Powered by Deep Web Technologies
Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


1

Storage capacity in hot dry rock reservoirs  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

A method is described for extracting thermal energy, in a cyclic manner, from geologic strata which may be termed hot dry rock. A reservoir comprised of hot fractured rock is established and water or other liquid is passed through the reservoir. The water is heated by the hot rock, recovered from the reservoir, cooled by extraction of heat by means of heat exchange apparatus on the surface, and then re-injected into the reservoir to be heated again. Water is added to the reservoir by means of an injection well and recovered from the reservoir by means of a production well. Water is continuously provided to the reservoir and continuously withdrawn from the reservoir at two different flow rates, a base rate and a peak rate. Increasing water flow from the base rate to the peak rate is accomplished by rapidly decreasing backpressure at the outlet of the production well in order to meet periodic needs for amounts of thermal energy greater than a baseload amount, such as to generate additional electric power to meet peak demands. The rate of flow of water provided to the hot dry rock reservoir is maintained at a value effective to prevent depletion of the liquid inventory of the reservoir. 4 figs.

Brown, D.W.

1997-11-11T23:59:59.000Z

2

Storage capacity in hot dry rock reservoirs  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

A method of extracting thermal energy, in a cyclic manner, from geologic strata which may be termed hot dry rock. A reservoir comprised of hot fractured rock is established and water or other liquid is passed through the reservoir. The water is heated by the hot rock, recovered from the reservoir, cooled by extraction of heat by means of heat exchange apparatus on the surface, and then re-injected into the reservoir to be heated again. Water is added to the reservoir by means of an injection well and recovered from the reservoir by means of a production well. Water is continuously provided to the reservoir and continuously withdrawn from the reservoir at two different flow rates, a base rate and a peak rate. Increasing water flow from the base rate to the peak rate is accomplished by rapidly decreasing backpressure at the outlet of the production well in order to meet periodic needs for amounts of thermal energy greater than a baseload amount, such as to generate additional electric power to meet peak demands. The rate of flow of water provided to the hot dry rock reservoir is maintained at a value effective to prevent depletion of the liquid

Brown, Donald W. (Los Alamos, NM)

1997-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

3

Analytical Estimation of CO2 Storage Capacity in Depleted Oil and Gas Reservoirs Based on Thermodynamic State Functions  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Numerical simulation has been used, as common practice, to estimate the CO2 storage capacity of depleted reservoirs. However, this method is time consuming, expensive and requires detailed input data. This investigation proposes an analytical method to estimate the ultimate CO2 storage in depleted oil and gas reservoirs by implementing a volume constrained thermodynamic equation of state (EOS) using the reservoir?s average pressure and fluid composition. This method was implemented in an algorithm which allows fast and accurate estimations of final storage, which can be used to select target storage reservoirs, and design the injection scheme and surface facilities. Impurities such as nitrogen and carbon monoxide, usually contained in power plant flue gases, are considered in the injection stream and can be handled correctly in the proposed algorithm by using their thermodynamic properties into the EOS. Results from analytical method presented excellent agreement with those from reservoir simulation. Ultimate CO2 storage capacity was predicted with an average difference of 1.3%, molar basis, between analytical and numerical methods; average oil, gas, and water saturations were also matched. Additionally, the analytical algorithm performed several orders of magnitude faster than numerical simulation, with an average of 5 seconds per run.

Valbuena Olivares, Ernesto

2011-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

4

Maximizing Storage Rate and Capacity and Insuring the Environmental Integrity of Carbon Dioxide Sequestration in Geological Reservoirs  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Maximizing Storage Rate and Capacity and Insuring the Environmental Maximizing Storage Rate and Capacity and Insuring the Environmental Integrity of Carbon dioxide Sequestration in Geological Reservoirs L. A. Davis Lorne.Davis@coe.ttu.edu Department of Petroleum Engineering A. L. Graham Alan.Graham@coe.ttu.edu H. W. Parker** Harry.Parker@coe.ttu.edu Department of Chemical Engineering Texas Tech University Lubbock, Texas 79409 M. S. Ingber ingber@me.unm.edu A. A. Mammoli mammoli@me.unm.edu Department of Mechanical Engineering University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131 L. A. Mondy lamondy@engsci.sandia.gov Energetic and Multiphase Processes Department Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185-0834 Quanxin Guo quan@advantekinternational.com Ahmed Abou-Sayed a.abou-sayed@att.net

5

Maximizing Storage Rate and Capacity and Insuring the Environmental Integrity of Carbon Dioxide Sequestration in Geological Reservoirs  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Maximizing Storage Rate and Capacity and Insuring the Environmental Integrity of Carbon Dioxide Sequestration in Geological Formations The U.S. and other countries may enter into an agreement that will require a significant reduction in CO2 emissions in the medium to long term. In order to achieve such goals without drastic reductions in fossil fuel usage, CO2 must be removed from the atmosphere and be stored in acceptable reservoirs. The research outlined in this proposal deals with developing a methodology to determine the suitability of a particular geologic formation for the long-term storage of CO2 and technologies for the economical transfer and storage of CO2 in these formations. A novel well-logging technique using nuclear-magnetic resonance (NMR) will be developed to characterize the geologic formation including the integrity and quality of the reservoir seal (cap rock). Well-logging using NMR does not require coring, and hence, can be performed much more quickly and efficiently. The key element in the economical transfer and storage of the CO2 is hydraulic fracturing the formation to achieve greater lateral spreads and higher throughputs of CO2. Transport, compression, and drilling represent the main costs in CO2 sequestration. The combination of well-logging and hydraulic fracturing has the potential of minimizing these costs. It is possible through hydraulic fracturing to reduce the number of injection wells by an order of magnitude. Many issues will be addressed as part of the proposed research to maximize the storage rate and capacity and insure the environmental integrity of CO2 sequestration in geological formations. First, correlations between formation properties and NMR relaxation times will be firmly established. A detailed experimental program will be conducted to determine these correlations. Second, improved hydraulic fracturing models will be developed which are suitable for CO2 sequestration as opposed to enhanced oil recovery (EOR). Although models that simulate the fracturing process exist, they can be significantly improved by extending the models to account for nonsymmetric, nonplanar fