,5283 "Pumped Storage",15,30,48,100,-1

  10. California Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    California" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",112317,122151,125699,118679,112376 " Coal",2235,2298,2280,2050,2100 " Petroleum",2368,2334,1742,1543,1059 " Natural Gas",105691,115700,119992,113463,107522 " Other Gases",2022,1818,1685,1623,1695 "Nuclear",31959,35792,32482,31764,32201 "Renewables",71963,52173,48912,53428,58881 "Pumped Storage",96,310,321,153,-171

  11. Colorado Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Colorado" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",48211,50980,48334,45490,45639 " Coal",36269,35936,34828,31636,34559 " Petroleum",21,28,19,13,17 " Natural Gas",11919,15014,13487,13840,11062 " Other Gases",3,2,"-","-","-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",2687,3054,5324,5132,5133 "Pumped

  12. Connecticut Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Connecticut" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",16046,14982,12970,12562,14743 " Coal",4282,3739,4387,2453,2604 " Petroleum",1279,1311,514,299,409 " Natural Gas",10484,9930,8070,9809,11716 " Other Gases",2,2,"-","-",14 "Nuclear",16589,16386,15433,16657,16750 "Renewables",1307,1093,1290,1268,1130 "Pumped Storage","-",-15,7,5,9

  13. Delaware Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Delaware" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",7182,8486,7350,4710,5489 " Coal",4969,5622,5267,2848,2568 " Petroleum",132,241,219,258,56 " Natural Gas",1171,1902,1387,1376,2865 " Other Gases",910,721,476,227,"-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables","s",48,163,126,138 "Pumped

  14. Florida Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Florida" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",184530,188433,180167,181553,197662 " Coal",65423,67908,64823,54003,59897 " Petroleum",22904,20203,11971,9221,9122 " Natural Gas",96186,100307,103363,118322,128634 " Other Gases",17,15,10,7,8 "Nuclear",31426,29289,32133,29118,23936 "Renewables",4534,4457,4509,4549,4664 "Pumped

  15. Georgia Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Georgia" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",100299,107165,99661,90634,97823 " Coal",86504,90298,85491,69478,73298 " Petroleum",834,788,742,650,641 " Natural Gas",12961,16079,13428,20506,23884 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",32006,32545,31691,31683,33512 "Renewables",5988,5652,4927,6085,6502 "Pumped

  16. Hawaii Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Hawaii" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",10646,10538,10356,9812,9655 " Coal",1549,1579,1648,1500,1546 " Petroleum",9054,8914,8670,8289,8087 " Natural Gas","-","-","-","-","-" " Other Gases",43,45,39,22,22 "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",738,846,861,817,817 "Pumped

  17. Idaho Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Idaho" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",1381,1741,1790,1726,1778 " Coal",82,84,90,83,88 " Petroleum","s","s","s","s","s" " Natural Gas",1298,1657,1700,1644,1689 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-"

  18. Illinois Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Illinois" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",97212,103072,101101,94662,99605 " Coal",91649,95265,96644,89967,93611 " Petroleum",136,132,143,113,110 " Natural Gas",5279,7542,4260,4495,5724 " Other Gases",149,134,54,88,161 "Nuclear",94154,95729,95152,95474,96190 "Renewables",1022,1438,3174,3666,5257 "Pumped Storage","-","-","-","-","-"

  19. Indiana Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Indiana" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",129345,129576,128206,114118,121101 " Coal",123645,122803,122036,108312,112328 " Petroleum",148,170,178,157,155 " Natural Gas",2682,4012,3636,3830,6475 " Other Gases",2870,2591,2356,1820,2144 "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",710,681,948,2209,3699 "Pumped

  20. Iowa Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Iowa" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",37014,41388,42734,38621,42749 " Coal",34405,37986,40410,37351,41283 " Petroleum",208,312,161,85,154 " Natural Gas",2400,3091,2163,1184,1312 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",5095,4519,5282,4679,4451 "Renewables",3364,3870,5070,8560,10309 "Pumped

  1. Kansas Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Kansas" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",35172,38590,36363,35033,34895 " Coal",33281,36250,34003,32243,32505 " Petroleum",51,207,130,121,103 " Natural Gas",1839,2133,2230,2669,2287 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",9350,10369,8497,8769,9556 "Renewables",1002,1163,1770,2876,3473 "Pumped

  2. Kentucky Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Kentucky" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",95720,95075,95478,86937,95182 " Coal",91198,90483,91621,84038,91054 " Petroleum",3341,2791,2874,2016,2285 " Natural Gas",1177,1796,979,878,1841 " Other Gases",4,5,4,4,3 "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",3050,2134,2377,3681,3020 "Pumped

  3. Utah Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Utah" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",40306,44634,45466,42034,40599 " Coal",36856,37171,38020,35526,34057 " Petroleum",62,39,44,36,50 " Natural Gas",3389,7424,7366,6444,6455 " Other Gases","-","-",36,28,36 "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",952,734,970,1322,1476 "Pumped

  4. Vermont Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Vermont" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",9,10,7,7,8 " Coal","-","-","-","-","-" " Petroleum",7,8,4,2,5 " Natural Gas",2,2,3,4,4 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",5107,4704,4895,5361,4782 "Renewables",1969,1110,1918,1915,1829 "Pumped

  5. Virginia Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Virginia" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",42343,48422,42242,38888,43751 " Coal",34288,35421,31776,25599,25459 " Petroleum",839,2097,1150,1088,1293 " Natural Gas",7215,10904,9315,12201,16999 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",27594,27268,27931,28212,26572 "Renewables",3810,3814,3709,3896,3720 "Pumped

  6. Washington Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Washington" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",14255,16215,18879,19747,19211 " Coal",6373,8557,8762,7478,8527 " Petroleum",38,37,35,54,32 " Natural Gas",7495,7287,9809,11971,10359 " Other Gases",349,334,272,245,292 "Nuclear",9328,8109,9270,6634,9241 "Renewables",84510,82560,82575,77977,74905 "Pumped Storage",47,45,49,52,53 "Other",62,62,56,59,62

  7. Wisconsin Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Wisconsin" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",46352,47530,47881,43477,46384 " Coal",40116,40028,41706,37280,40169 " Petroleum",877,1013,931,712,718 " Natural Gas",5358,6489,5244,5484,5497 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","s" "Nuclear",12234,12910,12155,12683,13281 "Renewables",2944,2846,3370,3734,4586 "Pumped

  8. Wyoming Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Wyoming" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",43749,44080,44635,42777,43781 " Coal",42892,43127,43808,41954,42987 " Petroleum",46,47,44,50,56 " Natural Gas",501,594,495,488,459 " Other Gases",310,312,289,284,279 "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",1602,1484,1798,3193,4271 "Pumped

  9. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  10. Utilities' Use of Nuclear Generation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ray, Harold B.

    2002-09-30

    This PowerPoint presentation was given at the Nuclear Energy Research Advisory Committee meeting, held 30 September 2002 in Arlington, VA.

  11. Illinois Nuclear Profile - Braidwood Generation Station

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

    Braidwood Generation Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,"1,178","9,197",89.1,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  12. Illinois Nuclear Profile - Byron Generating Station

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

    Byron Generating Station" ,"Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,"1,164","10,337",101.4,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  13. THE BIRTH OF NUCLEAR-GENERATED ELECTRICITY

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

    BIRTH OF NUCLEAR-GENERATED ELECTRICITY The first time that electricity was generated from nuclear energy occurred in an experimental breeder reactor in Idaho in 1951. The idea for a breeder reactor (a reactor that could produce more fuel than it uses) first occurred to scientists working on the nation's wartime atomic energy program in the early 1940's. Experimental evidence indicated that the breeding of nuclear fuel was possible in a properly designed reactor, but time and resources were not

  14. 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.

  15. Advanced Building Technologies: Toward a New Generation of Net-Zero Energy, Carbon-Neutral Buildings

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

    Meeting, Berkeley CA August 14, 2007 Advanced Building Technologies Toward a New Generation of Net-Zero Energy, Carbon-Neutral Buildings Stephen Selkowitz Department Head, Building Technologies Department Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory seselkowitz@lbl.gov 510/486-5064 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Building Energy Demand Challenge: End Use Energy Consumption Buildings consume 39% of total U.S. energy * 71% of electricity and 54% of natural gas Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

  16. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  17. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  18. Illinois Nuclear Profile - Dresden Generating Station

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

    Dresden Generating Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 2,867,"7,727",101.7,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" 3,867,"6,866",90.4,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  19. Kansas Nuclear Profile - Wolf Creek Generating Station

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

    April 2012" "Next Release Date: February 2013" "Wolf Creek Generating Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,"1,160","9,556",94.0,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  20. Washington Nuclear Profile - Columbia Generating Station

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

    Columbia Generating Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 2,"1,097","9,241",96.2,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,"1,097","9,241",96.2

  1. Industry Participation Sought for Design of Next Generation Nuclear...

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

    Industry Participation Sought for Design of Next Generation Nuclear Plant Industry Participation Sought for Design of Next Generation Nuclear Plant June 29, 2006 - 2:41pm Addthis ...

  2. United States Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source, 2006 - 2010" "(Thousand Megawatthours)" "United States" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Geothermal",14568,14637,14840,15009,15219 "Hydro Conventional",289246,247510,254831,273445,260203 "Solar",508,612,864,891,1212 "Wind",26589,34450,55363,73886,94652 "Wood/Wood Waste",38762,39014,37300,36050,37172 "MSW Biogenic/Landfill

  3. United States Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source, 2006 - 2010" "(Thousand Megawatthours)" "United States" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",2885295,2992238,2926731,2726452,2883361 " Coal",1990511,2016456,1985801,1755904,1847290 " Petroleum",64166,65739,46243,38937,37061 " Natural Gas",816441,896590,882981,920979,987697 " Other Gases",14177,13453,11707,10632,11313

  4. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  5. 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 ...

  6. Table 8.2c Electricity Net Generation: Electric Power Sector by Plant Type, 1989-2011 (Breakout of Table 8.2b; Thousand Kilowatthours)

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

    c Electricity Net Generation: Electric Power Sector by Plant Type, 1989-2011 (Breakout of Table 8.2b; Thousand Kilowatthours) Year Fossil Fuels Nuclear Electric Power Hydro- electric Pumped Storage 5 Renewable Energy Other 10 Total Coal 1 Petroleum 2 Natural Gas 3 Other Gases 4 Total Conventional Hydroelectric Power 6 Biomass Geo- thermal Solar/ PV 9 Wind Total Wood 7 Waste 8 Electricity-Only Plants 11<//td> 1989 1553997999 158,347,542 266,917,576 – 1,979,263,117 529,354,717 [6]

  7. Nuclear power generation and fuel cycle report 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-10-01

    This report presents the current status and projections through 2015 of nuclear capacity, generation, and fuel cycle requirements for all countries using nuclear power to generate electricity for commercial use. It also contains information and forecasts of developments in the worldwide nuclear fuel market. Long term projections of U.S. nuclear capacity, generation, and spent fuel discharges for two different scenarios through 2040 are developed. A discussion on decommissioning of nuclear power plants is included.

  8. Potential nuclear safeguards applications for neutron generators

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lindquist, L.O.

    1980-01-01

    Many nuclear safeguards inspection instruments use neutron sources to interrogate the fissile material (commonly /sup 235/U and /sup 239/Pu) to be measured. The neutron sources currently used in these instruments are isotopics such as Californium-252, Americium-Lithium, etc. It is becoming increasingly more difficult to transport isotopic sources from one measurement location to another. This represents a significant problem for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards inspectors because they must take their safeguards instruments with them to each nuclear installation to make an independent measurement. Purpose of this paper is to review the possibility of replacing isotopic neutron sources now used in IAEA safeguards instruments with electric neutron sources such as deuterium-tritium (D-T, 14-MeV neutrons) or deuterium-deuterium (D-D, 2-MeV neutrons). The potential for neutron generators to interrogate spent-light water reactor fuel assemblies in storage pools is also reviewed.

  9. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  10. 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.

  11. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  12. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  13. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  14. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  15. Tennessee Nuclear Profile - Watts Bar Nuclear Plant

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

    Watts Bar Nuclear Plant" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration ...

  16. Bush Administration Moves Forward to Develop Next Generation Nuclear Energy

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

    Systems | Department of Energy Moves Forward to Develop Next Generation Nuclear Energy Systems Bush Administration Moves Forward to Develop Next Generation Nuclear Energy Systems February 28, 2005 - 10:33am Addthis WASHINGTON, DC-The Bush Administration today took a major step in advancing international efforts to develop the next generation of clean, safe nuclear energy systems. Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman joined representatives from Canada, France, Japan, and the United Kingdom to

  17. 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 ...

  18. Next Generation Nuclear Plant GAP Analysis Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ball, Sydney J; Burchell, Timothy D; Corwin, William R; Fisher, Stephen Eugene; Forsberg, Charles W.; Morris, Robert Noel; Moses, David Lewis

    2008-12-01

    As a follow-up to the phenomena identification and ranking table (PIRT) studies conducted recently by NRC on next generation nuclear plant (NGNP) safety, a study was conducted to identify the significant 'gaps' between what is needed and what is already available to adequately assess NGNP safety characteristics. The PIRT studies focused on identifying important phenomena affecting NGNP plant behavior, while the gap study gives more attention to off-normal behavior, uncertainties, and event probabilities under both normal operation and postulated accident conditions. Hence, this process also involved incorporating more detailed evaluations of accident sequences and risk assessments. This study considers thermal-fluid and neutronic behavior under both normal and postulated accident conditions, fission product transport (FPT), high-temperature metals, and graphite behavior and their effects on safety. In addition, safety issues related to coupling process heat (hydrogen production) systems to the reactor are addressed, given the limited design information currently available. Recommendations for further study, including analytical methods development and experimental needs, are presented as appropriate in each of these areas.

  19. Proposal of a new generation of Laser Beacon for time calibration in the KM3NeT neutrino telescope

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Real, Diego [IFIC, Instituto de Fsica Corpuscular, CSIC-Universidad de Valencia, C Collaboration: KM3NeT Collaboration

    2014-11-18

    The KM3NeT collaboration aims at the construction of a multi-km3 high-energy neutrino telescope in the Mediterranean Sea consisting of a matrix of pressure resistant glass spheres holding each a set (31) of small area photomultipliers. The main motivation of the telescope is to observe cosmic neutrinos through the Cherenkov light induced in sea water by charged particles produced in neutrino interactions with the surrounding medium. A relative time calibration between photomultipliers of the order of 1 ns is required to achieve an optimal performance. To this end, several time calibration subsystems have been developed. In this article, the proposal of a last generation Laser Beacon, to be used in KM3NeT and developed to measure and monitor the relative time offsets between photomultipliers, is presented.

  20. NNSA Next Generation Safeguards Initiative | National Nuclear...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Administered by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), international safeguards serve to monitor nuclear activities under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and are the ...

  1. New Jersey Nuclear Profile - PSEG Salem Generating Station

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

    PSEG Salem Generating Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,"1,174","8,777",85.3,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  2. Illinois Nuclear Profile - LaSalle Generating Station

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

    LaSalle Generating Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,"1,118","9,207",94.0,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  3. Training the Next Generation of Nuclear Energy Leaders | Department of

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

    Energy the Next Generation of Nuclear Energy Leaders Training the Next Generation of Nuclear Energy Leaders May 8, 2012 - 3:06pm Addthis University of Idaho professor Supathorn Phongikaroon works with a graduate student in the radiochemistry lab at the Center for Advanced Energy Studies in Idaho Falls, Idaho. Phongikaroon has received $820,000 from DOE to study an applied technology to remotely analyze spent nuclear fuel. | Photo courtesy of the University of Idaho. University of Idaho

  4. Method and apparatus for generating low energy nuclear particles (Patent) |

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    SciTech Connect Patent: Method and apparatus for generating low energy nuclear particles Citation Details In-Document Search Title: Method and apparatus for generating low energy nuclear particles × You are accessing a document from the Department of Energy's (DOE) SciTech Connect. This site is a product of DOE's Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI) and is provided as a public service. Visit OSTI to utilize additional information resources in energy science and technology.

  5. The National Nuclear Security Administration's Neutron Generator Activities

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    National Nuclear Security Administration's Neutron Generator Activities OAS-L-14-11 August 2014 U.S. Department of Energy Office of Inspector General Office of Audits and Inspections Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 August 20, 2014 MEMORANDUM FOR THE MANAGER, SANDIA FIELD OFFICE FROM: David Sedillo Director, Western Audits Division Office of Inspector General SUBJECT: INFORMATION: Audit Report on "The National Nuclear Security Administration's Neutron Generator Activities"

  6. 1,"PSEG Salem Generating Station","Nuclear","PSEG Nuclear LLC...

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

    Cogen Plant","Natural gas","EFS Cogen Holdings I LLC",912.2 6,"Red Oak Power LLC","Natural gas","Red Oak Operating Services LLC",765.9 7,"PSEG Mercer Generating ...

  7. New Jersey Nuclear Profile - PSEG Hope Creek Generating Station

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

    PSEG Hope Creek Generating Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,"1,161","9,439",92.8,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,"1,161","9,439",92.8

  8. New York Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    York" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",69880,75234,66756,57187,64503 " Coal",20968,21406,19154,12759,13583 " Petroleum",6778,8195,3745,2648,2005 " Natural Gas",42134,45634,43856,41780,48916 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",42224,42453,43209,43485,41870 "Renewables",29941,28028,30042,32082,30286 "Pumped

  9. North Carolina Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Carolina" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",79134,84935,80312,70232,80692 " Coal",75487,79983,75815,65083,71951 " Petroleum",451,496,320,297,293 " Natural Gas",3196,4457,4177,4852,8447 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",39963,40045,39776,40848,40740 "Renewables",5667,4656,4956,7065,6840 "Pumped

  10. North Dakota Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Dakota" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",28987,29283,29721,29712,28552 " Coal",28879,29164,29672,29607,28462 " Petroleum",42,51,49,45,38 " Natural Gas",7,17,"s",17,16 " Other Gases",59,53,"-",44,36 "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",1894,1940,2959,4484,6150 "Pumped

  11. Rhode Island Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Rhode Island" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",5813,6891,7224,7547,7595 " Coal","-","-","-","-","-" " Petroleum",33,34,26,17,12 " Natural Gas",5780,6857,7198,7530,7583 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-"

  12. South Carolina Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Carolina" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",45778,47765,47449,44781,48789 " Coal",39473,41583,41540,34478,37671 " Petroleum",237,217,180,523,191 " Natural Gas",6068,5965,5729,9780,10927 " Other Gases","s","s","-","-","-" "Nuclear",50797,53200,51763,52150,51988 "Renewables",3717,3552,2939,4080,4250 "Pumped

  13. South Dakota Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Dakota" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",3586,3069,3912,3306,3439 " Coal",3316,2655,3660,3217,3298 " Petroleum",5,63,23,8,6 " Natural Gas",266,351,229,80,135 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",3546,3067,3140,4859,6611 "Pumped

  14. New Hampshire Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    New Hampshire" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",10331,10066,10660,8411,8519 " Coal",3885,3927,3451,2886,3083 " Petroleum",439,385,136,183,72 " Natural Gas",6007,5754,7073,5342,5365 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",9398,10764,9350,8817,10910 "Renewables",2275,2389,2808,2878,2710 "Pumped

  15. New Jersey Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Jersey" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",26910,29576,30264,26173,31662 " Coal",10862,10211,9028,5100,6418 " Petroleum",270,453,325,278,235 " Natural Gas",15668,18752,20752,20625,24902 " Other Gases",110,161,159,170,106 "Nuclear",32568,32010,32195,34328,32771 "Renewables",952,864,931,992,868 "Pumped Storage",-299,-269,-275,-202,-194 "Other",569,489,559,520,575

  16. New Mexico Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Mexico" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",35790,34308,35033,37823,34180 " Coal",29859,27604,27014,29117,25618 " Petroleum",41,44,53,45,50 " Natural Gas",5890,6660,7966,8661,8512 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",1476,1677,1974,1851,2072 "Pumped

  17. West Virginia Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    West Virginia" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",92063,92511,89481,68395,78482 " Coal",91473,91866,89113,68080,78148 " Petroleum",175,200,137,169,155 " Natural Gas",362,389,180,109,140 " Other Gases",53,56,50,36,40 "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",1746,1422,1640,2388,2307 "Pumped

  18. Method and apparatus for generating low energy nuclear particles

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Powell, J.R.; Reich, M.; Ludewig, H.; Todosow, M.

    1999-02-09

    A particle accelerator generates an input particle beam having an initial energy level above a threshold for generating secondary nuclear particles. A thin target is rotated in the path of the input beam for undergoing nuclear reactions to generate the secondary particles and correspondingly decrease energy of the input beam to about the threshold. The target produces low energy secondary particles and is effectively cooled by radiation and conduction. A neutron scatterer and a neutron filter are also used for preferentially degrading the secondary particles into a lower energy range if desired. 18 figs.

  19. Method and apparatus for generating low energy nuclear particles

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Powell, James R. (Shoreham, NY); Reich, Morris (Flushing, NY); Ludewig, Hans (Brookhaven, NY); Todosow, Michael (Miller Place, NY)

    1999-02-09

    A particle accelerator (12) generates an input particle beam having an initial energy level above a threshold for generating secondary nuclear particles. A thin target (14) is rotated in the path of the input beam for undergoing nuclear reactions to generate the secondary particles and correspondingly decrease energy of the input beam to about the threshold. The target (14) produces low energy secondary particles and is effectively cooled by radiation and conduction. A neutron scatterer (44) and a neutron filter (42) are also used for preferentially degrading the secondary particles into a lower energy range if desired.

  20. POWER GENERATION FROM LIQUID METAL NUCLEAR FUEL

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Dwyer, O.E.

    1958-12-23

    A nuclear reactor system is described wherein the reactor is the type using a liquid metal fuel, such as a dispersion of fissile material in bismuth. The reactor is designed ln the form of a closed loop having a core sectlon and heat exchanger sections. The liquid fuel is clrculated through the loop undergoing flssion in the core section to produce heat energy and transferrlng this heat energy to secondary fluids in the heat exchanger sections. The fission in the core may be produced by a separate neutron source or by a selfsustained chain reaction of the liquid fuel present in the core section. Additional auxiliary heat exchangers are used in the system to convert water into steam which drives a turbine.

  1. An Integrated Safety Assessment Methodology for Generation IV Nuclear Systems

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Timothy J. Leahy

    2010-06-01

    The Generation IV International Forum (GIF) Risk and Safety Working Group (RSWG) was created to develop an effective approach for the safety of Generation IV advanced nuclear energy systems. Early work of the RSWG focused on defining a safety philosophy founded on lessons learned from current and prior generations of nuclear technologies, and on identifying technology characteristics that may help achieve Generation IV safety goals. More recent RSWG work has focused on the definition of an integrated safety assessment methodology for evaluating the safety of Generation IV systems. The methodology, tentatively called ISAM, is an integrated toolkit consisting of analytical techniques that are available and matched to appropriate stages of Generation IV system concept development. The integrated methodology is intended to yield safety-related insights that help actively drive the evolving design throughout the technology development cycle, potentially resulting in enhanced safety, reduced costs, and shortened development time.

  2. ADVANCED CERAMIC MATERIALS FOR NEXT-GENERATION NUCLEAR APPLICATIONS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Marra, J.

    2010-09-29

    Rising global energy demands coupled with increased environmental concerns point to one solution; they must reduce their dependence on fossil fuels that emit greenhouse gases. As the global community faces the challenge of maintaining sovereign nation security, reducing greenhouse gases, and addressing climate change nuclear power will play a significant and likely growing role. In the US, nuclear energy already provides approximately one-fifth of the electricity used to power factories, offices, homes, and schools with 104 operating nuclear power plants, located at 65 sites in 31 states. Additionally, 19 utilities have applied to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for construction and operating licenses for 26 new reactors at 17 sites. This planned growth of nuclear power is occurring worldwide and has been termed the 'nuclear renaissance.' As major industrial nations craft their energy future, there are several important factors that must be considered about nuclear energy: (1) it has been proven over the last 40 years to be safe, reliable and affordable (good for Economic Security); (2) its technology and fuel can be domestically produced or obtained from allied nations (good for Energy Security); and (3) it is nearly free of greenhouse gas emissions (good for Environmental Security). Already an important part of worldwide energy security via electricity generation, nuclear energy can also potentially play an important role in industrial processes and supporting the nation's transportation sector. Coal-to-liquid processes, the generation of hydrogen and supporting the growing potential for a greatly increased electric transportation system (i.e. cars and trains) mean that nuclear energy could see dramatic growth in the near future as we seek to meet our growing demand for energy in cleaner, more secure ways. In order to address some of the prominent issues associated with nuclear power generation (i.e., high capital costs, waste management, and proliferation), the worldwide community is working to develop and deploy new nuclear energy systems and advanced fuel cycles. These new nuclear systems address the key challenges and include: (1) extracting the full energy value of the nuclear fuel; (2) creating waste solutions with improved long term safety; (3) minimizing the potential for the misuse of the technology and materials for weapons; (4) continually improving the safety of nuclear energy systems; and (5) keeping the cost of energy affordable.

  3. NNSA Program Develops the Next Generation of Nuclear Security Experts

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brim, Cornelia P.; Disney, Maren V.

    2015-09-02

    NNSA is fostering the next generation of nuclear security experts is through its successful NNSA Graduate Fellowship Program (NGFP). NGFP offers its Fellows an exceptional career development opportunity through hands-on experience supporting NNSA mission areas across policy and technology disciplines. The one-year assignments give tomorrow’s leaders in global nuclear security and nonproliferation unparalleled exposure through assignments to Program Offices across NNSA.

  4. 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, ...

  5. 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

  6. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  7. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  8. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Materials Selection and Qualification Program Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    R. Doug Hamelin; G. O. Hayner

    2004-11-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has selected the Very High Temperature Reactor (VHTR) design for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Project. The NGNP will demonstrate the use of nuclear power for electricity and hydrogen production without greenhouse gas emissions. The reactor design is a graphite-moderated, helium-cooled, prismatic or pebble bed thermal neutron spectrum reactor with an average reactor outlet temperature of at least 1000 C. The NGNP will use very high burn up, lowenriched uranium, TRISO-Coated fuel in a once-through fuel cycle. The design service life of the NGNP is 60 years.

  9. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Materials Research and Development Program Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    G. O. Hayner; E.L. Shaber

    2004-09-01

    The U.S Department of Energy (DOE) has selected the Very High Temperature Reactor (VHTR) design for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Project. The NGNP will demonstrate the use of nuclear power for electricity and hydrogen production without greenhouse gas emissions. The reactor design will be a graphite moderated, helium-cooled, prismatic or pebble-bed, thermal neutron spectrum reactor that will produce electricity and hydrogen in a state-of-the-art thermodynamically efficient manner. The NGNP will use very high burn-up, low-enriched uranium, TRISO-coated fuel and have a projected plant design service life of 60 years.

  10. Next-generation nuclear fuel withstands high-temperature accident

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

    conditions U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY IDAHO FALLS, IDAHO, 83403 For Immediate Release: Sept. 25, 2013 Media Contacts: Teri Ehresman, 208-526-7785 teri.ehresman@inl.gov Bill Cabage (ORNL), 865-574-4399, cabagewh@ornl.gov Next-generation nuclear fuel withstands high-temperature accident conditions IDAHO FALLS - A safer and more efficient nuclear fuel is on the horizon. A team of researchers at the U.S. Department of Energy's Idaho National Laboratory (INL) and Oak Ridge National Laboratory

  11. 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

  12. Reducing Risk for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    John M. Beck II; Harold J. Heydt; Emmanuel O. Opare; Kyle B. Oswald

    2010-07-01

    The Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Project, managed by the Idaho National Laboratory (INL), is directed by the Energy Policy Act of 2005, to research, develop, design, construct, and operate a prototype forth generation nuclear reactor to meet the needs of the 21st Century. As with all large projects developing and deploying new technologies, the NGNP has numerous risks that need to be identified, tracked, mitigated, and reduced in order for successful project completion. A Risk Management Plan (RMP) was created to outline the process the INL is using to manage the risks and reduction strategies for the NGNP Project. Integral to the RMP is the development and use of a Risk Management System (RMS). The RMS is a tool that supports management and monitoring of the project risks. The RMS does not only contain a risk register, but other functionality that allows decision makers, engineering staff, and technology researchers to review and monitor the risks as the project matures.

  13. 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

  14. 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

  15. 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

  16. 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.

  17. 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

  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. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  20. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  1. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  2. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  3. Net Metering | Department of Energy

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

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

  4. Table 9.1 Nuclear Generating Units, 1955-2011

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

    1 Nuclear Generating Units, 1955-2011 Year Original Licensing Regulations (10 CFR Part 50) 1 Current Licensing Regulations (10 CFR Part 52) 1 Permanent Shutdowns Operable Units 7 Construction Permits Issued 2,3 Low-Power Operating Licenses Issued 3,4 Full-Power Operating Licenses Issued 3,5 Early Site Permits Issued 3 Combined License Applications Received 6 Combined Licenses Issued 3 1955 1 0 0 – – – – – – 0 0 1956 3 0 0 – – – – – – 0 0 1957 1 1 1 – – – – – – 0 1 1958 0 0 0 –

  5. 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 ...

  6. Nuclear reactor characteristics and operational history

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Table 1. Nuclear Reactor, State, Type, Net Capacity, Generation, and Capacity Factor PDF ... MWh2 Capacity Factor Percent3 Arkansas Nuclear One 1 AR PWR 842 6,607,090 90 Arkansas ...

  7. EWEB- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  8. Avista Utilities- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  9. HIGH EFFICIENCY GENERATION OF HYDROGEN FUELS USING NUCLEAR POWER

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BROWN,LC; BESENBRUCH,GE; LENTSCH,RD; SCHULTZ,KR; FUNK,JF; PICKARD,PS; MARSHALL,AC; SHOWALTER,SK

    2003-06-01

    OAK B202 HIGH EFFICIENCY GENERATION OF HYDROGEN FUELS USING NUCLEAR POWER. Combustion of fossil fuels, used to power transportation, generate electricity, heat homes and fuel industry provides 86% of the world's energy. Drawbacks to fossil fuel utilization include limited supply, pollution, and carbon dioxide emissions. Carbon dioxide emissions, thought to be responsible for global warming, are now the subject of international treaties. Together, these drawbacks argue for the replacement of fossil fuels with a less-polluting potentially renewable primary energy such as nuclear energy. Conventional nuclear plants readily generate electric power but fossil fuels are firmly entrenched in the transportation sector. Hydrogen is an environmentally attractive transportation fuel that has the potential to displace fossil fuels. Hydrogen will be particularly advantageous when coupled with fuel cells. Fuel cells have higher efficiency than conventional battery/internal combustion engine combinations and do not produce nitrogen oxides during low-temperature operation. Contemporary hydrogen production is primarily based on fossil fuels and most specifically on natural gas. When hydrogen is produced using energy derived from fossil fuels, there is little or no environmental advantage. There is currently no large scale, cost-effective, environmentally attractive hydrogen production process available for commercialization, nor has such a process been identified. The objective of this work is to find an economically feasible process for the production of hydrogen, by nuclear means, using an advanced high-temperature nuclear reactor as the primary energy source. Hydrogen production by thermochemical water-splitting (Appendix A), a chemical process that accomplishes the decomposition of water into hydrogen and oxygen using only heat or, in the case of a hybrid thermochemical process, by a combination of heat and electrolysis, could meet these goals. Hydrogen produced from fossil fuels has trace contaminants (primarily carbon monoxide) that are detrimental to precious metal catalyzed fuel cells, as is now recognized by many of the world's largest automobile companies. Thermochemical hydrogen will not contain carbon monoxide as an impurity at any level. Electrolysis, the alternative process for producing hydrogen using nuclear energy, suffers from thermodynamic inefficiencies in both the production of electricity and in electrolytic parts of the process. The efficiency of electrolysis (electricity to hydrogen) is currently about 80%. Electric power generation efficiency would have to exceed 65% (thermal to electrical) for the combined efficiency to exceed the 52% (thermal to hydrogen) calculated for one thermochemical cycle. Thermochemical water-splitting cycles have been studied, at various levels of effort, for the past 35 years. They were extensively studied in the late 70s and early 80s but have received little attention in the past 10 years, particularly in the U.S. While there is no question about the technical feasibility and the potential for high efficiency, cycles with proven low cost and high efficiency have yet to be developed commercially. Over 100 cycles have been proposed, but substantial research has been executed on only a few. This report describes work accomplished during a three-year project whose objective is to ''define an economically feasible concept for production of hydrogen, by nuclear means, using an advanced high temperature nuclear reactor as the energy source.'' The emphasis of the first phase was to evaluate thermochemical processes which offer the potential for efficient, cost-effective, large-scale production of hydrogen from water in which the primary energy input is high temperature heat from an advanced nuclear reactor and to select one (or, at most three) for further detailed consideration. During Phase 1, an exhaustive literature search was performed to locate all cycles previously proposed. The cycles located were screened using objective criteria to determine which could benefit, in terms of efficiency and cost, from the high-temperature capabilities of advanced nuclear reactors. The more promising cycles were then analyzed in depth as to their adaptability to advanced high-temperature nuclear reactors. As a result, the Sulfur-Iodine (S-I) cycle was selected for integration into the advanced nuclear reactor system. In Phases 2 and 3, alternative flowsheets were developed and compared. This effort entailed a considerable effort into developing the solution thermodynamics pertinent to the S-I cycle.

  10. Generating unstructured nuclear reactor core meshes in parallel

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

    Jain, Rajeev; Tautges, Timothy J.

    2014-10-24

    Recent advances in supercomputers and parallel solver techniques have enabled users to run large simulations problems using millions of processors. Techniques for multiphysics nuclear reactor core simulations are under active development in several countries. Most of these techniques require large unstructured meshes that can be hard to generate in a standalone desktop computers because of high memory requirements, limited processing power, and other complexities. We have previously reported on a hierarchical lattice-based approach for generating reactor core meshes. Here, we describe efforts to exploit coarse-grained parallelism during reactor assembly and reactor core mesh generation processes. We highlight several reactor coremore » examples including a very high temperature reactor, a full-core model of the Korean MONJU reactor, a ¼ pressurized water reactor core, the fast reactor Experimental Breeder Reactor-II core with a XX09 assembly, and an advanced breeder test reactor core. The times required to generate large mesh models, along with speedups obtained from running these problems in parallel, are reported. A graphical user interface to the tools described here has also been developed.« less

  11. Generating unstructured nuclear reactor core meshes in parallel

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jain, Rajeev; Tautges, Timothy J.

    2014-10-24

    Recent advances in supercomputers and parallel solver techniques have enabled users to run large simulations problems using millions of processors. Techniques for multiphysics nuclear reactor core simulations are under active development in several countries. Most of these techniques require large unstructured meshes that can be hard to generate in a standalone desktop computers because of high memory requirements, limited processing power, and other complexities. We have previously reported on a hierarchical lattice-based approach for generating reactor core meshes. Here, we describe efforts to exploit coarse-grained parallelism during reactor assembly and reactor core mesh generation processes. We highlight several reactor core examples including a very high temperature reactor, a full-core model of the Korean MONJU reactor, a ¼ pressurized water reactor core, the fast reactor Experimental Breeder Reactor-II core with a XX09 assembly, and an advanced breeder test reactor core. The times required to generate large mesh models, along with speedups obtained from running these problems in parallel, are reported. A graphical user interface to the tools described here has also been developed.

  12. DOE, NRC Issue Licensing Roadmap For Next-Generation Nuclear Plant |

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

    Department of Energy DOE, NRC Issue Licensing Roadmap For Next-Generation Nuclear Plant DOE, NRC Issue Licensing Roadmap For Next-Generation Nuclear Plant August 15, 2008 - 3:15pm Addthis WASHINGTON, DC -The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) today delivered to Congress the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Licensing Strategy Report which describes the licensing approach, the analytical tools, the research and development activities and the

  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. 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

  16. 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

  17. 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

  18. Dependable Hydrogen and Industrial Heat Generation from the Next Generation Nuclear Plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Charles V. Park; Michael W. Patterson; Vincent C. Maio; Piyush Sabharwall

    2009-03-01

    The Department of Energy is working with industry to develop a next generation, high-temperature gas-cooled nuclear reactor (HTGR) as a part of the effort to supply the US with abundant, clean and secure energy. The Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) project, led by the Idaho National Laboratory, will demonstrate the ability of the HTGR to generate hydrogen, electricity, and high-quality process heat for a wide range of industrial applications. Substituting HTGR power for traditional fossil fuel resources reduces the cost and supply vulnerability of natural gas and oil, and reduces or eliminates greenhouse gas emissions. As authorized by the Energy Policy Act of 2005, industry leaders are developing designs for the construction of a commercial prototype producing up to 600 MWt of power by 2021. This paper describes a variety of critical applications that are appropriate for the HTGR with an emphasis placed on applications requiring a clean and reliable source of hydrogen. An overview of the NGNP project status and its significant technology development efforts are also presented.

  19. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  20. Next Generation Nuclear Plant: A Report to Congress | Department of Energy

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

    Next Generation Nuclear Plant: A Report to Congress Next Generation Nuclear Plant: A Report to Congress The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) project helps address the President's goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and enhancing energy security. The NGNP project was formally established by the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005), designated as Public Law 109-58, 42 USC 16021, to demonstrate the generation of electricity and/or hydrogen with a

  1. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Resilient Control System Functional Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lynne M. Stevens

    2010-07-01

    Control Systems and their associated instrumentation must meet reliability, availability, maintainability, and resiliency criteria in order for high temperature gas-cooled reactors (HTGRs) to be economically competitive. Research, perhaps requiring several years, may be needed to develop control systems to support plant availability and resiliency. This report functionally analyzes the gaps between traditional and resilient control systems as applicable to HTGRs, which includes the Next Generation Nuclear Plant; defines resilient controls; assesses the current state of both traditional and resilient control systems; and documents the functional gaps existing between these two controls approaches as applicable to HTGRs. This report supports the development of an overall strategy for applying resilient controls to HTGRs by showing that control systems with adequate levels of resilience perform at higher levels, respond more quickly to disturbances, increase operational efficiency, and increase public protection.

  2. NEXT GENERATION NUCLEAR PLANT LICENSING BASIS EVENT SELECTION WHITE PAPER

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mark Holbrook

    2010-09-01

    The Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) will be a licensed commercial high temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTGR) plant capable of producing the electricity and high temperature process heat for industrial markets supporting a range of end-user applications. The NGNP Project has adopted the 10 CFR 52 Combined License (COL) application process, as recommended in the Report to Congress, dated August 2008, as the foundation for the NGNP licensing strategy. NRC licensing of the NGNP plant utilizing this process will demonstrate the efficacy of licensing future HTGRs for commercial industrial applications. This white paper is one in a series of submittals that will address key generic issues of the COL priority licensing topics as part of the process for establishing HTGR regulatory requirements.

  3. Modeling a Helical-coil Steam Generator in RELAP5-3D for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Nathan V. Hoffer; Piyush Sabharwall; Nolan A. Anderson

    2011-01-01

    Options for the primary heat transport loop heat exchangers for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant are currently being evaluated. A helical-coil steam generator is one heat exchanger design under consideration. Safety is an integral part of the helical-coil steam generator evaluation. Transient analysis plays a key role in evaluation of the steam generators safety. Using RELAP5-3D to model the helical-coil steam generator, a loss of pressure in the primary side of the steam generator is simulated. This report details the development of the steam generator model, the loss of pressure transient, and the response of the steam generator primary and secondary systems to the loss of primary pressure. Back ground on High Temperature Gas-cooled reactors, steam generators, the Next Generation Nuclear Plant is provided to increase the readers understanding of the material presented.

  4. Net Metering | Department of Energy

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

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

  5. Net Metering | Department of Energy

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

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

  6. Net Metering Policy Development and Distributed Solar Generation in Minnesota: Overview of Trends in Nationwide Policy Development and Implications of Increasing the Eligible System Size Cap

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Doris, E.; Busche, S.; Hockett, S.

    2009-12-01

    The goal of the Minnesota net metering policy is to give the maximum possible encouragement to distributed generation assets, especially solar electric systems (MN 2008). However, according to a published set of best practices (NNEC 2008) that prioritize the maximum development of solar markets within states, the Minnesota policy does not incorporate many of the important best practices that may help other states transform their solar energy markets and increase the amount of grid-connected distributed solar generation assets. Reasons cited include the low system size limit of 40kW (the best practices document recommends a 2 MW limit) and a lack of language protecting generators from additional utility fees. This study was conducted to compare Minnesota's policies to national best practices. It provides an overview of the current Minnesota policy in the context of these best practices and other jurisdictions' net metering policies, as well as a qualitative assessment of the impacts of raising the system size cap within the policy based on the experiences of other states.

  7. NNSA Administrator Addresses the Next Generation of Nuclear Security Professionals: Part 2

    ScienceCinema (OSTI)

    Thomas D'Agostino

    2010-09-01

    Administrator Thomas DAgostino of the National Nuclear Security Administration addressed the next generation of nuclear security professionals during the opening session of todays 2009 Department of Energy (DOE) Computational Science Graduate Fellowship Annual Conference. Administrator DAgostino discussed NNSAs role in implementing President Obamas nuclear security agenda and encouraged the computing science fellows to consider careers in nuclear security.

  8. NNSA Administrator Addresses the Next Generation of Nuclear Security Professionals: Part 1

    ScienceCinema (OSTI)

    Thomas D'Agostino

    2010-09-01

    Administrator Thomas DAgostino of the National Nuclear Security Administration addressed the next generation of nuclear security professionals during the opening session of todays 2009 Department of Energy (DOE) Computational Science Graduate Fellowship Annual Conference. Administrator DAgostino discussed NNSAs role in implementing President Obamas nuclear security agenda and encouraged the computing science fellows to consider careers in nuclear security.

  9. Nuclear Power Generation and Fuel Cycle Report 1996

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    1996-01-01

    This report provides information and forecasts important to the domestic and world nuclear and uranium industries.

  10. Washington Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    Washington nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Columbia Generating Station Unit 2","1,097","9,241",100.0,"Energy Northwest" "1 Plant 1 Reactor","1,097","9,241",100.0

  11. Paving the path for next-generation nuclear energy | Department of Energy

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Paving the path for next-generation nuclear energy Paving the path for next-generation nuclear energy May 6, 2013 - 2:26pm Addthis Renewed energy and enhanced coordination are on the horizon for an international collaborative that is advancing new, safer nuclear energy systems. Renewed energy and enhanced coordination are on the horizon for an international collaborative that is advancing new, safer nuclear energy systems. Deputy Assistant Secretary Kelly Deputy Assistant Secretary Kelly Deputy

  12. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Materials Research and Development Program Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    G.O. Hayner; R.L. Bratton; R.N. Wright

    2005-09-01

    The U.S Department of Energy (DOE) has selected the Very High Temperature Reactor (VHTR) design for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Project. The NGNP will demonstrate the use of nuclear power for electricity and hydrogen production without greenhouse gas emissions. The reactor design will be a graphite moderated, helium-cooled, prismatic or pebble-bed, thermal neutron spectrum reactor that will produce electricity and hydrogen in a state-of-the-art thermodynamically efficient manner. The NGNP will use very high burn-up, low-enriched uranium, TRISO-coated fuel and have a projected plant design service life of 60 years. The VHTR concept is considered to be the nearest-term reactor design that has the capability to efficiently produce hydrogen. The plant size, reactor thermal power, and core configuration will ensure passive decay heat removal without fuel damage or radioactive material releases during accidents. The NGNP Project is envisioned to demonstrate the following: (1) A full-scale prototype VHTR by about 2021; (2) High-temperature Brayton Cycle electric power production at full scale with a focus on economic performance; (3) Nuclear-assisted production of hydrogen (with about 10% of the heat) with a focus on economic performance; and (4) By test, the exceptional safety capabilities of the advanced gas-cooled reactors. Further, the NGNP program will: (1) Obtain a Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) License to construct and operate the NGNP, this process will provide a basis for future performance based, risk-informed licensing; and (2) Support the development, testing, and prototyping of hydrogen infrastructures. The NGNP Materials Research and Development (R&D) Program is responsible for performing R&D on likely NGNP materials in support of the NGNP design, licensing, and construction activities. The NGNP Materials R&D Program includes the following elements: (1) Developing a specific approach, program plan and other project management tools for managing the R&D program elements; (2) Developing a specific work package for the R&D activities to be performed during each government fiscal year; (3) Reporting the status and progress of the work based on committed deliverables and milestones; (4) Developing collaboration in areas of materials R&D of benefit to the NGNP with countries that are a part of the Generation IV International Forum; and (5) Ensuring that the R&D work performed in support of the materials program is in conformance with established Quality Assurance and procurement requirements. The objective of the NGNP Materials R&D Program is to provide the essential materials R&D needed to support the design and licensing of the reactor and balance of plant, excluding the hydrogen plant. The materials R&D program is being initiated prior to the design effort to ensure that materials R&D activities are initiated early enough to support the design process and support the Project Integrator. The thermal, environmental, and service life conditions of the NGNP will make selection and qualification of some high-temperature materials a significant challenge; thus, new materials and approaches may be required.

  13. Letter to NEAC to Review the Next Generation Nuclear Plant Activities |

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Department of Energy to NEAC to Review the Next Generation Nuclear Plant Activities Letter to NEAC to Review the Next Generation Nuclear Plant Activities The Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) project was established under the Energy Policy Act in August 2005 (EPACT-2005). EPACT-2005 defined an overall plan and timetable for NGNP research, design, licensing, construction and operation by the end of FY 2021. At the time that EPACT-2005 was passed, it was envisioned that key aspects of the

  14. DOE Seeks Additional Input on Next Generation Nuclear Plant | Department of

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

    Energy Additional Input on Next Generation Nuclear Plant DOE Seeks Additional Input on Next Generation Nuclear Plant April 17, 2008 - 10:49am Addthis WASHINGTON, DC -The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today announced it is seeking public and industry input on how to best achieve the goals and meet the requirements for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) demonstration project work at DOE's Idaho National Laboratory. DOE today issued a Request for Information and Expressions of Interest

  15. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Research and Development Program Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2005-01-01

    The U.S Department of Energy (DOE) is conducting research and development (R&D) on the Very High Temperature Reactor (VHTR) design concept for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Project. The reactor design will be a graphite moderated, thermal neutron spectrum reactor that will produce electricity and hydrogen in a highly efficient manner. The NGNP reactor core could be either a prismatic graphite block type core or a pebble bed core. Use of a liquid salt coolant is also being evaluated. The NGNP will use very high-burnup, low-enriched uranium, TRISO-coated fuel, and have a projected plant design service life of 60 years. The VHTR concept is considered to be the nearest-term reactor design that has the capability to efficiently produce hydrogen. The plant size, reactor thermal power, and core configuration will ensure passive decay heat removal without fuel damage or radioactive material releases during accidents. The objectives of the NGNP Project are to: (1) Demonstrate a full-scale prototype VHTR that is commercially licensed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2) Demonstrate safe and economical nuclear-assisted production of hydrogen and electricity. The DOE laboratories, led by the INL, will perform R&D that will be critical to the success of the NGNP, primarily in the areas of: (1) High temperature gas reactor fuels behavior; (2) High temperature materials qualification; (3) Design methods development and validation; (4) Hydrogen production technologies; and (5) Energy conversion. The current R&D work is addressing fundamental issues that are relevant to a variety of possible NGNP designs. This document describes the NGNP R&D planned and currently underway in the first three topic areas listed above. The NGNP Advanced Gas Reactor (AGR) Fuel Development and Qualification Program is presented in Section 2, the NGNP Materials R&D Program Plan is presented in Section 3, and the NGNP Design Methods Development and Validation R&D Program is presented in Section 4. The DOE-funded hydrogen production [DOE 2004] and energy conversion technologies programs are described elsewhere.

  16. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  17. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  18. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Note: The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) issued a decision in April 2016 establishing rules for net metering PV systems paired with storage devices 10 kW or smaller. See below for...

  19. Net Metering

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

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

  20. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  1. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  2. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  3. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  4. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  5. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  6. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  7. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Methods Technical Program Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Richard R. Schultz; Abderrafi M. Ougouag; David W. Nigg; Hans D. Gougar; Richard W. Johnson; William K. Terry; Chang H. Oh; Donald W. McEligot; Gary W. Johnsen; Glenn E. McCreery; Woo Y. Yoon; James W. Sterbentz; J. Steve Herring; Temitope A. Taiwo; Thomas Y. C. Wei; William D. Pointer; Won S. Yang; Michael T. Farmer; Hussein S. Khalil; Madeline A. Feltus

    2007-01-01

    One of the great challenges of designing and licensing the Very High Temperature Reactor (VHTR) is to confirm that the intended VHTR analysis tools can be used confidently to make decisions and to assure all that the reactor systems are safe and meet the performance objectives of the Generation IV Program. The research and development (R&D) projects defined in the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Design Methods Development and Validation Program will ensure that the tools used to perform the required calculations and analyses can be trusted. The Methods R&D tasks are designed to ensure that the calculational envelope of the tools used to analyze the VHTR reactor systems encompasses, or is larger than, the operational and transient envelope of the VHTR itself. The Methods R&D focuses on the development of tools to assess the neutronic and thermal fluid behavior of the plant. The fuel behavior and fission product transport models are discussed in the Advanced Gas Reactor (AGR) program plan. Various stress analysis and mechanical design tools will also need to be developed and validated and will ultimately also be included in the Methods R&D Program Plan. The calculational envelope of the neutronics and thermal-fluids software tools intended to be used on the NGNP is defined by the scenarios and phenomena that these tools can calculate with confidence. The software tools can only be used confidently when the results they produce have been shown to be in reasonable agreement with first-principle results, thought-problems, and data that describe the highly ranked phenomena inherent in all operational conditions and important accident scenarios for the VHTR.

  8. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Methods Technical Program Plan -- PLN-2498

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Richard R. Schultz; Abderrafi M. Ougouag; David W. Nigg; Hans D. Gougar; Richard W. Johnson; William K. Terry; Chang H. Oh; Donald W. McEligot; Gary W. Johnsen; Glenn E. McCreery; Woo Y. Yoon; James W. Sterbentz; J. Steve Herring; Temitope A. Taiwo; Thomas Y. C. Wei; William D. Pointer; Won S. Yang; Michael T. Farmer; Hussein S. Khalil; Madeline A. Feltus

    2010-09-01

    One of the great challenges of designing and licensing the Very High Temperature Reactor (VHTR) is to confirm that the intended VHTR analysis tools can be used confidently to make decisions and to assure all that the reactor systems are safe and meet the performance objectives of the Generation IV Program. The research and development (R&D) projects defined in the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Design Methods Development and Validation Program will ensure that the tools used to perform the required calculations and analyses can be trusted. The Methods R&D tasks are designed to ensure that the calculational envelope of the tools used to analyze the VHTR reactor systems encompasses, or is larger than, the operational and transient envelope of the VHTR itself. The Methods R&D focuses on the development of tools to assess the neutronic and thermal fluid behavior of the plant. The fuel behavior and fission product transport models are discussed in the Advanced Gas Reactor (AGR) program plan. Various stress analysis and mechanical design tools will also need to be developed and validated and will ultimately also be included in the Methods R&D Program Plan. The calculational envelope of the neutronics and thermal-fluids software tools intended to be used on the NGNP is defined by the scenarios and phenomena that these tools can calculate with confidence. The software tools can only be used confidently when the results they produce have been shown to be in reasonable agreement with first-principle results, thought-problems, and data that describe the highly ranked phenomena inherent in all operational conditions and important accident scenarios for the VHTR.

  9. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Methods Technical Program Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Richard R. Schultz; Abderrafi M. Ougouag; David W. Nigg; Hans D. Gougar; Richard W. Johnson; William K. Terry; Chang H. Oh; Donald W. McEligot; Gary W. Johnsen; Glenn E. McCreery; Woo Y. Yoon; James W. Sterbentz; J. Steve Herring; Temitope A. Taiwo; Thomas Y. C. Wei; William D. Pointer; Won S. Yang; Michael T. Farmer; Hussein S. Khalil; Madeline A. Feltus

    2010-12-01

    One of the great challenges of designing and licensing the Very High Temperature Reactor (VHTR) is to confirm that the intended VHTR analysis tools can be used confidently to make decisions and to assure all that the reactor systems are safe and meet the performance objectives of the Generation IV Program. The research and development (R&D) projects defined in the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Design Methods Development and Validation Program will ensure that the tools used to perform the required calculations and analyses can be trusted. The Methods R&D tasks are designed to ensure that the calculational envelope of the tools used to analyze the VHTR reactor systems encompasses, or is larger than, the operational and transient envelope of the VHTR itself. The Methods R&D focuses on the development of tools to assess the neutronic and thermal fluid behavior of the plant. The fuel behavior and fission product transport models are discussed in the Advanced Gas Reactor (AGR) program plan. Various stress analysis and mechanical design tools will also need to be developed and validated and will ultimately also be included in the Methods R&D Program Plan. The calculational envelope of the neutronics and thermal-fluids software tools intended to be used on the NGNP is defined by the scenarios and phenomena that these tools can calculate with confidence. The software tools can only be used confidently when the results they produce have been shown to be in reasonable agreement with first-principle results, thought-problems, and data that describe the highly ranked phenomena inherent in all operational conditions and important accident scenarios for the VHTR.

  10. Meeting the Next Generation of Nuclear Nonproliferation Specialists...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    ... DNN R&D directs an integrated research and development portfolio in support of its mission to detect signs of nuclear proliferation and nuclear detonations. The DNN R&D-funded ...

  11. 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 ...

  12. 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 ...

  13. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Project Evaluation of Siting a HTGR Co-generation Plant on an Operating Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    L.E. Demick

    2011-10-01

    This paper summarizes an evaluation by the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Project of siting a High Temperature Gas-cooled Reactor (HTGR) plant on an existing nuclear plant site that is located in an area of significant industrial activity. This is a co-generation application in which the HTGR Plant will be supplying steam and electricity to one or more of the nearby industrial plants.

  14. 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.

  15. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Research and Development Program Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    P. E. MacDonald

    2005-01-01

    The U.S Department of Energy (DOE) is conducting research and development (R&D) on the Very High Temperature Reactor (VHTR) design concept for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Project. The reactor design will be a graphite moderated, thermal neutron spectrum reactor that will produce electricity and hydrogen in a highly efficient manner. The NGNP reactor core could be either a prismatic graphite block type core or a pebble bed core. Use of a liquid salt coolant is also being evaluated. The NGNP will use very high-burnup, low-enriched uranium, TRISO-coated fuel, and have a projected plant design service life of 60 years. The VHTR concept is considered to be the nearest-term reactor design that has the capability to efficiently produce hydrogen. The plant size, reactor thermal power, and core configuration will ensure passive decay heat removal without fuel damage or radioactive material releases during accidents. The objectives of the NGNP Project are to: Demonstrate a full-scale prototype VHTR that is commercially licensed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Demonstrate safe and economical nuclearassisted production of hydrogen and electricity. The DOE laboratories, led by the INL, will perform R&D that will be critical to the success of the NGNP, primarily in the areas of: High temperature gas reactor fuels behavior High temperature materials qualification Design methods development and validation Hydrogen production technologies Energy conversion. The current R&D work is addressing fundamental issues that are relevant to a variety of possible NGNP designs. This document describes the NGNP R&D planned and currently underway in the first three topic areas listed above. The NGNP Advanced Gas Reactor (AGR) Fuel Development and Qualification Program is presented in Section 2, the NGNP Materials R&D Program Plan is presented in Section 3, and the NGNP Design Methods Development and Validation R&D Program is presented in Section 4. The DOE-funded hydrogen production [DOE 2004] and energy conversion technologies programs are described elsewhere.

  16. 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

  17. 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

  18. 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 -

  19. Mississippi Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    Mississippi nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Grand Gulf Unit 1","1,251","9,643",100.0,"System Energy Resources, Inc" "1 Plant 1 Reactor","1,251","9,643",100.0

  20. 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

  1. Nebraska Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    Nebraska nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Cooper Unit 1",767,"6,793",61.4,"Nebraska Public Power District" "Fort Calhoun Unit 1",478,"4,261",38.6,"Omaha Public Power District" "2 Plants 2

  2. Alabama Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

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

  3. 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

  4. Florida Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

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

  5. Georgia Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

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

  6. Iowa Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

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

  7. Virginia Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "North Anna Unit 1, Unit 2","1,863","13,399",50.4,"Virginia Electric & Power Co" "Surry Unit 1, Unit 2","1,638","13,172",49.6,"Virginia Electric & Power

  8. Monthly Nuclear Utility Generation by State and Reactor, 2003

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

    3" "January through December 2003" ,"Net" "State of Location","Capacity",,"JAN","FEB","MAR","APR","MAY","JUNE","JULY","AUG","SEP","OCT","NOV","DEC","Year-To-Date" "and Reactor Name","MW(e)",,"Megawatt hours"

  9. Monthly Nuclear Utility Generation by State and Reactor, 2004

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

    4" "January through December 2004" ,"Net" "State of Location","Capacity",,"JAN","FEB","MAR","APR","MAY","JUNE","JULY","AUG","SEP","OCT","NOV","DEC","Year-To-Date" "and Reactor Name","MW(e)",,"Megawatt hours"

  10. Monthly Nuclear Utility Generation by State and Reactor, 2005

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

    5" "January through December 2005" ,"Net" "State of Location","Capacity",,"JAN","FEB","MAR","APR","MAY","JUNE","JULY","AUG","SEP","OCT","NOV","DEC","Year-To-Date" "and Reactor Name","MW(e)",,"Megawatt hours"

  11. Monthly Nuclear Utility Generation by State and Reactor, 2007

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

    7" "January through December 2007" ,"Net" "State of Location","Capacity",,"JAN","FEB","MAR","APR","MAY","JUNE","JULY","AUG","SEP","OCT","NOV","DEC","Year-To-Date" "and Reactor Name","MW(e)",,"Megawatt hours"

  12. Monthly Nuclear Utility Generation by State and Reactor, 2008

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

    8" "January through December 2008" ,"Net" "State of Location","Capacity",,"JAN","FEB","MAR","APR","MAY","JUNE","JULY","AUG","SEP","OCT","NOV","DEC","Year-To-Date" "and Reactor Name","MW(e)",,"Megawatt hours"

  13. A High Intensity Multi-Purpose D-D Neutron Generator for Nuclear Engineering Laboratories

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ka-Ngo Leung; Jasmina L. Vujic; Edward C. Morse; Per F. Peterson

    2005-11-29

    This NEER project involves the design, construction and testing of a low-cost high intensity D-D neutron generator for teaching nuclear engineering students in a laboratory environment without radioisotopes or a nuclear reactor. The neutron generator was designed, fabricated and tested at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL).

  14. Fostering the Next Generation of Nuclear Energy Technology |...

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

    this draft solicitation would support advanced nuclear energy technologies that will catalyze the deployment of future projects that replicate or extend a technological innovation. ...

  15. Nuclear Power Generation and Fuel Cycle Report 1997

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    1997-01-01

    Final issue. This report provides information and forecasts important to the domestic and world nuclear and uranium industries. 1997 represents the most recent publication year.

  16. Investing in the next generation: The Office of Nuclear Energy...

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

    educational and research opportunities to prepare NS&E students for nuclear energy professions, in support of NE's mission. NE is seeking applicants for undergraduate...

  17. New York 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" "Indian Point Unit 2, Unit 3","2,063","16,321",39.0,"Entergy Nuclear Indian Point" "James A Fitzpatrick Unit 1",855,"6,361",15.2,"Entergy Nuc Fitzpatrick LLC" "Nine

  18. 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

  19. 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

  20. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Steam Generator and Intermediate Heat Exchanger Materials Research and Development Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    J. K. Wright

    2010-09-01

    DOE has selected the High Temperature Gas-cooled Reactor (HTGR) design for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Project. The NGNP will demonstrate the use of nuclear power for electricity and hydrogen production. It will have an outlet gas temperature in the range of 900°C and a plant design service life of 60 years. The reactor design will be a graphite moderated, helium-cooled, prismatic or pebble-bed reactor and use low-enriched uranium, Tri-Isotopic (TRISO)-coated fuel. The plant size, reactor thermal power, and core configuration will ensure passive decay heat removal without fuel damage or radioactive material releases during accidents. The NGNP Materials Research and Development (R&D) Program is responsible for performing R&D on likely NGNP materials in support of the NGNP design, licensing, and construction activities. Today’s high-temperature alloys and associated ASME Codes for reactor applications are approved up to 760°C. However, some primary system components, such as the Intermediate Heat Exchanger (IHX) for the NGNP will require use of materials that can withstand higher temperatures. The thermal, environmental, and service life conditions of the NGNP will make selection and qualification of some high-temperature materials a significant challenge. Examples include materials for the core barrel and core internals, such as the control rod sleeves. The requirements of the materials for the IHX are among the most demanding. Selection of the technology and design configuration for the NGNP must consider both the cost and risk profiles to ensure that the demonstration plant establishes a sound foundation for future commercial deployments. The NGNP challenge is to achieve a significant advancement in nuclear technology while at the same time setting the stage for an economically viable deployment of the new technology in the commercial sector soon after 2020. A number of solid solution strengthened nickel based alloys have been considered for application in heat exchangers and core internals for the NGNP. The primary candidates are Inconel 617, Haynes 230, Incoloy 800H and Hastelloy XR. Based on the technical maturity, availability in required product forms, experience base, and high temperature mechanical properties all of the vendor pre-conceptual design studies have specified Alloy 617 as the material of choice for heat exchangers. Also a draft code case for Alloy 617 was developed previously. Although action was suspended before the code case was accepted by ASME, this draft code case provides a significant head start for achieving codification of the material. Similarly, Alloy 800H is the material of choice for control rod sleeves. In addition to the above listed considerations, Alloy 800H is already listed in the nuclear section of the ASME Code; although the maximum use temperature and time need to be increased.

  1. Mix and mingle: Networking for the next nuclear generation | Y-12 National

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

    Security Complex Mix and mingle: Networking ... Mix and mingle: Networking for the next nuclear generation Posted: February 25, 2016 - 2:55pm Print version CNS offers groups to help early career professionals. Whether you're starting your first career or establishing a new one, transitioning into the nuclear industry from college, the military or another profession or organization can be an exciting and challenging experience. Consolidated Nuclear Security, LLC has three programs that offer

  2. Design Features and Technology Uncertainties for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    John M. Ryskamp; Phil Hildebrandt; Osamu Baba; Ron Ballinger; Robert Brodsky; Hans-Wolfgang Chi; Dennis Crutchfield; Herb Estrada; Jeane-Claude Garnier; Gerald Gordon; Richard Hobbins; Dan Keuter; Marilyn Kray; Philippe Martin; Steve Melancon; Christian Simon; Henry Stone; Robert Varrin; Werner von Lensa

    2004-06-01

    This report presents the conclusions, observations, and recommendations of the Independent Technology Review Group (ITRG) regarding design features and important technology uncertainties associated with very-high-temperature nuclear system concepts for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP). The ITRG performed its reviews during the period November 2003 through April 2004.

  3. Development of New Generation of Adsorbents and Waste Forms for Nuclear

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Waste Management. (Conference) | SciTech Connect Development of New Generation of Adsorbents and Waste Forms for Nuclear Waste Management. Citation Details In-Document Search Title: Development of New Generation of Adsorbents and Waste Forms for Nuclear Waste Management. Abstract not provided. Authors: Wang, Yifeng Publication Date: 2014-10-01 OSTI Identifier: 1242125 Report Number(s): SAND2014-19376C 540938 DOE Contract Number: AC04-94AL85000 Resource Type: Conference Resource Relation:

  4. Investing in the next generation: The Office of Nuclear Energy Issues

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

    Requests for Scholarship and Fellowship Applications. | Department of Energy Investing in the next generation: The Office of Nuclear Energy Issues Requests for Scholarship and Fellowship Applications. Investing in the next generation: The Office of Nuclear Energy Issues Requests for Scholarship and Fellowship Applications. As President Obama recognized in the State of the Union on January 28th, 2014, the best way to grow the economy and create jobs is to prepare students with the skills

  5. Palau- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  6. Rocky Mountain Power- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  7. Blue Ridge EMC- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  8. North Carolina Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    Carolina 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" "Brunswick Unit 1, Unit 2","1,858","14,808",36.3,"Progress Energy Carolinas Inc" "Harris Unit 1",900,"7,081",17.4,"Progress Energy Carolinas Inc" "McGuire

  9. South Carolina Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

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

    South Carolina 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" "Catawba Unit 1, Unit 2","2,258","18,964",36.5,"Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC" "H B Robinson Unit 2",724,"3,594",6.9,"Progress Energy Carolinas Inc"

  10. New Hampshire 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 (nw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Seabrook Unit 1","1,247","10,910",100.0,"NextEra Energy Seabrook LLC" "1 Plant 1 Reactor","1,247","10,910",100.0 "Note: Totals may not equal sum of components due

  11. Yonggwang nuclear power plant units 3 and 4; Bridging the gap to the next generation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Heider, R.C.; Daley, T.J.; Green, K.J. )

    1991-01-01

    This paper reports on the use of nuclear energy since the oil embargo of 1973 has displaced the use of 4.3 billion barrels of imported oil, which helped conserve 1 billion tons of coal and 6.5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas for future generations, and helped protect the environment by reducing utility emissions of carbon dioxide by 20% a year. The current 112 operating nuclear energy plants generate more electricity than those of France, Japan, and the Soviet Union-nations that have made a national commitment to nuclear energy-combined. Yet it has been over 10 years since the last construction permit was issued for a nuclear power plant in the United States. Considering a projected shortfall in baseload electric generation capacity in the mid-1990s, new requirements for costly air pollution controls on coal plants, the concern over increased dependence on oil imports from the unstable Middle East region, and the increased concern over the possible long-term effects of greenhouse gas emissions, the Nuclear Power Oversight Committee (NPOC), the governing organization for the commercial nuclear energy industry, has developed a strategic plan with the goal of being able to order new nuclear power plants by the mid-1990s. The strategic plan, which contains 14 enabling conditions or building blocks, outlines an integrated effort to address the range of institutional and technical issues on which significant progress must be achieved to make nuclear power attractive in the United States for the 1990s.

  12. Aging of nuclear station diesel generators: Evaluation of operating and expert experience: Phase 1, Study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hoopingarner, K.R.; Vause, J.W.; Dingee, D.A.; Nesbitt, J.F.

    1987-08-01

    Pacific Northwest Laboratory evaluated operational and expert experience pertaining to the aging degradation of diesel generators in nuclear service. The research, sponsored by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), identified and characterized the contribution of aging to emergency diesel generator failures. This report, Volume I, reviews diesel-generator experience to identify the systems and components most subject to aging degradation and isolates the major causes of failure that may affect future operational readiness. Evaluations show that as plants age, the percent of aging-related failures increases and failure modes change. A compilation is presented of recommended corrective actions for the failures identified. This study also includes a review of current, relevant industry programs, research, and standards. Volume II reports the results of an industry-wide workshop held on May 28 and 29, 1986 to discuss the technical issues associated with aging of nuclear service emergency diesel generators.

  13. Energy Department Invests $60 Million to Train Next Generation Nuclear Energy Leaders, Pioneer Advanced Nuclear Technology

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Building on President Obama’s Climate Action Plan to continue America’s leadership in clean energy innovation, the Energy Department announced more than $60 million in nuclear energy research awards and improvements to university research reactors and infrastructure.

  14. Apparatus for nuclear transmutation and power production using an intense accelerator-generated thermal neutron flux

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Bowman, Charles D.

    1992-01-01

    Apparatus for nuclear transmutation and power production using an intense accelerator-generated thermal neutron flux. High thermal neutron fluxes generated from the action of a high power proton accelerator on a spallation target allows the efficient burn-up of higher actinide nuclear waste by a two-step process. Additionally, rapid burn-up of fission product waste for nuclides having small thermal neutron cross sections, and the practicality of small material inventories while achieving significant throughput derive from employment of such high fluxes. Several nuclear technology problems are addressed including 1. nuclear energy production without a waste stream requiring storage on a geological timescale, 2. the burn-up of defense and commercial nuclear waste, and 3. the production of defense nuclear material. The apparatus includes an accelerator, a target for neutron production surrounded by a blanket region for transmutation, a turbine for electric power production, and a chemical processing facility. In all applications, the accelerator power may be generated internally from fission and the waste produced thereby is transmuted internally so that waste management might not be required beyond the human lifespan.

  15. Apparatus for nuclear transmutation and power production using an intense accelerator-generated thermal neutron flux

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Bowman, C.D.

    1992-11-03

    Apparatus for nuclear transmutation and power production using an intense accelerator-generated thermal neutron flux. High thermal neutron fluxes generated from the action of a high power proton accelerator on a spallation target allows the efficient burn-up of higher actinide nuclear waste by a two-step process. Additionally, rapid burn-up of fission product waste for nuclides having small thermal neutron cross sections, and the practicality of small material inventories while achieving significant throughput derive from employment of such high fluxes. Several nuclear technology problems are addressed including 1. nuclear energy production without a waste stream requiring storage on a geological timescale, 2. the burn-up of defense and commercial nuclear waste, and 3. the production of defense nuclear material. The apparatus includes an accelerator, a target for neutron production surrounded by a blanket region for transmutation, a turbine for electric power production, and a chemical processing facility. In all applications, the accelerator power may be generated internally from fission and the waste produced thereby is transmuted internally so that waste management might not be required beyond the human lifespan.

  16. Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems Ten-Year Program Plan Fiscal Year 2005, Volume 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2005-03-01

    As reflected in the U.S. ''National Energy Policy'', nuclear energy has a strong role to play in satisfying our nation's future energy security and environmental quality needs. The desirable environmental, economic, and sustainability attributes of nuclear energy give it a cornerstone position, not only in the U.S. energy portfolio, but also in the world's future energy portfolio. Accordingly, on September 20, 2002, U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham announced that, ''The United States and nine other countries have agreed to develop six Generation IV nuclear energy concepts''. The Secretary also noted that the systems are expected to ''represent significant advances in economics, safety, reliability, proliferation resistance, and waste minimization''. The six systems and their broad, worldwide research and development (R&D) needs are described in ''A Technology Roadmap for Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems'' (hereafter referred to as the Generation IV Roadmap). The first 10 years of required U.S. R&D contributions to achieve the goals described in the Generation IV Roadmap are outlined in this Program Plan.

  17. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Structures, Systems, and Components Safety Classification White Paper

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pete Jordan

    2010-09-01

    This white paper outlines the relevant regulatory policy and guidance for a risk-informed approach for establishing the safety classification of Structures, Systems, and Components (SSCs) for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant and sets forth certain facts for review and discussion in order facilitate an effective submittal leading to an NGNP Combined Operating License application under 10 CFR 52.

  18. 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 ...

  19. Educating Next Generation Nuclear Criticality Safety Engineers at the Idaho National Laboratory

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    J. D. Bess; J. B. Briggs; A. S. Garcia

    2011-09-01

    One of the challenges in educating our next generation of nuclear safety engineers is the limitation of opportunities to receive significant experience or hands-on training prior to graduation. Such training is generally restricted to on-the-job-training before this new engineering workforce can adequately provide assessment of nuclear systems and establish safety guidelines. Participation in the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project (ICSBEP) and the International Reactor Physics Experiment Evaluation Project (IRPhEP) can provide students and young professionals the opportunity to gain experience and enhance critical engineering skills. The ICSBEP and IRPhEP publish annual handbooks that contain evaluations of experiments along with summarized experimental data and peer-reviewed benchmark specifications to support the validation of neutronics codes, nuclear cross-section data, and the validation of reactor designs. Participation in the benchmark process not only benefits those who use these Handbooks within the international community, but provides the individual with opportunities for professional development, networking with an international community of experts, and valuable experience to be used in future employment. Traditionally students have participated in benchmarking activities via internships at national laboratories, universities, or companies involved with the ICSBEP and IRPhEP programs. Additional programs have been developed to facilitate the nuclear education of students while participating in the benchmark projects. These programs include coordination with the Center for Space Nuclear Research (CSNR) Next Degree Program, the Collaboration with the Department of Energy Idaho Operations Office to train nuclear and criticality safety engineers, and student evaluations as the basis for their Master's thesis in nuclear engineering.

  20. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Phenomena Identification and Ranking Tables (PIRTs) Volume 6: Process Heat and Hydrogen Co-Generation PIRTs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Forsberg, Charles W; Gorensek, M. B.; Herring, S.; Pickard, P.

    2008-03-01

    A Phenomena Identification and Ranking Table (PIRT) exercise was conducted to identify potential safety-0-related physical phenomena for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) when coupled to a hydrogen production or similar chemical plant. The NGNP is a very high-temperature reactor (VHTR) with the design goal to produce high-temperature heat and electricity for nearby chemical plants. Because high-temperature heat can only be transported limited distances, the two plants will be close to each other. One of the primary applications for the VHTR would be to supply heat and electricity for the production of hydrogen. There was no assessment of chemical plant safety challenges. The primary application of this PIRT is to support the safety analysis of the NGNP coupled one or more small hydrogen production pilot plants. However, the chemical plant processes to be coupled to the NGNP have not yet been chosen; thus, a broad PIRT assessment was conducted to scope alternative potential applications and test facilities associated with the NGNP. The hazards associated with various chemicals and methods to minimize risks from those hazards are well understood within the chemical industry. Much but not all of the information required to assure safe conditions (separation distance, relative elevation, berms) is known for a reactor coupled to a chemical plant. There is also some experience with nuclear plants in several countries that have produced steam for industrial applications. The specific characteristics of the chemical plant, site layout, and the maximum stored inventories of chemicals can provide the starting point for the safety assessments. While the panel identified events and phenomena of safety significance, there is one added caveat. Multiple high-temperature reactors provide safety-related experience and understanding of reactor safety. In contrast, there have been only limited safety studies of coupled chemical and nuclear plants. The work herein provides a starting point for those studies; but, the general level of understanding of safety in coupling nuclear and chemical plants is less than in other areas of high-temperature reactor safety.

  1. NetCDF

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

    NetCDF NetCDF Description and Overview NetCDF (Network Common Data Form) is a set of software libraries and machine-independent data formats that support the creation, access, and sharing of array-oriented scientific data. This includes the libnetcdf.a library as well as the NetCDF Operators (NCO), Climate Data Operators (CDO), NCCMP, and NCVIEW packages. Files written with previous versions can be read or written with the current version. Using NetCDF on Cray System NetCDF libraries on the

  2. Locating hot and cold-legs in a nuclear powered steam generation system

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Ekeroth, Douglas E.; Corletti, Michael M.

    1993-01-01

    A nuclear reactor steam generator includes a reactor vessel for heating water and a steam generator with a pump casing at the lowest point on the steam generator. A cold-leg pipe extends horizontally between the steam generator and the reactor vessel to return water from the steam generator to the reactor vessel. The bottom of the cold-leg pipe is at a first height above the bottom of the reactor vessel. A hot-leg pipe with one end connected to the steam generator and a second end connected to the reactor vessel has a first pipe region extending downwardly from the steam generator to a location between the steam generator and the reactor vessel at which a bottom of the hot-leg pipe is at a second height above the bottom of the reactor vessel. A second region extends from that location in a horizontal direction at the second height to the point at which the hot-leg pipe connects to the reactor vessel. A pump is attached to the casing at a location below the first and second heights and returns water from the steam generator to the reactor vessel over the cold-leg. The first height is greater than the second height and the bottom of the steam generator is at a height above the bottom of the reactor vessel that is greater than the first and second heights. A residual heat recovery pump is below the hot-leg and has an inlet line from the hot-leg that slopes down continuously to the pump inlet.

  3. Locating hot and cold-legs in a nuclear powered steam generation system

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Ekeroth, D.E.; Corletti, M.M.

    1993-11-16

    A nuclear reactor steam generator includes a reactor vessel for heating water and a steam generator with a pump casing at the lowest point on the steam generator. A cold-leg pipe extends horizontally between the steam generator and the reactor vessel to return water from the steam generator to the reactor vessel. The bottom of the cold-leg pipe is at a first height above the bottom of the reactor vessel. A hot-leg pipe with one end connected to the steam generator and a second end connected to the reactor vessel has a first pipe region extending downwardly from the steam generator to a location between the steam generator and the reactor vessel at which a bottom of the hot-leg pipe is at a second height above the bottom of the reactor vessel. A second region extends from that location in a horizontal direction at the second height to the point at which the hot-leg pipe connects to the reactor vessel. A pump is attached to the casing at a location below the first and second heights and returns water from the steam generator to the reactor vessel over the cold-leg. The first height is greater than the second height and the bottom of the steam generator is at a height above the bottom of the reactor vessel that is greater than the first and second heights. A residual heat recovery pump is below the hot-leg and has an inlet line from the hot-leg that slopes down continuously to the pump inlet. 2 figures.

  4. 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.

  5. Ontology-based Software for Generating Scenarios for Characterizing Searches for Nuclear Materials

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ward, Richard C; Sorokine, Alexandre; Schlicher, Bob G; Wright, Michael C; Kruse, Kara L

    2011-01-01

    A software environment was created in which ontologies are used to significantly expand the number and variety of scenarios for special nuclear materials (SNM) detection based on a set of simple generalized initial descriptions. A framework was built that combined advanced reasoning from ontologies with geographical and other data sources to generate a much larger list of specific detailed descriptions from a simple initial set of user-input variables. This presentation shows how basing the scenario generation on a process of inferencing from multiple ontologies, including a new SNM Detection Ontology (DO) combined with data extraction from geodatabases, provided the desired significant variability of scenarios for testing search algorithms, including unique combinations of variables not previously expected. The various components of the software environment and the resulting scenarios generated will be discussed.

  6. High Efficiency Generation of Hydrogen Fuels using Nuclear Power Annual Report August, 2000 - July 2001

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brown, L.C.

    2002-11-01

    OAK B188 High Efficiency Generation of Hydrogen Fuels using Nuclear Power Annual Report August 2000 - July 2001. Currently no large scale, cost-effective, environmentally attractive hydrogen production process is available for commercialization nor has such a process been identified. Hydrogen is a promising energy carrier, which potentially could replace the fossil fuels used in the transportation sector of our economy. Carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel combustion are thought to be responsible for global warming. The purpose of this work is to determine the potential for efficient, cost-effective, large-scale production of hydrogen utilizing high temperature heat from an advanced nuclear power station. The benefits of this work will include the generation of a low-polluting transportable energy feedstock in an efficient method that has little or no implication for greenhouse gas emissions from a primary energy source whose availability and sources are domestically controlled. This will help to ensure energy for a future transportation/energy infrastructure that is not influenced/controlled by foreign governments. This report describes work accomplished during the second year (Phase 2) of a three year project whose objective is to ''define an economically feasible concept for production of hydrogen, by nuclear means, using an advanced high temperature nuclear reactor as the energy source.'' The emphasis of the first year (Phase 1) was to evaluate thermochemical processes which offer the potential for efficient, cost-effective, large-scale production of hydrogen from water, in which the primary energy input is high temperature heat from an advanced nuclear reactor and to select one (or, at most, three) for further detailed consideration. Phase 1 met its goals and did select one process, the sulfur-iodine process, for investigation in Phases 2 and 3. The combined goals of Phases 2 and 3 were to select the advanced nuclear reactor best suited to driving the selected thermochemical process and to define the selected reactor and process to the point that capital costs, operating costs and the resultant cost of hydrogen can be estimated. During original contract negotiation, it was necessary to reduce work scope to meet funding limits. As a result, the reactor interface and process will not be iterated to the point that only hydrogen is produced. Rather, hydrogen and electricity will be co-generated and the hydrogen cost will be stated as a function of the electricity sales price.

  7. The Coming Nuclear Renaissance for Next Generation Safeguards Specialists--Maximizing Potential and Minimizing the Risks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eipeldauer, Mary D

    2009-01-01

    This document is intended to provide an overview of the workshop entitled 'The Coming Nuclear Renaissance for the Next Generation Safeguards Experts-Maximizing Benefits While Minimizing Proliferation Risks', conducted at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) in partnership with the Y-12 National Security Complex (Y-12) and the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL). This document presents workshop objectives; lists the numerous participant universities and individuals, the nuclear nonproliferation lecture topics covered, and the facilities tours taken as part of the workshop; and discusses the university partnership sessions and proposed areas for collaboration between the universities and ORNL for 2009. Appendix A contains the agenda for the workshop; Appendix B lists the workshop attendees and presenters with contact information; Appendix C contains graphics of the evaluation form results and survey areas; and Appendix D summarizes the responses to the workshop evaluation form. The workshop was an opportunity for ORNL, Y-12, and SRNL staff with more than 30 years combined experience in nuclear nonproliferation to provide a comprehensive overview of their expertise for the university professors and their students. The overall goal of the workshop was to emphasize nonproliferation aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle and to identify specific areas where the universities and experts from operations and national laboratories could collaborate.

  8. NetCDF

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

    NetCDF NetCDF NetCDF NetCDF (network Common Data Form) is a set of libraries and machine-independent data formats for creation, access, and sharing of array-oriented scientific data. Includes the NCO, NCCMP, and CDO tools. Read More » Climate Data Operators (CDO) Climate Data Operators (CDO) is a collection of command line Operators to manipulate and analyze Climate and forecast model Data. Read More » NCView NCVIEW is a visual browser for NetCDF format files. Read More » Last edited:

  9. Potential Applications for Nuclear Energy besides Electricity Generation: AREVA Global Perspective of HTR Potential Market

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Soutworth, Finis; Gauthier, Jean-Claude; Lecomte, Michel; Carre, Franck

    2007-07-01

    Energy supply is increasingly showing up as a major issue for electricity supply, transportation, settlement, and process heat industrial supply including hydrogen production. Nuclear power is part of the solution. For electricity supply, as exemplified in Finland and France, the EPR brings an immediate answer; HTR could bring another solution in some specific cases. For other supply, mostly heat, the HTR brings a solution inaccessible to conventional nuclear power plants for very high or even high temperature. As fossil fuels costs increase and efforts to avoid generation of Greenhouse gases are implemented, a market for nuclear generated process heat will develop. Following active developments in the 80's, HTR have been put on the back burner up to 5 years ago. Light water reactors are widely dominating the nuclear production field today. However, interest in the HTR technology was renewed in the past few years. Several commercial projects are actively promoted, most of them aiming at electricity production. ANTARES is today AREVA's response to the cogeneration market. It distinguishes itself from other concepts with its indirect cycle design powering a combined cycle power plant. Several reasons support this design choice, one of the most important of which is the design flexibility to adapt readily to combined heat and power applications. From the start, AREVA made the choice of such flexibility with the belief that the HTR market is not so much in competition with LWR in the sole electricity market but in the specific added value market of cogeneration and process heat. In view of the volatility of the costs of fossil fuels, AREVA's choice brings to the large industrial heat applications the fuel cost predictability of nuclear fuel with the efficiency of a high temperature heat source free of greenhouse gases emissions. The ANTARES module produces 600 MWth which can be split into the required process heat, the remaining power drives an adapted prorated electric plant. Depending on the process heat temperature and power needs, up to 80 % of the nuclear heat is converted into useful power. An important feature of the design is the standardization of the heat source, as independent as possible of the process heat application. This should expedite licensing. The essential conditions for success include: 1. Timely adapted licensing process and regulations, codes and standards for such application and design; 2. An industry oriented R and D program to meet the technological challenges making the best use of the international collaboration. Gen IV could be the vector; 3. Identification of an end user (or a consortium of) willing to fund a FOAK. (authors)

  10. Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Newly Generated Liquid Waste Demonstration Project Feasibility Study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Herbst, A.K.

    2000-02-01

    A research, development, and demonstration project for the grouting of newly generated liquid waste (NGLW) at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center is considered feasible. NGLW is expected from process equipment waste, decontamination waste, analytical laboratory waste, fuel storage basin waste water, and high-level liquid waste evaporator condensate. The potential grouted waste would be classed as mixed low-level waste, stabilized and immobilized to meet RCRA LDR disposal in a grouting process in the CPP-604 facility, and then transported to the state.

  11. Murray City Power- Net Metering Pilot Program

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Under a pilot program, Murray City Power offers net metering to customers that generate electricity using photovoltaic (PV), wind-electric or hydroelectric systems with a maximum capacity of 10...

  12. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Phenomena Identification and Ranking Tables (PIRTs) Volume 1: Main Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ball, Sydney J

    2008-03-01

    A phenomena identification and ranking table (PIRT) process was conducted for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) design. This design (in the conceptual stage) is a modular high-temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTGR) that generates both electricity and process heat for hydrogen production. Expert panels identified safety-relevant phenomena, ranked their importance, and assessed the knowledge levels in the areas of accidents and thermal fluids, fission-product transport and dose, high-temperature materials, graphite, and process heat for hydrogen production. This main report summarizes and documents the process and scope of the reviews, noting the major activities and conclusions. The identified phenomena, analyses, rationales, and associated ratings of the phenomena, plus a summary of each panel's findings, are presented. Individual panel reports for these areas are provided as attached volumes to this main report and provide considerably more detail about each panel's deliberations as well as a more complete listing of the phenomena that were evaluated.

  13. Compaction Scale Up and Optimization of Cylindrical Fuel Compacts for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jeffrey J. Einerson; Jeffrey A. Phillips; Eric L. Shaber; Scott E. Niedzialek; W. Clay Richardson; Scott G. Nagley

    2012-10-01

    Multiple process approaches have been used historically to manufacture cylindrical nuclear fuel compacts. Scale-up of fuel compacting was required for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) project to achieve an economically viable automated production process capable of providing a minimum of 10 compacts/minute with high production yields. In addition, the scale-up effort was required to achieve matrix density equivalent to baseline historical production processes, and allow compacting at fuel packing fractions up to 46% by volume. The scale-up approach of jet milling, fluid-bed overcoating, and hot-press compacting adopted in the U.S. Advanced Gas Reactor (AGR) Fuel Development Program involves significant paradigm shifts to capitalize on distinct advantages in simplicity, yield, and elimination of mixed waste. A series of designed experiments have been completed to optimize compaction conditions of time, temperature, and forming pressure using natural uranium oxycarbide (NUCO) fuel. Results from these experiments are included. The scale-up effort is nearing completion with the process installed and operational using nuclear fuel materials. The process is being certified for manufacture of qualification test fuel compacts for the AGR-5/6/7 experiment at the Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL).

  14. Site Selection & Characterization Status Report for Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mark Holbrook

    2007-09-01

    In the near future, the US Department of Energy (DOE) will need to make important decisions regarding design and construction of the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP). One part of making these decisions is considering the potential environmental impacts that this facility may have, if constructed here at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 provides DOE decision makers with a process to systematically consider potential environmental consequences of agency decisions. In addition, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Title VI, Subtitel C, Section 644) states that the 'Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) shall have licensing and regulatory authority for any reactor authorized under this subtitle.' This stipulates that the NRC will license the NGNP for operation. The NRC NEPA Regulations (10 CFR Part 51) require tha thte NRC prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for a permit to construct a nuclear power plant. The applicant is required to submit an Environmental report (ER) to aid the NRC in complying with NEPA.

  15. Method and apparatus for improving the performance of a nuclear power electrical generation system

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Tsiklauri, Georgi V.; Durst, Bruce M.

    1995-01-01

    A method and apparatus for improving the efficiency and performance a of nuclear electrical generation system that comprises the addition of steam handling equipment to an existing plant that results in a surprising increase in plant performance. More particularly, a gas turbine electrical generation system with heat recovery boiler is installed along with a high pressure and a low pressure mixer superheater. Depending upon plant characteristics, the existing moisture separator reheater (MSR) can be either augmented or done away with. The instant invention enables a reduction in T.sub.hot without a derating of the reactor unit, and improves efficiency of the plant's electrical conversion cycle. Coupled with this advantage is a possible extension of the plant's fuel cycle length due to an increased electrical conversion efficiency. The reduction in T.sub.hot further allows for a surprising extension of steam generator life. An additional advantage is the reduction in erosion/corrosion of secondary system components including turbine blades and diaphragms. The gas turbine generator used in the instant invention can also replace or augment existing peak or emergency power needs.

  16. Method and apparatus for steam mixing a nuclear fueled electricity generation system

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Tsiklauri, Georgi V.; Durst, Bruce M.

    1996-01-01

    A method and apparatus for improving the efficiency and performance of a nuclear electrical generation system that comprises the addition of steam handling equipment to an existing plant that results in a surprising increase in plant performance. More particularly, a gas turbine electrical generation system with heat recovery boiler is installed along with a micro-jet high pressure and a low pressure mixer superheater. Depending upon plant characteristics, the existing moisture separator reheater (MSR) can be either augmented or done away with. The instant invention enables a reduction in T.sub.hot without a derating of the reactor unit, and improves efficiency of the plant's electrical conversion cycle. Coupled with this advantage is a possible extension of the plant's fuel cycle length due to an increased electrical conversion efficiency. The reduction in T.sub.hot further allows for a surprising extension of steam generator life. An additional advantage is the reduction in erosion/corrosion of secondary system components including turbine blades and diaphragms. The gas turbine generator used in the instant invention can also replace or augment existing peak or emergency power needs. Another benefit of the instant invention is the extension of plant life and the reduction of downtime due to refueling.

  17. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Phenomena Identification and Ranking Tables (PIRTs) Volume 5: Graphite PIRTs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Burchell, Timothy D; Bratton, Rob; Marsden, Barry; Srinivasan, Makuteswara; Penfield, Scott; Mitchell, Mark; Windes, Will

    2008-03-01

    Here we report the outcome of the application of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Phenomena Identification and Ranking Table (PIRT) process to the issue of nuclear-grade graphite for the moderator and structural components of a next generation nuclear plant (NGNP), considering both routine (normal operation) and postulated accident conditions for the NGNP. The NGNP is assumed to be a modular high-temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTGR), either a gas-turbine modular helium reactor (GTMHR) version [a prismatic-core modular reactor (PMR)] or a pebble-bed modular reactor (PBMR) version [a pebble bed reactor (PBR)] design, with either a direct- or indirect-cycle gas turbine (Brayton cycle) system for electric power production, and an indirect-cycle component for hydrogen production. NGNP design options with a high-pressure steam generator (Rankine cycle) in the primary loop are not considered in this PIRT. This graphite PIRT was conducted in parallel with four other NRC PIRT activities, taking advantage of the relationships and overlaps in subject matter. The graphite PIRT panel identified numerous phenomena, five of which were ranked high importance-low knowledge. A further nine were ranked with high importance and medium knowledge rank. Two phenomena were ranked with medium importance and low knowledge, and a further 14 were ranked medium importance and medium knowledge rank. The last 12 phenomena were ranked with low importance and high knowledge rank (or similar combinations suggesting they have low priority). The ranking/scoring rationale for the reported graphite phenomena is discussed. Much has been learned about the behavior of graphite in reactor environments in the 60-plus years since the first graphite rectors went into service. The extensive list of references in the Bibliography is plainly testament to this fact. Our current knowledge base is well developed. Although data are lacking for the specific grades being considered for Generation IV (Gen IV) concepts, such as the NGNP, it is fully expected that the behavior of these graphites will conform to the recognized trends for near isotropic nuclear graphite. Thus, much of the data needed is confirmatory in nature. Theories that can explain graphite behavior have been postulated and, in many cases, shown to represent experimental data well. However, these theories need to be tested against data for the new graphites and extended to higher neutron doses and temperatures pertinent to the new Gen IV reactor concepts. It is anticipated that current and planned future graphite irradiation experiments will provide the data needed to validate many of the currently accepted models, as well as providing the needed data for design confirmation.

  18. The Next Generation Nuclear Plant Graphite Creep Experiment Irradiation in the Advanced Test Reactor

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Blaine Grover

    2010-10-01

    The United States Department of Energys Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Program will be irradiating six gas reactor graphite creep experiments in the Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) located at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). The ATR has a long history of irradiation testing in support of reactor development and the INL has been designated as the United States Department of Energys lead laboratory for nuclear energy development. The ATR is one of the worlds premiere test reactors for performing long term, high flux, and/or large volume irradiation test programs. These graphite irradiations are being accomplished to support development of the next generation reactors in the United States. The graphite experiments will be irradiated over the next six to eight years to support development of a graphite irradiation performance data base on the new nuclear grade graphites now available for use in high temperature gas reactors. The goals of the irradiation experiments are to obtain irradiation performance data, including irradiation creep, at different temperatures and loading conditions to support design of the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Very High Temperature Gas Reactor, as well as other future gas reactors. The experiments will each consist of a single capsule that will contain six stacks of graphite specimens, with half of the graphite specimens in each stack under a compressive load, while the other half of the specimens will not be subjected to a compressive load during irradiation. The six stacks will have differing compressive loads applied to the top half of each pair of specimen stacks, while a seventh stack will not have a compressive load. The specimens will be irradiated in an inert sweep gas atmosphere with on-line temperature and compressive load monitoring and control. There will also be the capability of sampling the sweep gas effluent to determine if any oxidation or off-gassing of the specimens occurs during initial start-up of the experiment. The first experiment was inserted in the ATR in August 2009 and started its irradiation in September 2009. It is anticipated to complete its irradiation in early calendar 2011. This paper will discuss the design of the experiment including the test train and the temperature and compressive load monitoring, control, and the irradiation experience to date.

  19. Massachusetts Nuclear Profile - Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station

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

    Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer cpacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,685,"5,918",98.7,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,685,"5,918",98.7

  20. Effect of Hurricane Andrew on the Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Station from August 20--30, 1992. [Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hebdon, F.J.

    1993-03-01

    On August 24, 1992, Hurricane Andrew, a Category 4 hurricane, struck the Turkey Point Electrical Generating Station with sustained winds of 145 mph (233 km/h). This is the report of the team that the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) jointly sponsored (1) to review the damage that the hurricane caused the nuclear units and the utility`s actions to prepare for the storm and recover from it, and (2) to compile lessons that might benefit other nuclear reactor facilities.

  1. Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Nuclear Electricity Generation: Systematic Review and Harmonization

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Warner, E. S.; Heath, G. A.

    2012-04-01

    A systematic review and harmonization of life cycle assessment (LCA) literature of nuclear electricity generation technologies was performed to determine causes of and, where possible, reduce variability in estimates of life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to clarify the state of knowledge and inform decision making. LCA literature indicates that life cycle GHG emissions from nuclear power are a fraction of traditional fossil sources, but the conditions and assumptions under which nuclear power are deployed can have a significant impact on the magnitude of life cycle GHG emissions relative to renewable technologies. Screening 274 references yielded 27 that reported 99 independent estimates of life cycle GHG emissions from light water reactors (LWRs). The published median, interquartile range (IQR), and range for the pool of LWR life cycle GHG emission estimates were 13, 23, and 220 grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per kilowatt-hour (g CO{sub 2}-eq/kWh), respectively. After harmonizing methods to use consistent gross system boundaries and values for several important system parameters, the same statistics were 12, 17, and 110 g CO{sub 2}-eq/kWh, respectively. Harmonization (especially of performance characteristics) clarifies the estimation of central tendency and variability. To explain the remaining variability, several additional, highly influential consequential factors were examined using other methods. These factors included the primary source energy mix, uranium ore grade, and the selected LCA method. For example, a scenario analysis of future global nuclear development examined the effects of a decreasing global uranium market-average ore grade on life cycle GHG emissions. Depending on conditions, median life cycle GHG emissions could be 9 to 110 g CO{sub 2}-eq/kWh by 2050.

  2. Threatened and Endangered Species Evaluation for Operating Commercial Nuclear Power Generating Plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sackschewsky, Michael R.

    2004-01-15

    The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 requires that federal agencies ensure that any action authorized, funded, or carried out under their jurisdiction is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any threatened or endangered (T&E) species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitats for such species. The issuance and maintenance of a federal license, such as a construction permit or operating license issued by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for a commercial nuclear power generating facility is a federal action under the jurisdiction of a federal agency, and is therefore subject to the provisions of the ESA. The Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) staff have performed appropriate assessments of potential impacts to threatened or endangered species, and consulted with appropriate agencies with regard to protection of such species in authorizing the construction, operation, and relicensing of nuclear power generating facilities. However, the assessments and consultations concerning many facilities were performed during the 1970's or early 1980's, and have not been re-evaluated in detail or updated since those initial evaluations. A review of potential Endangered Species Act issues at licensed nuclear power facilities was completed in 1997. In that review 484 different ESA-listed species were identified as potentially occurring near one or more of the 75 facility sites that were examined. An update of the previous T&E species evaluation at this time is desired because, during the intervening 6 years: nearly 200 species have been added to the ESA list, critical habitats have been designated for many of the listed species, and significantly more information is available online, allowing for more efficient high-level evaluations of potential species presence near sites and the potential operation impacts. The updated evaluation included searching the NRC's ADAMS database to find any documents related to T&E species take, consultations, and evaluations of potential effects of operation on T&E species. This search recovered a total of approximately 100 documents from 13 sites. Sites that were in the relicensing or decommissioning processes were excluded from the ADAMS search. In general the ADAMS search did not reveal any serious deficiencies or compliance problems. The most notable finds were reports of takes of green sea turtles at Diablo Canyon. While these events were reported to both the NRC and to NOAA Fisheries, no record of interaction between the two federal agencies was found. Species potentially present at each site were determined via querying the Geographical, Environmental, and Siting Information System (GEn&SIS) database developed for the NRC by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The results of these queries were compared against the 1997 review, and in the cases of sites that were in the relicensing process, with the results of those site specific evaluations. A total of 452 T&E species were identified as potentially occurring near one or more of the operating commercial nuclear power generating plants. Information about each of these species was gathered to support an assessment of the probability of occurrence at each of the reactor sites. Based on the assessments of which species are potentially affected at each site, and the information gathered through the ADAMS search, each site was assigned a priority value for follow-up evaluations. The priority listing did not include any sites that had entered the relicensing process, those where the licensee has indicated that they intend to enter the relicensing process before the end of 2005, or those that have entered the decommissioning process. Of the 39 remaining sites, those that were identified as the highest priority for follow-on evaluations are: Diablo Canyon, San Onofre, Crystal River, Harris, and Vogtle, followed by South Texas, Palo Verde, Salem, and Cooper.

  3. SRP- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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

  8. 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

  9. 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

  10. 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

  11. 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

  12. 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

  13. 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

  14. 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

  15. 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

  16. 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

  17. 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

  18. 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

  19. 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

  20. 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

  1. 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

  2. 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,"*"

  3. 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

  4. 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,"*"

  5. 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

  6. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Reactor Pressure Vessel Materials Research and Development Plan (PLN-2803)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    J. K. Wright; R. N. Wright

    2010-07-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has selected the High-Temperature Gas-cooled Reactor (HTGR) design for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Project. The NGNP will demonstrate the use of nuclear power for electricity and hydrogen production, with an outlet gas temperature in the range of 750°C, and a design service life of 60 years. The reactor design will be a graphite-moderated, helium-cooled, prismatic, or pebble bed reactor and use low-enriched uranium, Tri-Isotopic (TRISO)-coated fuel. The plant size, reactor thermal power, and core configuration will ensure passive decay heat removal without fuel damage or radioactive material releases during accidents. Selection of the technology and design configuration for the NGNP must consider both the cost and risk profiles to ensure that the demonstration plant establishes a sound foundation for future commercial deployments. The NGNP challenge is to achieve a significant advancement in nuclear technology while setting the stage for an economically viable deployment of the new technology in the commercial sector soon after 2020. This technology development plan details the additional research and development (R&D) required to design and license the NGNP RPV, assuming that A 508/A 533 is the material of construction. The majority of additional information that is required is related to long-term aging behavior at NGNP vessel temperatures, which are somewhat above those commonly encountered in the existing database from LWR experience. Additional data are also required for the anticipated NGNP environment. An assessment of required R&D for a Grade 91 vessel has been retained from the first revision of the R&D plan in Appendix B in somewhat less detail. Considerably more development is required for this steel compared to A 508/A 533 including additional irradiation testing for expected NGNP operating temperatures, high-temperature mechanical properties, and extensive studies of long-term microstructural stability.

  7. Research and Development Technology Development Roadmaps for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ian McKirdy

    2011-07-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has selected the high temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTGR) design for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Project. The NGNP will demonstrate the use of nuclear power for process heat, hydrogen and electricity production. The reactor will be graphite moderated with helium as the primary coolant and may be either prismatic or pebble-bed. Although, final design features have not yet been determined. Research and Development (R&D) activities are proceeding on those known plant systems to mature the technology, codify the materials for specific applications, and demonstrate the component and system viability in NGNP relevant and integrated environments. Collectively these R&D activities serve to reduce the project risk and enhance the probability of on-budget, on-schedule completion and NRC licensing. As the design progresses, in more detail, toward final design and approval for construction, selected components, which have not been used in a similar application, in a relevant environment nor integrated with other components and systems, must be tested to demonstrate viability at reduced scales and simulations prior to full scale operation. This report and its R&D TDRMs present the path forward and its significance in assuring technical readiness to perform the desired function by: Choreographing the integration between design and R&D activities; and proving selected design components in relevant applications.

  8. Structural integrity analysis of the degraded drywell containment at the Oyster Creek Nuclear generating station.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Petti, Jason P.

    2007-01-01

    This study examines the effects of the degradation experienced in the steel drywell containment at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. Specifically, the structural integrity of the containment shell is examined in terms of the stress limits using the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel (B&PV) Code, Section III, Division I, Subsection NE, and examined in terms of buckling (stability) using the ASME B&PV Code Case N-284. Degradation of the steel containment shell (drywell) at Oyster Creek was first observed during an outage in the mid-1980s. Subsequent inspections discovered reductions in the shell thickness due to corrosion throughout the containment. Specifically, significant corrosion occurred in the sandbed region of the lower sphere. Since the presence of the wet sand provided an environment which supported corrosion, a series of analyses were conducted by GE Nuclear Energy in the early 1990s. These analyses examined the effects of the degradation on the structural integrity. The current study adopts many of the same assumptions and data used in the previous GE study. However, the additional computational recourses available today enable the construction of a larger and more sophisticated structural model.

  9. 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

  10. 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

  11. 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

  12. 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

  13. 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

  14. 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

  15. 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

  16. 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

  17. 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

  18. 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

  19. 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

  20. 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

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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

  8. 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

  9. 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

  10. 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

  11. 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

  12. 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

  13. 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

  14. 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

  15. 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

  16. 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

  17. 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

  18. 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

  19. 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

  20. 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

  1. 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

  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)

    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

  9. 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

  10. 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

  11. Considerations Associated with Reactor Technology Selection for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    L.E. Demick

    2010-09-01

    At the inception of the Next Generation Nuclear Plant Project and during predecessor activities, alternative reactor technologies have been evaluated to determine the technology that best fulfills the functional and performance requirements of the targeted energy applications and market. Unlike the case of electric power generation where the reactor performance is primarily expressed in terms of economics, the targeted energy applications involve industrial applications that have specific needs in terms of acceptable heat transport fluids and the associated thermodynamic conditions. Hence, to be of interest to these industrial energy applications, the alternative reactor technologies are weighed in terms of the reactor coolant/heat transport fluid, achievable reactor outlet temperature, and practicality of operations to achieve the very high reliability demands associated with the petrochemical, petroleum, metals and related industries. These evaluations have concluded that the high temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTGR) can uniquely provide the required ranges of energy needs for these target applications, do so with promising economics, and can be commercialized with reasonable development risk in the time frames of current industry interest i.e., within the next 10-15 years.

  12. Threatened and endangered species evaluation for 75 licensed commercial nuclear power generating plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sackschewsky, M.R.

    1997-03-01

    The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended, and related implementing regulations of the jurisdictional federal agencies, the U.S. Departments of Commerce and Interior, at 50 CFR Part 17. 1, et seq., require that federal agencies ensure that any action authorized, funded, or carried out under their jurisdiction is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any threatened or endangered species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitats for such species. The issuance and maintenance of a federal license, such as a construction permit or operating license issued by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for a commercial nuclear power generating facility is a federal action under the jurisdiction of a federal agency, and is therefore subject to the provisions of the ESA. The U.S. Department of the Interior (through the Fish and Wildlife Service), and the U.S. Department of Commerce, share responsibility for administration of the ESA. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) deals with species that inhabit marine environments and anadromous fish, while the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is responsible for terrestrial and freshwater species and migratory birds. A species (or other distinct taxonomic unit such as subspecies, variety, and for vertebrates, distinct population units) may be classified for protection as `endangered` when it is in danger of extinction within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. A `threatened` classification is provided to those animals and plants likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of their ranges. As of February 1997, there were about 1067 species listed under the ESA in the United States. Additionally there were approximately 125 species currently proposed for listing as threatened or endangered, and another 183 species considered to be candidates for formal listing proposals.

  13. Net Energy Billing

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  14. Guam- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  15. Austin Energy- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  16. SpawnNet

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2014-12-23

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

  17. Idaho Power- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  18. LADWP- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  19. NetState

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2005-09-01

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

  20. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Reactor Pressure Vessel Materials Research and Development Plan (PLN-2803)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    J. K. Wright; R. N. Wright

    2008-04-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy has selected the High Temperature Gas-cooled Reactor design for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Project. The NGNP will demonstrate the use of nuclear power for electricity and hydrogen production. It will have an outlet gas temperature in the range of 900°C and a plant design service life of 60 years. The reactor design will be a graphite moderated, helium-cooled, prismatic, or pebble-bed reactor and use low-enriched uranium, Tri-Isotopic-coated fuel. The plant size, reactor thermal power, and core configuration will ensure passive decay heat removal without fuel damage or radioactive material releases during accidents. The NGNP Materials Research and Development Program is responsible for performing research and development on likely NGNP materials in support of the NGNP design, licensing, and construction activities. Selection of the technology and design configuration for the NGNP must consider both the cost and risk profiles to ensure that the demonstration plant establishes a sound foundation for future commercial deployments. The NGNP challenge is to achieve a significant advancement in nuclear technology while setting the stage for an economically viable deployment of the new technology in the commercial sector soon after 2020. Studies of potential Reactor Pressure Vessel (RPV) steels have been carried out as part of the pre-conceptual design studies. These design studies generally focus on American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code status of the steels, temperature limits, and allowable stresses. Three realistic candidate materials have been identified by this process: conventional light water reactor RPV steels A508/533, 2¼Cr-1Mo in the annealed condition, and modified 9Cr 1Mo ferritic martenistic steel. Based on superior strength and higher temperature limits, the modified 9Cr-1Mo steel has been identified by the majority of design engineers as the preferred choice for the RPV. All of the vendors have concluded, however, that with adequate engineered cooling of the vessel, the A508/533 steels are also acceptable.

  1. Preliminary materials selection issues for the next generation nuclear plant reactor pressure vessel.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Natesan, K.; Majumdar, S.; Shankar, P. S.; Shah, V. N.; Nuclear Engineering Division

    2007-03-21

    In the coming decades, the United States and the entire world will need energy supplies to meet the growing demands due to population increase and increase in consumption due to global industrialization. One of the reactor system concepts, the Very High Temperature Reactor (VHTR), with helium as the coolant, has been identified as uniquely suited for producing hydrogen without consumption of fossil fuels or the emission of greenhouse gases [Generation IV 2002]. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has selected this system for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Project, to demonstrate emissions-free nuclear-assisted electricity and hydrogen production within the next 15 years. The NGNP reference concepts are helium-cooled, graphite-moderated, thermal neutron spectrum reactors with a design goal outlet helium temperature of {approx}1000 C [MacDonald et al. 2004]. The reactor core could be either a prismatic graphite block type core or a pebble bed core. The use of molten salt coolant, especially for the transfer of heat to hydrogen production, is also being considered. The NGNP is expected to produce both electricity and hydrogen. The process heat for hydrogen production will be transferred to the hydrogen plant through an intermediate heat exchanger (IHX). The basic technology for the NGNP has been established in the former high temperature gas reactor (HTGR) and demonstration plants (DRAGON, Peach Bottom, AVR, Fort St. Vrain, and THTR). In addition, the technologies for the NGNP are being advanced in the Gas Turbine-Modular Helium Reactor (GT-MHR) project, and the South African state utility ESKOM-sponsored project to develop the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR). Furthermore, the Japanese HTTR and Chinese HTR-10 test reactors are demonstrating the feasibility of some of the planned components and materials. The proposed high operating temperatures in the VHTR place significant constraints on the choice of material selected for the reactor pressure vessel for both the PBMR and prismatic design. The main focus of this report is the RPV for both design concepts with emphasis on material selection.

  2. PSEG Long Island- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  3. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Methods Research and Development Technical Program Plan -- PLN-2498

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Richard R. Schultz; Abderrafi M. Ougouag; David W. Nigg; Hans D. Gougar; Richard W. Johnson; William K. Terry; Chang H. Oh; Donald W. McEligot; Gary W. Johnsen; Glenn E. McCreery; Woo Y. Yoon; James W. Sterbentz; J. Steve Herring; Temitope A. Taiwo; Thomas Y. C. Wei; William D. Pointer; Won S. Yang; Michael T. Farmer; Hussein S. Khalil; Madeline A. Feltus

    2008-09-01

    One of the great challenges of designing and licensing the Very High Temperature Reactor (VHTR) is to confirm that the intended VHTR analysis tools can be used confidently to make decisions and to assure all that the reactor systems are safe and meet the performance objectives of the Generation IV Program. The research and development (R&D) projects defined in the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Design Methods Development and Validation Program will ensure that the tools used to perform the required calculations and analyses can be trusted. The Methods R&D tasks are designed to ensure that the calculational envelope of the tools used to analyze the VHTR reactor systems encompasses, or is larger than, the operational and transient envelope of the VHTR itself. The Methods R&D focuses on the development of tools to assess the neutronic and thermal fluid behavior of the plant. The fuel behavior and fission product transport models are discussed in the Advanced Gas Reactor (AGR) program plan. Various stress analysis and mechanical design tools will also need to be developed and validated and will ultimately also be included in the Methods R&D Program Plan. The calculational envelope of the neutronics and thermal-fluids software tools intended to be used on the NGNP is defined by the scenarios and phenomena that these tools can calculate with confidence. The software tools can only be used confidently when the results they produce have been shown to be in reasonable agreement with first-principle results, thought-problems, and data that describe the “highly ranked” phenomena inherent in all operational conditions and important accident scenarios for the VHTR.

  4. US Central Station Nuclear Electric Generating Units: significant milestones. (Status as of April 1, 1980)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1980-06-01

    Construction and operational milestones are tabulated for US nuclear power plants. Data are presented on nuclear steam supply system orders. A schedule of commercial operation through 1990 is given.

  5. Observations on A Technology Roadmap for Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems: Technical Roadmap Report

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The development of advanced nuclear energy systems in the U.S. will depend greatly on the continued success of currently operating light water nuclear power plants and the ordering of new...

  6. Net Metering | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

  7. Grid Net | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

  8. Characteristics of colloids generated during the corrosion of nuclear waste glasses in groundwater

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Feng, X.; Buck, E.C.; Mertz, C.; Bates, J.K.; Cunnane, J.C.; Chaiko, D.

    1993-10-01

    Aqueous colloidal suspensions were generated by reacting nuclear waste glasses with groundwater at 90{degrees}C at different ratios of the glass surface area to solution volume (S/V). The colloids have been characterized in terms of size, charge, identity, and stability with respect to salt concentration, pH, and time, by examination using dynamic light scattering, electrophoretic mobility, and transmission electron microscopy. The colloids are predominately produced by precipitation from solution, possibly with contribution from reacted layers that have spallated from the glass. These colloids are silicon-rich minerals. The colloidal suspensions agglomerate when the salinity of the solutions increase. The following implications for modeling the colloidal transport of contaminants have been derived from this study: (1) The sources of the colloids are not only solubility-limited real colloids and the pseudo colloids formed by adsorption of radionuclides onto a groundwater colloid, but also from the spalled surface layers of reacted waste glasses. (2) In a repository, the local environment is likely to be glass-reaction dominated and the salt concentration is likely to be high, leading to rapid colloid agglomeration and settling; thus, colloid transport may be insignificant. (3) If large volumes of groundwater contact the glass reaction site, the precipitated colloids may become resuspended, and colloid transport may become important. (4) Under most conditions, the colloids are negatively charged and will deposit readily on positively charged surfaces. Negatively charged surfaces will, in general, facilitate colloid stability and transport.

  9. Connecticut Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation...

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

    "Solar","-","-","-","-","-" "Wind","-","-","-","-","-" "WoodWood Waste",9,2,2,1,"s" "MSW BiogenicLandfill Gas",755,728,732,758,739 "Other ...

  10. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Intermediate Heat Exchanger Materials Research and Development Plan (PLN-2804)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    J. K. Wright

    2008-04-01

    DOE has selected the High Temperature Gas-cooled Reactor (HTGR) design for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Project. The NGNP will demonstrate the use of nuclear power for electricity and hydrogen production. It will have an outlet gas temperature in the range of 900°C and a plant design service life of 60 years. The reactor design will be a graphite moderated, helium-cooled, prismatic or pebble-bed reactor and use low-enriched uranium, Tri-Isotopic (TRISO)-coated fuel. The plant size, reactor thermal power, and core configuration will ensure passive decay heat removal without fuel damage or radioactive material releases during accidents. The NGNP Materials Research and Development (R&D) Program is responsible for performing R&D on likely NGNP materials in support of the NGNP design, licensing, and construction activities. Today’s high-temperature alloys and associated ASME Codes for reactor applications are approved up to 760°C. However, some primary system components, such as the Intermediate Heat Exchanger (IHX) for the NGNP will require use of materials that can withstand higher temperatures. The thermal, environmental, and service life conditions of the NGNP will make selection and qualification of some high-temperature materials a significant challenge. Examples include materials for the core barrel and core internals, such as the control rod sleeves. The requirements of the materials for the IHX are among the most demanding. Selection of the technology and design configuration for the NGNP must consider both the cost and risk profiles to ensure that the demonstration plant establishes a sound foundation for future commercial deployments. The NGNP challenge is to achieve a significant advancement in nuclear technology while at the same time setting the stage for an economically viable deployment of the new technology in the commercial sector soon after 2020. A number of solid solution strengthened nickel based alloys have been considered for application in heat exchangers and core internals for the NGNP. The primary candidates are Inconel 617, Haynes 230, Incoloy 800H and Hastelloy XR. Based on the technical maturity, availability in required product forms, experience base, and high temperature mechanical properties all of the vendor pre-conceptual design studies have specified Alloy 617 as the material of choice for heat exchangers. Also a draft code case for Alloy 617 was developed previously. Although action was suspended before the code case was accepted by ASME, this draft code case provides a significant head start for achieving codification of the material. Similarly, Alloy 800H is the material of choice for control rod sleeves. In addition to the above listed considerations, Alloy 800H is already listed in the nuclear section of the ASME Code; although the maximum use temperature and time need to be increased.

  11. OpenNet Training | Department of Energy

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

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

  12. STARLIB: A NEXT-GENERATION REACTION-RATE LIBRARY FOR NUCLEAR ASTROPHYSICS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sallaska, A. L.; Iliadis, C.; Champange, A. E.; Goriely, S.; Starrfield, S.; Timmes, F. X.

    2013-07-15

    STARLIB is a next-generation, all-purpose nuclear reaction-rate library. For the first time, this library provides the rate probability density at all temperature grid points for convenient implementation in models of stellar phenomena. The recommended rate and its associated uncertainties are also included. Currently, uncertainties are absent from all other rate libraries, and, although estimates have been attempted in previous evaluations and compilations, these are generally not based on rigorous statistical definitions. A common standard for deriving uncertainties is clearly warranted. STARLIB represents a first step in addressing this deficiency by providing a tabular, up-to-date database that supplies not only the rate and its uncertainty but also its distribution. Because a majority of rates are lognormally distributed, this allows the construction of rate probability densities from the columns of STARLIB. This structure is based on a recently suggested Monte Carlo method to calculate reaction rates, where uncertainties are rigorously defined. In STARLIB, experimental rates are supplemented with: (1) theoretical TALYS rates for reactions for which no experimental input is available, and (2) laboratory and theoretical weak rates. STARLIB includes all types of reactions of astrophysical interest to Z = 83, such as (p, {gamma}), (p, {alpha}), ({alpha}, n), and corresponding reverse rates. Strong rates account for thermal target excitations. Here, we summarize our Monte Carlo formalism, introduce the library, compare methods of correcting rates for stellar environments, and discuss how to implement our library in Monte Carlo nucleosynthesis studies. We also present a method for accessing STARLIB on the Internet and outline updated Monte Carlo-based rates.

  13. Design of Radiation-Tolerant Structural Alloys for Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Todd R. Allen

    2009-06-30

    This project will use proton irradiation to further understand the microstructural stability of ceramics being considered as matrix material for advanced nuclear fuels.

  14. New York 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","5,271",13.4,"41,870",30.6 "Coal","2,781",7.1,"13,583",9.9 "Hydro and Pumped

  15. North Carolina 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","4,958",17.9,"40,740",31.7 "Coal","12,766",46.1,"71,951",55.9 "Hydro and Pumped

  16. South Carolina 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","6,486",27.0,"51,988",49.9 "Coal","7,230",30.1,"37,671",36.2 "Hydro and Pumped

  17. New Hampshire 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","1,247",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

  18. New Jersey 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","4,108",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

  19. 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

  20. 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

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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

  8. 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

  9. 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

  10. 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

  11. 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

  12. The Next Generation Nuclear Plant - Insights Gained from the INEEL Point Design Studies

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Philip E. MacDonald; A. M. Baxter; P. D. Bayless; J. M. Bolin; H. D. Gougar; R. L. Moore; A. M. Ougouag; M. B. Richards; R. L. Sant; J. W. Sterbentz; W. K. Terry

    2004-08-01

    This paper provides the results of an assessment of two possible versions of the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP), a prismatic fuel type helium gas-cooled reactor and a pebble-bed fuel helium gas reactor. Insights gained regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the two designs are also discussed. Both designs will meet the three basic requirements that have been set for the NGNP: a coolant outlet temperature of 1000 C, passive safety, and a total power output consistent with that expected for commercial high-temperature gas-cooled reactors. Two major modifications of the current Gas Turbine- Modular Helium Reactor (GT-MHR) design were needed to obtain a prismatic block design with a 1000 C outlet temperature: reducing the bypass flow and better controlling the inlet coolant flow distribution to the core. The total power that could be obtained for different core heights without exceeding a peak transient fuel temperature of 1600 C during a high or low-pressure conduction cooldown event was calculated. With a coolant inlet temperature of 490 C and 10% nominal core bypass flow, it is estimated that the peak power for a 10-block high core is 686 MWt, for a 12-block high core is 786 MWt, and for a 14-block core is about 889 MWt. The core neutronics calculations showed that the NGNP will exhibit strongly negative Doppler and isothermal temperature coefficients of reactivity over the burnup cycle. In the event of rapid loss of the helium gas, there is negligible core reactivity change. However, water or steam ingress into the core coolant channels can produce a relatively large reactivity effect. Two versions of an annular pebble-bed NGNP have also been developed, a 300 and a 600 MWt module. From this work we learned how to design passively safe pebble bed reactors that produce more than 600 MWt. We also found a way to improve both the fuel utilization and safety by modifying the pebble design (by adjusting the fuel zone radius in the pebble to optimize the fuel-to-moderator ratio). We also learned how to perform design optimization calculations by using a genetic algorithm that automatically selects a sequence of design parameter sets to meet specified fitness criteria increasingly well. In the pebble-bed NGNP design work, we use the genetic algorithm to direct the INEELs PEBBED code to perform hundreds of code runs in less than a day to find optimized design configurations. And finally, we learned how to calculate cross sections more accurately for pebble bed reactors, and we identified research needs for the further refinement of the cross section calculations.

  13. New York Nuclear Profile - Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station

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

    Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,630,"5,294",95.9,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  14. New York Nuclear Profile - R E Ginna Nuclear Power Plant

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

    R E Ginna Nuclear Power Plant" "Unit","Summer Capacity (MW)","Net Generation (Thousand MWh)","Summer Capacity Factor (Percent)","Type","Commercial Operation Date","License Expiration Date" 1,581,"4,948",97.2,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,581,"4,948",97.2

  15. Maryland Nuclear Profile - Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant

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

    Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,855,"6,755",90.2,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  16. Investing in the Next Generation of U.S. Nuclear Energy Leaders

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    As part of the Energy Department’s Nuclear Energy University Programs (NEUP) annual workshop, I met today with professors from across the country and announced awards of up to $39 million for...

  17. Montana Electric Cooperatives- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  18. Washington City Power- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  19. Grays Harbor PUD- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  20. N. Mariana Islands- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  1. Arkansas Nuclear Profile - Arkansas Nuclear One

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

    Nuclear One" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,842,"6,607",89.6,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" 2,993,"8,416",96.7,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  2. Wisconsin Nuclear Profile - Point Beach Nuclear Plant

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

    Point Beach Nuclear Plant" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,506,"3,954",89.2,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" 2,512,"4,336",96.7,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  3. ARM - Time in ARM NetCDF Files

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

    govDataTime in ARM NetCDF Files Page Contents Introduction Time Zones Epoch Time Time Variables Conversion Examples and Hints Perl Example C Example Fortran Example IDL Example Notes on Generating Epoch Times Contact Information Time in ARM NetCDF Files Introduction This document explains most of the issues related to the use of time in ARM netCDF data files. Time Zones All ARM netCDF files are in UTC. Note that this has some implications for solar-based data; we tend to split our files at

  4. Electronic constant current and current pulse signal generator for nuclear instrumentation testing

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Brown, Roger A.

    1994-01-01

    Circuitry for testing the ability of an intermediate range nuclear instrut to detect and measure a constant current and a periodic current pulse. The invention simulates the resistance and capacitance of the signal connection of a nuclear instrument ion chamber detector and interconnecting cable. An LED flasher/oscillator illuminates an LED at a periodic rate established by a timing capacitor and circuitry internal to the flasher/oscillator. When the LED is on, a periodic current pulse is applied to the instrument. When the LED is off, a constant current is applied. An inductor opposes battery current flow when the LED is on.

  5. Electronic constant current and current pulse signal generator for nuclear instrumentation testing

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Brown, R.A.

    1994-04-19

    Circuitry is described for testing the ability of an intermediate range nuclear instrument to detect and measure a constant current and a periodic current pulse. The invention simulates the resistance and capacitance of the signal connection of a nuclear instrument ion chamber detector and interconnecting cable. An LED flasher/oscillator illuminates an LED at a periodic rate established by a timing capacitor and circuitry internal to the flasher/oscillator. When the LED is on, a periodic current pulse is applied to the instrument. When the LED is off, a constant current is applied. An inductor opposes battery current flow when the LED is on. 1 figures.

  6. Replacement energy costs for nuclear electricity-generating units in the United States: 1997--2001. Volume 4

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    VanKuiken, J.C.; Guziel, K.A.; Tompkins, M.M.; Buehring, W.A.

    1997-09-01

    This report updates previous estimates of replacement energy costs for potential short-term shutdowns of 109 US nuclear electricity-generating units. This information was developed to assist the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in its regulatory impact analyses, specifically those that examine the impacts of proposed regulations requiring retrofitting of or safety modifications to nuclear reactors. Such actions might necessitate shutdowns of nuclear power plants while these changes are being implemented. The change in energy cost represents one factor that the NRC must consider when deciding to require a particular modification. Cost estimates were derived from probabilistic production cost simulations of pooled utility system operations. Factors affecting replacement energy costs, such as random unit failures, maintenance and refueling requirements, and load variations, are treated in the analysis. This report describes an abbreviated analytical approach as it was adopted to update the cost estimates published in NUREG/CR-4012, Vol. 3. The updates were made to extend the time frame of cost estimates and to account for recent changes in utility system conditions, such as change in fuel prices, construction and retirement schedules, and system demand projects.

  7. Worldwide assessment of steam-generator problems in pressurized-water-reactor nuclear power plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Woo, H.H.; Lu, S.C.

    1981-09-15

    Objective is to assess the reliability of steam generators of pressurized water reactor (PWR) power plants in the United States and abroad. The assessment is based on operation experience of both domestic and foreign PWR plants. The approach taken is to collect and review papers and reports available from the literature as well as information obtained by contacting research institutes both here and abroad. This report presents the results of the assessment. It contains a general background of PWR plant operations, plant types, and materials used in PWR plants. A review of the worldwide distribution of PWR plants is also given. The report describes in detail the degradation problems discovered in PWR steam generators: their causes, their impacts on the performance of steam generators, and the actions to mitigate and avoid them. One chapter is devoted to operating experience of PWR steam generators in foreign countries. Another discusses the improvements in future steam generator design.

  8. 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...

  9. Net-Zero Energy Retail Store Debuts in Illinois

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Walgreens on November 21 opened a net-zero energy retail store in Evanston, Illinois that it anticipates will generate at least as much energy as it consumes over the course of a year.

  10. NERI Final Project Report: On-Line Intelligent Self-Diagnostic Monitoring System for Next Generation Nuclear Power Plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bond, Leonard J.; Jarrell, Donald B.; Koehler, Theresa M.; Meador, Richard J.; Sisk, Daniel R.; Hatley, Darrel D.; Watkins, Kenneth S.; Chai, Jangbom; Kim, Wooshik

    2003-06-20

    This project provides a proof-of-principle technology demonstration for SDMS, where a distributed suite of sensors is integrated with active components and passive structures of types expected to be encountered in next generation nuclear power reactor and plant systems. The project employs state-of-the-art operational sensors, advanced stressor-based instrumentation, distributed computing, RF data network modules and signal processing to improve the monitoring and assessment of the power reactor system and gives data that is used to provide prognostics capabilities.

  11. 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.

  12. Accelerated development of Zr-containing new generation ferritic steels for advanced nuclear reactors

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tan, Lizhen; Yang, Ying; Sridharan, K.

    2015-12-01

    The mission of the Nuclear Energy Enabling Technologies (NEET) program is to develop crosscutting technologies for nuclear energy applications. Advanced structural materials with superior performance at elevated temperatures are always desired for nuclear reactors, which can improve reactor economics, safety margins, and design flexibility. They benefit not only new reactors, including advanced light water reactors (LWRs) and fast reactors such as the sodium-cooled fast reactor (SFR) that is primarily designed for management of high-level wastes, but also life extension of the existing fleet when component exchange is needed. Developing and utilizing the modern materials science tools (experimental, theoretical, and computational tools) is an important path to more efficient alloy development and process optimization. The ultimate goal of this project is, with the aid of computational modeling tools, to accelerate the development of Zr-bearing ferritic alloys that can be fabricated using conventional steelmaking methods. The new alloys are expected to have superior high-temperature creep performance and excellent radiation resistance as compared to Grade 91. The designed alloys were fabricated using arc-melting and drop-casting, followed by hot rolling and conventional heat treatments. Comprehensive experimental studies have been conducted on the developed alloys to evaluate their hardness, tensile properties, creep resistance, Charpy impact toughness, and aging resistance, as well as resistance to proton and heavy ion (Fe2+) irradiation.

  13. Los Alamos National Laboratory new generation standard nuclear material storage container - the SAVY4000 design

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stone, Timothy Amos

    2010-01-01

    Incidents involving release of nuclear materials stored in containers of convenience such as food pack cans, slip lid taped cans, paint cans, etc. has resulted in defense board concerns over the lack of prescriptive performance requirements for interim storage of nuclear materials. Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) has shared in these incidents and in response proactively moved into developing a performance based standard involving storage of nuclear material (RD003). This RD003 requirements document has sense been updated to reflect requirements as identified with recently issued DOE M 441.1-1 'Nuclear Material Packaging Manual'. The new packaging manual was issued at the encouragement of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board with a clear directive for protecting the worker from exposure due to loss of containment of stored materials. The Manual specifies a detailed and all inclusive approach to achieve a high level of protection; from package design & performance requirements, design life determinations of limited life components, authorized contents evaluations, and surveillance/maintenance to ensure in use package integrity over time. Materials in scope involve those stored outside an approved engineered-contamination barrier that would result in a worker exposure of in excess of 5 rem Committed Effective Does Equivalent (CEDE). Key aspects of meeting the challenge as developed around the SAVY-3000 vented storage container design will be discussed. Design performance and acceptance criteria against the manual, bounding conditions as established that the user must ensure are met to authorize contents in the package (based upon the activity of heat-source plutonium (90% Pu-238) oxide, which bounds the requirements for weapons-grade plutonium oxide), interface as a safety class system within the facility under the LANL plutonium facility DSA, design life determinations for limited life components, and a sense of design specific surveillance program implementation as LANL moves forward into production and use of the SAVY-3000 will all be addressed. The SAVY-3000 is intended as a work horse package for the DOE complex as a vented storage container primarily for plutonium in solid form.

  14. OglNet

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2010-03-10

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

  15. Risk perception & strategic decision making :general insights, a framework, and specific application to electricity generation using nuclear energy.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brewer, Jeffrey D.

    2005-11-01

    The objective of this report is to promote increased understanding of decision making processes and hopefully to enable improved decision making regarding high-consequence, highly sophisticated technological systems. This report brings together insights regarding risk perception and decision making across domains ranging from nuclear power technology safety, cognitive psychology, economics, science education, public policy, and neural science (to name a few). It forms them into a unique, coherent, concise framework, and list of strategies to aid in decision making. It is suggested that all decision makers, whether ordinary citizens, academics, or political leaders, ought to cultivate their abilities to separate the wheat from the chaff in these types of decision making instances. The wheat includes proper data sources and helpful human decision making heuristics; these should be sought. The chaff includes ''unhelpful biases'' that hinder proper interpretation of available data and lead people unwittingly toward inappropriate decision making ''strategies''; obviously, these should be avoided. It is further proposed that successfully accomplishing the wheat vs. chaff separation is very difficult, yet tenable. This report hopes to expose and facilitate navigation away from decision-making traps which often ensnare the unwary. Furthermore, it is emphasized that one's personal decision making biases can be examined, and tools can be provided allowing better means to generate, evaluate, and select among decision options. Many examples in this report are tailored to the energy domain (esp. nuclear power for electricity generation). The decision making framework and approach presented here are applicable to any high-consequence, highly sophisticated technological system.

  16. Challenges to Integration of Safety and Reliability with Proliferation Resistance and Physical Protection for Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    H. Khalil; P. F. Peterson; R. Bari; G. -L. Fiorini; T. Leahy; R. Versluis

    2012-07-01

    The optimization of a nuclear energy system's performance requires an integrated consideration of multiple design goals - sustainability, safety and reliability (S&R), proliferation resistance and physical protection (PR&PP), and economics - as well as careful evaluation of trade-offs for different system design and operating parameters. Design approaches motivated by each of the goal areas (in isolation from the other goal areas) may be mutually compatible or in conflict. However, no systematic methodology approach has yet been developed to identify and maximize synergies and optimally balance conflicts across the possible design configurations and operating modes of a nuclear energy system. Because most Generation IV systems are at an early stage of development, design, and assessment, designers and analysts are only beginning to identify synergies and conflicts between PR&PP, S&R, and economics goals. The close coupling between PR&PP and S&R goals has motivated early attention within the Generation IV International Forum to their integrated consideration to facilitate the optimization of their effects and the minimization of potential conflicts. This paper discusses the status of this work.

  17. Mechanisms Governing the Creep Behavior of High Temperature Alloys for Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Vasudevan, Vijay; Carroll, Laura; Sham, Sam

    2015-04-06

    This research project, which includes collaborators from INL and ORNL, focuses on the study of alloy 617 and alloy 800H that are candidates for applications as intermediate heat exchangers in GEN IV nuclear reactors, with an emphasis on the effects of grain size, grain boundaries and second phases on the creep properties; the mechanisms of dislocation creep, diffusional creep and cavitation; the onset of tertiary creep; and theoretical modeling for long-term predictions of materials behavior and for high temperature alloy design.

  18. Socio-economic impacts of nuclear generating stations: Crystal River Unit 3 case study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bergmann, P.A.

    1982-07-01

    This report documents a case study of the socio-economic impacts of the construction and operation of the Crystal River Unit 3 nuclear power station. It is part of a major post-licensing study of the socio-economic impacts at twelve nuclear power stations. The case study covers the period beginning with the announcement of plans to construct the reactor and ending in the period 1980 to 1981. The case study deals with changes in the economy, population, settlement patterns and housing, local government and public services, social structure, and public response in the study area during the construction/operation of the reactor. A regional modeling approach is used to trace the impact of construction/operation on the local economy, labor market, and housing market. Emphasis in the study is on the attribution of socio-economic impacts to the reactor or other causal factors. As part of the study of local public response to the construction/operation of the reactor, the effects of the Three Mile Island accident are examined.

  19. Net Metering | Department of Energy

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

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

  20. Road to Net Zero (Presentation)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Glover, B.

    2011-05-01

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

  1. Net Metering | Department of Energy

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

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

  2. FY 2004 Second Quarter Review Forecast of Generation Accumulated...

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

    Bonneville Power Administration Power Business Line Generation (PBL) Accumulated Net Revenue Forecast for Financial-Based Cost Recovery Adjustment Clause (FB CRAC) and Safety-Net...

  3. PBL FY 2003 Third Quarter Review Forecast of Generation Accumulated...

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

    2003 Bonneville Power Administration Power Business Line Generation Accumulated Net Revenue Forecast for Financial-Based Cost Recovery Adjustment Clause (FB CRAC) and Safety-Net...

  4. Fuzzy Logic Controller Architecture for Water Level Control in Nuclear Power Plant Steam Generator (SG) Using ANFIS Training Method

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Vosoughi, Naser; Naseri, Zahra

    2002-07-01

    Since suitable control of water level can greatly enhance the operation of a power station, a Fuzzy logic controller architecture is applied to show desired control of the water level in a Nuclear steam generator. with regard to the physics of the system, it is shown that two inputs, a single output and the least number of rules (9 rules) are considered for a controller, and the ANFIS training method is employed to model functions in a controlled system. By using ANFIS training method, initial member functions will be trained and appropriate functions are generated to control water level inside the steam generators while using the stated rules. The proposed architecture can construct an input output mapping based on both human knowledge (in from of Fuzzy if then rules) and stipulated input output data. In this paper with a simple test it has been shown that the architecture fuzzy logic controller has a reasonable response to one step input at a constant power. Through computer simulation, it is found that Fuzzy logic controller is suitable, especially for the water level deviation and abrupt steam flow disturbances that are typical in the existing power plant. (authors)

  5. Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Nuclear Electricity Generation: Systematic Review and Harmonization

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    As clean energy increasingly becomes part of the national dialogue, lenders, utilities, and lawmakers need the most comprehensive and accurate information on GHG emissions from various sources of energy to inform policy, planning, and investment decisions. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) recently led the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Harmonization Project, a study that gives decision makers and investors more precise estimates of life cycle GHG emissions for renewable and conventional generation, clarifying inconsistent and conflicting estimates in the published literature, and reducing uncertainty.

  6. Missouri 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","1,190",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

  7. Washington 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","1,097",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

  8. SensorNet Node Suite

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2004-09-01

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

  9. Status of Net Metering: Assessing the Potential to Reach Program Caps

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Heeter, J.; Gelman, R.; Bird, L.

    2014-09-01

    Several states are addressing the issue of net metering program caps, which limit the total amount of net metered generating capacity that can be installed in a state or utility service territory. In this analysis, we examine net metering caps to gain perspective on how long net metering will be available in various jurisdictions under current policies. We also surveyed state practices and experience to understand important policy design considerations.

  10. Status of Net Metering: Assessing the Potential to Reach Program Caps (Poster)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Heeter, J.; Bird, L.; Gelman, R.

    2014-10-01

    Several states are addressing the issue of net metering program caps, which limit the total amount of net metered generating capacity that can be installed in a state or utility service territory. In this analysis, we examine net metering caps to gain perspective on how long net metering will be available in various jurisdictions under current policies. We also surveyed state practices and experience to understand important policy design considerations.

  11. TacNet Tracker Software

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2008-08-04

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

  12. Maintaining a Technology-Neutral Approach to Hydrogen Production Process Development through Conceptual Design of the Next Generation Nuclear Plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Michael W. Patterson

    2008-05-01

    The Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) project was authorized in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct), tasking the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) with demonstrating High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor (HTGR) technology. The demonstration is to include the technical, licensing, operational, and commercial viability of HTGR technology for the production of electricity and hydrogen. The Nuclear Hydrogen Initiative (NHI), a component of the DOE Hydrogen Program managed by the Office of Nuclear Energy, is also investigating multiple approaches to cost effective hydrogen production from nuclear energy. The objective of NHI is development of the technology and information basis for a future decision on commercial viability. The initiatives are clearly intertwined. While the objectives of NGNP and NHI are generally consistent, NGNP has progressed to the project definition phase and the project plan has matured. Multiple process applications for the NGNP require process heat, electricity and hydrogen in varied combinations and sizes. Coupling these processes to the reactor in multiple configurations adds complexity to the design, licensing and demonstration of both the reactor and the hydrogen production process. Commercial viability of hydrogen production may depend on the specific application and heat transport configuration. A component test facility (CTF) is planned by the NGNP to support testing and demonstration of NGNP systems, including those for hydrogen production, in multiple configurations. Engineering-scale demonstrations in the CTF are expected to start in 2012 to support scheduled design and licensing activities leading to subsequent construction and operation. Engineering-scale demonstrations planned by NHI are expected to start at least two years later. Reconciliation of these schedules is recommended to successfully complete both initiatives. Hence, closer and earlier integration of hydrogen process development and heat transport systems is sensible. For integration purposes, an analysis comparing the design, cost and schedule impact of maintaining a technology neutral approach through conceptual design or making an early hydrogen process technology selection was performed. Early selection does not specifically eliminate a technology, but rather selects the first hydrogen technology for demonstration. A systems-engineering approach was taken to define decision-making criteria for selecting a hydrogen technology. The relative technical, cost and schedule risks of each approach were analyzed and risk mitigation strategies were recommended, including provisions to maintain close collaboration with the NHI. The results of these analyses are presented here.

  13. Tennessee Nuclear Profile - Sequoyah

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

    Sequoyah" "Unit","Summer Capacity (MW)","Net Generation (Thousand MWh)","Summer Capacity Factor (Percent)","Type","Commercial Operation Date","License Expiration Date" ...

  14. On-Line Monitoring and Diagnostics of the Integrity of Nuclear Plant Steam Generators and Heat Exchangers, Volumes 1, 2.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Upadhyaya, Belle R.; Hines, J. Wesley; Lu, Baofu; Huang, Xuedong; Penha, Rosani, L.; Perillo, Sergio, R.; Zhao, Ke

    2005-06-03

    The overall purpose of this Nuclear Engineering Education Research (NEER) project was to integrate new, innovative, and existing technologies to develop a fault diagnostics and characterization system for nuclear plant steam generators (SG) and heat exchangers (HX). Issues related to system level degradation of SG and HX tubing, including tube fouling, performance under reduced heat transfer area, and the damage caused by stress corrosion cracking, are the important factors that influence overall plant operation, maintenance, and economic viability of nuclear power systems. The research at The University of Tennessee focused on the development of techniques for monitoring process and structural integrity of steam generators and heat exchangers. The objectives of the project were accomplished by the completion of the following tasks. All the objectives were accomplished during the project period. This report summarizes the research and development activities, results, and accomplishments during June 2001 ???????????????????????????????? September 2004. ???????????????????????????????· Development and testing of a high-fidelity nodal model of a U-tube steam generator (UTSG) to simulate the effects of fouling and to generate a database representing normal and degraded process conditions. Application of the group method of data handling (GMDH) method for process variable prediction. ???????????????????????????????· Development of a laboratory test module to simulate particulate fouling of HX tubes and its effect on overall thermal resistance. Application of the GMDH technique to predict HX fluid temperatures, and to compare with the calculated thermal resistance. ???????????????????????????????· Development of a hybrid modeling technique for process diagnosis and its evaluation using laboratory heat exchanger test data. ???????????????????????????????· Development and testing of a sensor suite using piezo-electric devices for monitoring structural integrity of both flat plates (beams) and tubing. Experiments were performed in air, and in water with and without bubbly flow. ???????????????????????????????· Development of advanced signal processing methods using wavelet transforms and image processing techniques for isolating flaw types. ???????????????????????????????· Development and implementation of a new nonlinear and non-stationary signal processing method, called the Hilbert-Huang transform (HHT), for flaw detection and location. This is a more robust and adaptive approach compared to the wavelet transform

  15. On-Line Monitoring and Diagnostics of the Integrity of Nuclear Plant Steam Generators and Heat Exchangers.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Belle R. Upadhyaya; J. Wesley Hines

    2004-09-27

    The overall purpose of this Nuclear Engineering Education Research (NEER) project was to integrate new, innovative, and existing technologies to develop a fault diagnostics and characterization system for nuclear plant steam generators (SG) and heat exchangers (HX). Issues related to system level degradation of SG and HX tubing, including tube fouling, performance under reduced heat transfer area, and the damage caused by stress corrosion cracking, are the important factors that influence overall plant operation, maintenance, and economic viability of nuclear power systems. The research at The University of Tennessee focused on the development of techniques for monitoring process and structural integrity of steam generators and heat exchangers. The objectives of the project were accomplished by the completion of the following tasks. All the objectives were accomplished during the project period. This report summarizes the research and development activities, results, and accomplishments during June 2001-September 2004. (1) Development and testing of a high-fidelity nodal model of a U-tube steam generator (UTSG) to simulate the effects of fouling and to generate a database representing normal and degraded process conditions. Application of the group method of data handling (GMDH) method for process variable prediction. (2) Development of a laboratory test module to simulate particulate fouling of HX tubes and its effect on overall thermal resistance. Application of the GMDH technique to predict HX fluid temperatures, and to compare with the calculated thermal resistance. (3) Development of a hybrid modeling technique for process diagnosis and its evaluation using laboratory heat exchanger test data. (4) Development and testing of a sensor suite using piezo-electric devices for monitoring structural integrity of both flat plates (beams) and tubing. Experiments were performed in air, and in water with and without bubbly flow. (5) Development of advanced signal processing methods using wavelet transforms and image processing techniques for isolating flaw types. (6) Development and implementation of a new nonlinear and non-stationary signal processing method, called the Hilbert-Huang transform (HHT), for flaw detection and location. This is a more robust and adaptive approach compared to the wavelet transform. (7) Implementation of a moving-window technique in the time domain for detecting and quantifying flaw types in tubular structures. A window zooming technique was also developed for flaw location in tubes. (8) Theoretical study of elastic wave propagation (longitudinal and shear waves) in metallic flat plates and tubing with and without flaws. (9) Simulation of the Lamb wave propagation using the finite-element code ABAQUS. This enabled the verification of the experimental results. The research tasks included both analytical research and experimental studies. The experimental results helped to enhance the robustness of fault monitoring methods and to provide a systematic verification of the analytical results. The results of this research were disseminated in scientific meetings. A journal manuscript was submitted for publication. The new findings of this research have potential applications in aerospace and civil structures. The report contains a complete bibliography that was developed during the course of the project.

  16. Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a New Technology for Extraction of Insoluble Impurities from Nuclear Power Plant Steam Generators with Purge Water

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bud'ko, I. O.; Zhukov, A. G.

    2013-11-15

    An experimental technology for the removal of insoluble impurities from a horizontal steam generator with purge water during planned shutdowns of the power generating unit is improved through a more representative determination of the concentration of impurities in the purge water ahead of the water cleanup facility and a more precise effective time for the duration of the purge process. Tests with the improved technique at power generating unit No. 1 of the Rostov Nuclear Power Plant show that the efficiency with which insoluble impurities are removed from the steam generator volume was more than two orders of magnitude greater than under the standard regulations.

  17. Net Metering | Department of Energy

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

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

  18. Net Zero Energy Installations (Presentation)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Booth, S.

    2012-05-01

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

  19. Net Metering | Department of Energy

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

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

  20. Valley Electric Association- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  1. Buildings Energy Data Book: 6.2 Electricity Generation, Transmission, and Distribution

    Buildings Energy Data Book [EERE]

    2010 Existing Capacity, by Energy Source (GW) Number of Generator Nameplate Net Summer Net Winter Plant Fuel Type Generators Capacity Capacity Capacity Coal Petroleum Natural Gas Other Gases Nuclear Hydroelectric Conventional Wind Solar Thermal and Photovoltaic Wood and Wood Derived Fuels Geothermal Other Biomass Pumped Storage Other Total Source(s): EIA, Electric Power Annual 2010, Feb. 2012, Table 1.2. 51 1.0 0.9 0.9 18,150 1,138.6 1,039.1 1,078.7 1,574 5.0 4.4 4.4 151 20.5 22.2 22.1 346 7.9

  2. ISO standardization of scaling factor method for low and intermediate level radioactive wastes generated at nuclear power plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kashiwagi, Makoto; Masui, Hideki; Denda, Yasutaka; James, David; Lantes, Bertrand; Mueller, Wolfgang; Garamszeghy, Mike; Leganes, Jose Luis; Maxeiner, Harald; Van Velzen, Leo

    2007-07-01

    Low- and intermediate-level radioactive wastes (L-ILW ) generated at nuclear power plants are disposed of in various countries. In the disposal of such wastes, it is required that the radioactivity concentrations of waste packages should be declared with respect to difficult-to-measure nuclides (DTM nuclides), such as C-14, Ni-63 and a-emitting nuclides, which are often limited to maximum values in disposal licenses, safety cases and/or regulations for maximum radioactive concentrations. To fulfill this requirement, the Scaling Factor method (SF method) has been applied in various countries as a principal method for determining the concentrations of DTM nuclides. In the SF method, the concentrations of DTM nuclides are determined by multiplying the concentrations of certain key nuclides by SF values (the determined ratios of radioactive concentration between DTM nuclides and those key nuclides). The SF values used as conversion factors are determined from the correlation between DTM nuclides and key nuclides such as Co-60. The concentrations of key nuclides are determined by {gamma} ray measurements which can be made comparatively easily from outside the waste package. The SF values are calculated based on the data obtained from the radiochemical analysis of waste samples. The use of SFs, which are empirically based on analytical data, has become established as a widely recognized 'de facto standard'. A number of countries have independently collected nuclide data by analysis over many years and each has developed its own SF method, but all the SF methods that have been adopted are similar. The project team for standardization had been organized for establishing this SF method as a 'de jure standard' in the international standardization system of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). The project team for standardization has advanced the standardization through technical studies, based upon each country's study results and analysis data. The conclusions reached by the project team was published as ISO International Standard 21238:2007 'The Scaling Factor method to determine the radioactivity of low- and intermediate-level radioactive waste packages generated at nuclear power plants'. This paper gives an introduction to the international standardization process for the SF method and the contents of the recently published International Standard. (authors)

  3. ,"Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals ...

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Net ... 7:00:48 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Net ...

  4. Modeling a Printed Circuit Heat Exchanger with RELAP5-3D for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    2010-12-01

    The main purpose of this report is to design a printed circuit heat exchanger (PCHE) for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant and carry out Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA) simulation using RELAP5-3D. Helium was chosen as the coolant in the primary and secondary sides of the heat exchanger. The design of PCHE is critical for the LOCA simulations. For purposes of simplicity, a straight channel configuration was assumed. A parallel intermediate heat exchanger configuration was assumed for the RELAP5 model design. The RELAP5 modeling also required the semicircular channels in the heat exchanger to be mapped to rectangular channels. The initial RELAP5 run outputs steady state conditions which were then compared to the heat exchanger performance theory to ensure accurate design is being simulated. An exponential loss of pressure transient was simulated. This LOCA describes a loss of coolant pressure in the primary side over a 20 second time period. The results for the simulation indicate that heat is initially transferred from the primary loop to the secondary loop, but after the loss of pressure occurs, heat transfers from the secondary loop to the primary loop.

  5. 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

  6. 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."

  7. 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

  8. 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

  9. 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."

  10. 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

  11. Monthly/Annual Energy Review - nuclear section

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2015-01-01

    Monthly and latest annual statistics on nuclear electricity capacity, generation, and number of operable nuclear reactors.

  12. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Phenomena Identification and Ranking Tables (PIRTs) Volume 2: Accident and Thermal Fluids Analysis PIRTs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ball, Sydney J; Corradini, M.; Fisher, Stephen Eugene; Gauntt, R.; Geffraye, G.; Gehin, Jess C; Hassan, Y.; Moses, David Lewis; Renier, John-Paul; Schultz, R.; Wei, T.

    2008-03-01

    An accident, thermal fluids, and reactor physics phenomena identification and ranking process was conducted by a panel of experts on the next generation nuclear plant (NGNP) design (consideration given to both pebble-bed and prismatic gas-cooled reactor configurations). Safety-relevant phenomena, importance, and knowledge base were assessed for the following event classes: (1) normal operation (including some reactor physics aspects), (2) general loss of forced circulation (G-LOFC), (3) pressurized loss-of-forced circulation (P-LOFC), (4) depressurized loss-of-forced circulation (D-LOFC), (5) air ingress (following D-LOFC), (6) reactivity transients - including anticipated transients without scram (ATWS), (7) processes coupled via intermediate heat exchanger (IHX) (IHX failure with molten salt), and (8) steam/water ingress. The panel's judgment of the importance ranking of a given phenomenon (or process) was based on the effect it had on one or more figures of merit or evaluation criteria. These included public and worker dose, fuel failure, and primary (and other safety) system integrity. The major phenomena of concern that were identified and categorized as high importance combined with medium to low knowledge follow: (1) core coolant bypass flows (normal operation), (2) power/flux profiles (normal operation), (3) outlet plenum flows (normal operation), (4) reactivity-temperature feedback coefficients for high-plutonium-content cores (normal operation and accidents), (5) fission product release related to the transport of silver (normal operation), (6)emissivity aspects for the vessel and reactor cavity cooling system (G-LOFC), (7) reactor vessel cavity air circulation and heat transfer (G-LOFC), and (8)convection/radiation heating of upper vessel area (P-LOFC).

  13. SophiNet Version 12

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2012-08-09

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

  14. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Phenomena Identification and Ranking Tables (PIRTs) Volume 4: High-Temperature Materials PIRTs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Corwin, William R; Ballinger, R.; Majumdar, S.; Weaver, K. D.

    2008-03-01

    The Phenomena Identification and Ranking Table (PIRT) technique was used to identify safety-relevant/safety-significant phenomena and assess the importance and related knowledge base of high-temperature structural materials issues for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP), a very high temperature gas-cooled reactor (VHTR). The major aspects of materials degradation phenomena that may give rise to regulatory safety concern for the NGNP were evaluated for major structural components and the materials comprising them, including metallic and nonmetallic materials for control rods, other reactor internals, and primary circuit components; metallic alloys for very high-temperature service for heat exchangers and turbomachinery, metallic alloys for high-temperature service for the reactor pressure vessel (RPV), other pressure vessels and components in the primary and secondary circuits; and metallic alloys for secondary heat transfer circuits and the balance of plant. These materials phenomena were primarily evaluated with regard to their potential for contributing to fission product release at the site boundary under a variety of event scenarios covering normal operation, anticipated transients, and accidents. Of all the high-temperature metallic components, the one most likely to be heavily challenged in the NGNP will be the intermediate heat exchanger (IHX). Its thin, internal sections must be able to withstand the stresses associated with thermal loading and pressure drops between the primary and secondary loops under the environments and temperatures of interest. Several important materials-related phenomena related to the IHX were identified, including crack initiation and propagation; the lack of experience of primary boundary design methodology limitations for new IHX structures; and manufacturing phenomena for new designs. Specific issues were also identified for RPVs that will likely be too large for shop fabrication and transportation. Validated procedures for on-site welding, post-weld heat treatment (PWHT), and inspections will be required for the materials of construction. High-importance phenomena related to the RPV include crack initiation and subcritical crack growth; field fabrication process control; property control in heavy sections; and the maintenance of high emissivity of the RPV materials over their service lifetime to enable passive heat rejection from the reactor core. All identified phenomena related to the materials of construction for the IHX, RPV, and other components were evaluated and ranked for their potential impact on reactor safety.

  15. Texas Nuclear Profile - Comanche Peak

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

    Comanche Peak" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" ...

  16. American PowerNet | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

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

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

    11:34:24 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: U.S. Refinery Net Production" ...US1","MMNRXNUS1","MPGRXNUS1" "Date","U.S. Refinery Net Production of Crude Oil and ...

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

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

    11:35:14 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: U.S. Blender Net Production" ...BNUSMBBL","MEPPGYPBNUSMBBL" "Date","U.S. Blender Net Production of Crude Oil and ...

  19. Wire-Net | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

  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

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

  9. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

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

  10. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

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

  11. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

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

  12. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

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

  13. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

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

  14. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

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

  15. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

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

  16. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

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

  17. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

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

  18. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

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

  19. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

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

    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,

  20. 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,

  1. 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,

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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

  8. 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,

  9. 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

  10. 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

  11. 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

  12. 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

  13. 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,

  14. 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,

  15. 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,

  16. 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

  17. 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

  18. 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,

  19. 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,

  20. 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,

  1. 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,

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. Next Update: October 2009 Net Internal

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

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

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals ... Net Withdrawals of Liquefied Natural Gas from Storage Minnesota Liquefied Natural Gas ...

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

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

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

  9. The NetLogger Toolkit V2.0

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2003-03-28

    The NetLogger Toolkit is designed to monitor, under actual operating conditions, the behavior of all the elements of the application-to-application communication path in order to determine exactly where time is spent within a complex system Using NetLogger, distnbuted application components are modified to produce timestamped logs of "interesting" events at all the critical points of the distributed system Events from each component are correlated, which allov^ one to characterize the performance of all aspects ofmore » the system and network in detail. The NetLogger Toolkit itself consists of four components an API and library of functions to simplify the generation of application-level event logs, a set of tools for collecting and sorting log files, an event archive system, and a tool for visualization and analysis of the log files In order to instrument an application to produce event logs, the application developer inserts calls to the NetLogger API at all the critical points in the code, then links the application with the NetLogger library All the tools in the NetLogger Toolkit share a common log format, and assume the existence of accurate and synchronized system clocks NetLogger messages can be logged using an easy-to-read text based format based on the lETF-proposed ULM format, or a binary format that can still be used through the same API but that is several times faster and smaller, with performance comparable or better than binary message formats such as MPI, XDR, SDDF-Binary, and PBIO. The NetLogger binary format is both highly efficient and self-describing, thus optimized for the dynamic message construction and parsing of application instrumentation. NetLogger includes an "activation" API that allows NetLogger logging to be turned on, off, or modified by changing an external file This IS useful for activating logging in daemons/services (e g GndFTP server). The NetLogger reliability API provides the ability to specify backup logging locations and penodically try to reconnect broken TCP pipe. A typical use for this is to store data on local disk while net is down. An event archiver can log one or more incoming NetLogger streams to a local disk file (netlogd) or to a mySQL database (netarchd). We have found exploratory, visual analysis of the log event data to be the most useful means of determining the causes of performance anomalies The NetLogger Visualization tool, niv, has been developed to provide a flexible and interactive graphical representation of system-level and application-level events.« less

  10. City of Danville- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    A customer may begin operation of their renewable energy generator once the conditions of interconnection have been met. These include:

  11. An interactive ontology-driven information system for simulating background radiation and generating scenarios for testing special nuclear materials detection algorithms

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

    Sorokine, Alexandre; Schlicher, Bob G; Ward, Richard C; Wright, Michael C; Kruse, Kara L

    2015-01-01

    This paper describes an original approach to generating scenarios for the purpose of testing the algorithms used to detect special nuclear materials (SNM) that incorporates the use of ontologies. Separating the signal of SNM from the background requires sophisticated algorithms. To assist in developing such algorithms, there is a need for scenarios that capture a very wide range of variables affecting the detection process, depending on the type of detector being used. To provide such a cpability, we developed an ontology-driven information system (ODIS) for generating scenarios that can be used in creating scenarios for testing of algorithms for SNMmore » detection. The ontology-driven scenario generator (ODSG) is an ODIS based on information supplied by subject matter experts and other documentation. The details of the creation of the ontology, the development of the ontology-driven information system, and the design of the web user interface (UI) are presented along with specific examples of scenarios generated using the ODSG. We demonstrate that the paradigm behind the ODSG is capable of addressing the problem of semantic complexity at both the user and developer levels. Compared to traditional approaches, an ODIS provides benefits such as faithful representation of the users' domain conceptualization, simplified management of very large and semantically diverse datasets, and the ability to handle frequent changes to the application and the UI. The approach makes possible the generation of a much larger number of specific scenarios based on limited user-supplied information« less

  12. Tsiklauri-Durst combined cycle (T-D Cycle{trademark}) application for nuclear and fossil-fueled power generating plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tsiklauri, B.; Korolev, V.N.; Durst, B.M.; Shen, P.K.

    1998-07-01

    The Tsiklauri-Durst combined cycle is a combination of the best attributes of both nuclear power and combined cycle gas power plants. A technology patented in 1994 by Battelle Memorial Institute offers a synergistic approach to power generation. A typical combined cycle is defined as the combination of gas turbine Brayton Cycle, topping steam turbine Rankine Cycle. Exhaust from the gas turbine is used in heat recovery steam generators to produce steam for a steam turbine. In a standard combined cycle gas turbine-steam turbine application, the gas turbine generates about 65 to 70 percent of system power. The thermal efficiency for such an installation is typically about 45 to 50 percent. A T-D combined cycle takes a new, creative approach to combined cycle design by directly mixing high enthalpy steam from the heat recovery steam generator, involving the steam generator at more than one pressure. Direct mixing of superheated and saturated steam eliminates the requirement for a large heat exchanger, making plant modification simple and economical.

  13. An interactive ontology-driven information system for simulating background radiation and generating scenarios for testing special nuclear materials detection algorithms

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sorokine, Alexandre; Schlicher, Bob G; Ward, Richard C; Wright, Michael C; Kruse, Kara L

    2015-01-01

    This paper describes an original approach to generating scenarios for the purpose of testing the algorithms used to detect special nuclear materials (SNM) that incorporates the use of ontologies. Separating the signal of SNM from the background requires sophisticated algorithms. To assist in developing such algorithms, there is a need for scenarios that capture a very wide range of variables affecting the detection process, depending on the type of detector being used. To provide such a cpability, we developed an ontology-driven information system (ODIS) for generating scenarios that can be used in creating scenarios for testing of algorithms for SNM detection. The ontology-driven scenario generator (ODSG) is an ODIS based on information supplied by subject matter experts and other documentation. The details of the creation of the ontology, the development of the ontology-driven information system, and the design of the web user interface (UI) are presented along with specific examples of scenarios generated using the ODSG. We demonstrate that the paradigm behind the ODSG is capable of addressing the problem of semantic complexity at both the user and developer levels. Compared to traditional approaches, an ODIS provides benefits such as faithful representation of the users' domain conceptualization, simplified management of very large and semantically diverse datasets, and the ability to handle frequent changes to the application and the UI. The approach makes possible the generation of a much larger number of specific scenarios based on limited user-supplied information

  14. Table 2. Ten largest plants by generation capacity, 2014

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

    Tennessee" ,"Plant","Primary energy source","Operating company","Net summer capacity (MW)" 1,"Cumberland (TN)","Coal","Tennessee Valley Authority",2470 2,"Sequoyah","Nuclear","Tenn...

  15. Proceedings of the 2. MIT international conference on the next generation of nuclear power technology. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1993-12-31

    The goal of the conference was to try to attract a variety of points of view from well-informed people to debate issues concerning nuclear power. Hopefully from that process a better understanding of what one should be doing will emerge. In organizing the conference lessons learned from the previous one were applied. A continuous effort was made to see to it that the arguments for the alternatives to nuclear power were given abundant time for presentation. This is ultimately because nuclear power is going to have to compete with all of the energy technologies. Thus, in discussing energy strategy all of the alternatives must be considered in a reasonable fashion. The structure the conference used has seven sessions. The first six led up to the final session which was concerned with what the future nuclear power strategy should be. Each session focused upon a question concerning the future. None of these questions has a unique correct answer. Rather, topics are addressed where reasonable people can disagree. In order to state some of the important arguments for each session`s question, the combination of a keynote paper followed by a respondent was used. The respondent`s paper is not necessarily included to be a rebuttal to the keynote; but rather, it was recognized that two people will look at a complex question with different shadings. Through those two papers the intention was to get out the most important arguments affecting the question for the session. The purpose of the papers was to set the stage for about an hour of discussion. The real product of this conference was that discussion.

  16. Low-level radioactive waste from nuclear power generating stations: Characterization, classification and assessment of activated metals and waste streams

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thomas, V.W.; Robertson, D.E.; Thomas, C.W.

    1993-02-01

    Since the enactment of 10 CFR Part 61, additional difficult-to-measure long-lived radionuclides, not specified in Tables 1 2 of Part 61, have been identified (e.g., {sup 108m}Ag, {sup 93}Mo, {sup 36}Cl, {sup 10}Be, {sup 113m}Cd, {sup 121m}Sn, {sup 126}Sn, {sup 93m}Nb) that may be of concern in certain types of waste. These nuclides are primarily associated with activated metal and perhaps other nuclear power low-level waste (LLW) being sent to disposal facilities. The concentration of a radionuclide in waste materials is normally determined by direct measurement or by indirect calculational methods, such as using a scaling factor to relate inferred concentration of a difficult-to-measure radionuclide to another that is easily measured. The total disposal site inventory of certain difficult-to-measure radionuclides (e.g., {sup 14}C, {sup 129}I, and {sup 99}Tc) often control the total quantities of radioactive waste permitted in LLW burial facilities. Overly conservative scaling factors based on lower limits of detection (LLD), often used in the nuclear power industry to estimate these controlling nuclides, could lead to premature closure of a disposal facility. Samples of LLW (Class B and C activated metals [AM] and other waste streams) are being collected from operating nuclear power stations and analyzed for radionuclides covered in 10 CFR Part 61 and the additional difficult-to-measure radionuclides. This analysis will enhance the NRC`s understanding of the distribution and projected quantities of radionuclides within AM and LLW streams from commercial nuclear power stations. This research will also provide radiological characterization of AM specimens for others to use in leach-rate and lysimeter experiments to determine nuclide releases and subsequent movement in natural soil environments.

  17. Low-level radioactive waste from nuclear power generating stations: Characterization, classification and assessment of activated metals and waste streams

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thomas, V.W.; Robertson, D.E.; Thomas, C.W.

    1993-02-01

    Since the enactment of 10 CFR Part 61, additional difficult-to-measure long-lived radionuclides, not specified in Tables 1 2 of Part 61, have been identified (e.g., [sup 108m]Ag, [sup 93]Mo, [sup 36]Cl, [sup 10]Be, [sup 113m]Cd, [sup 121m]Sn, [sup 126]Sn, [sup 93m]Nb) that may be of concern in certain types of waste. These nuclides are primarily associated with activated metal and perhaps other nuclear power low-level waste (LLW) being sent to disposal facilities. The concentration of a radionuclide in waste materials is normally determined by direct measurement or by indirect calculational methods, such as using a scaling factor to relate inferred concentration of a difficult-to-measure radionuclide to another that is easily measured. The total disposal site inventory of certain difficult-to-measure radionuclides (e.g., [sup 14]C, [sup 129]I, and [sup 99]Tc) often control the total quantities of radioactive waste permitted in LLW burial facilities. Overly conservative scaling factors based on lower limits of detection (LLD), often used in the nuclear power industry to estimate these controlling nuclides, could lead to premature closure of a disposal facility. Samples of LLW (Class B and C activated metals [AM] and other waste streams) are being collected from operating nuclear power stations and analyzed for radionuclides covered in 10 CFR Part 61 and the additional difficult-to-measure radionuclides. This analysis will enhance the NRC's understanding of the distribution and projected quantities of radionuclides within AM and LLW streams from commercial nuclear power stations. This research will also provide radiological characterization of AM specimens for others to use in leach-rate and lysimeter experiments to determine nuclide releases and subsequent movement in natural soil environments.

  18. Minnesota Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy...

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

    Minnesota" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",36125,36463,34879,32263,32454 " Coal",33070,32190,31755,29327,28083 " Petroleum",494,405,232,65,31 " Natural ...

  19. Ohio Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Ohio" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Geothermal","-","-","-","-","-" "Hydro Conventional",632,410,386,528,429 "Solar","-","-","-","-",13 "Wind",14,15,15,14,13 "Wood/Wood Waste",410,399,418,410,399 "MSW Biogenic/Landfill Gas",24,11,183,198,264 "Other Biomass",10,10,8,11,12 "Total",1091,846,1010,1161,1

  20. Oklahoma Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Oklahoma" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Geothermal","-","-","-","-","-" "Hydro Conventional",624,3066,3811,3553,2809 "Solar","-","-","-","-","-" "Wind",1712,1849,2358,2698,3808 "Wood/Wood Waste",297,276,23,68,255 "MSW Biogenic/Landfill Gas","-",4,5,"-","-" "Other

  1. Oregon Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Oregon" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Geothermal","-","-","-","-","-" "Hydro Conventional",37850,33587,33805,33034,30542 "Solar","-","-","-","-","-" "Wind",931,1247,2575,3470,3920 "Wood/Wood Waste",799,843,717,674,632 "MSW Biogenic/Landfill Gas",71,100,131,128,205 "Other

  2. Pennsylvania Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Pennsylvania" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Geothermal","-","-","-","-","-" "Hydro Conventional",2844,2236,2549,2683,2332 "Solar","-","-","s",4,8 "Wind",361,470,729,1075,1854 "Wood/Wood Waste",683,620,658,694,675 "MSW Biogenic/Landfill Gas",1411,1441,1414,1577,1706 "Other Biomass",18,16,2,3,3

  3. Louisiana Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Louisiana" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Geothermal","-","-","-","-","-" "Hydro Conventional",713,827,1064,1236,1109 "Solar","-","-","-","-","-" "Wind","-","-","-","-","-" "Wood/Wood Waste",2881,2898,2639,2297,2393 "MSW Biogenic/Landfill

  4. Maine Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Maine" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Geothermal","-","-","-","-","-" "Hydro Conventional",4278,3738,4457,4212,3810 "Solar","-","-","-","-","-" "Wind","-",99,132,299,499 "Wood/Wood Waste",3685,3848,3669,3367,3390 "MSW Biogenic/Landfill Gas",235,208,206,232,237 "Other Biomass",48,52,52,41,27

  5. Maryland Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Maryland" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Geothermal","-","-","-","-","-" "Hydro Conventional",2104,1652,1974,1889,1667 "Solar","-","-","-","-","s" "Wind","-","-","-","-",1 "Wood/Wood Waste",218,203,198,175,165 "MSW Biogenic/Landfill Gas",408,400,415,376,407 "Other

  6. Massachusetts Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Massachusetts" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Geothermal","-","-","-","-","-" "Hydro Conventional",1513,797,1156,1201,996 "Solar","-","-","s","s",1 "Wind","-","-",4,6,22 "Wood/Wood Waste",125,119,123,115,125 "MSW Biogenic/Landfill Gas",1126,1094,1128,1104,1125 "Other Biomass",27,27,2,4,1

  7. Michigan Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Michigan" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Geothermal","-","-","-","-","-" "Hydro Conventional",1520,1270,1364,1372,1251 "Solar","-","-","-","-","-" "Wind",2,3,141,300,360 "Wood/Wood Waste",1704,1692,1710,1489,1670 "MSW Biogenic/Landfill Gas",735,721,738,829,795 "Other Biomass",2,1,1,5,8

  8. Minnesota Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Minnesota" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Geothermal","-","-","-","-","-" "Hydro Conventional",572,654,727,809,840 "Solar","-","-","-","-","-" "Wind",2055,2639,4355,5053,4792 "Wood/Wood Waste",590,727,725,796,933 "MSW Biogenic/Landfill Gas",412,423,399,384,340 "Other Biomass",3,143,372,503,576

  9. Mississippi Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Mississippi" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Geothermal","-","-","-","-","-" "Hydro Conventional","-","-","-","-","-" "Solar","-","-","-","-","-" "Wind","-","-","-","-","-" "Wood/Wood Waste",1535,1488,1386,1417,1503 "MSW

  10. Missouri Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Missouri" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Geothermal","-","-","-","-","-" "Hydro Conventional",199,1204,2047,1817,1539 "Solar","-","-","-","-","-" "Wind","-","-",203,499,925 "Wood/Wood Waste","s","s",2,2,"s" "MSW Biogenic/Landfill Gas",15,22,30,50,58 "Other

  11. Montana Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Montana" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Geothermal","-","-","-","-","-" "Hydro Conventional",10130,9364,10000,9506,9415 "Solar","-","-","-","-","-" "Wind",436,496,593,821,930 "Wood/Wood Waste",94,111,111,95,97 "MSW Biogenic/Landfill Gas","-","-","-","-","-"

  12. Nebraska Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Nebraska" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Geothermal","-","-","-","-","-" "Hydro Conventional",893,347,346,434,1314 "Solar","-","-","-","-","-" "Wind",261,217,214,383,422 "Wood/Wood Waste","-","-","-","-","-" "MSW Biogenic/Landfill Gas",37,46,45,47,53 "Other

  13. Nevada Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Nevada" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Geothermal",1344,1253,1383,1633,2070 "Hydro Conventional",2058,2003,1751,2461,2157 "Solar","-",44,156,174,217 "Wind","-","-","-","-","-" "Wood/Wood Waste","-","-","-",1,"-" "MSW Biogenic/Landfill Gas","-","-","-","-","-"

  14. FY 2002 Generation Audited Accumulated Net Revenues, February...

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

    to rates for the FY 2003- 2006 period through the SN CRAC to achieve a five-year 80% TPP, then applying no further FB or SN CRAC adjustments, potentially combined with using...

  15. Connecticut Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by...

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

    Connecticut" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",16046,14982,12970,12562,147...wables",1307,1093,1290,1268,1130 "Pumped Storage","-",-15,7,5,9 "Other",739,726,710,713,71...

  16. Alabama Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Alabama" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Geothermal","-","-","-","-","-" "Hydro Conventional",7252,4136,6136,12535,8704 "Solar","-","-","-","-","-" "Wind","-","-","-","-","-" "Wood/Wood Waste",3865,3784,3324,3035,2365 "MSW Biogenic/Landfill

  17. Alaska Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Alaska" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Geothermal","-","-","-","-","-" "Hydro Conventional",1224,1291,1172,1324,1433 "Solar","-","-","-","-","-" "Wind",1,1,"s",7,13 "Wood/Wood Waste",1,"s","-","-","-" "MSW Biogenic/Landfill

  18. Arizona Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Arizona" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Geothermal","-","-","-","-","-" "Hydro Conventional",6793,6598,7286,6427,6622 "Solar",13,9,15,14,16 "Wind","-","-","-",30,135 "Wood/Wood Waste",8,"-",76,137,140 "MSW Biogenic/Landfill Gas",28,29,19,18,24 "Other Biomass",4,4,4,4,4 "Total",6846,6639,7400,6630,694

  19. Arkansas Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    Arkansas" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Geothermal","-","-","-","-","-" "Hydro Conventional",1551,3237,4660,4193,3659 "Solar","-","-","-","-","-" "Wind","-","-","-","-","-" "Wood/Wood Waste",1689,1581,1466,1529,1567 "MSW Biogenic/Landfill Gas",7,33,36,34,38

  20. California Renewable Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    California" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Geothermal",12821,12991,12883,12853,12600 "Hydro Conventional",48047,27328,24128,27888,33431 "Solar",495,557,670,647,769 "Wind",4883,5585,5385,5840,6079 "Wood/Wood Waste",3422,3407,3484,3732,3551 "MSW Biogenic/Landfill Gas",1685,1657,1717,1842,1812 "Other Biomass",610,648,645,626,639 "Total",71963,52173,48912,53428,58881 "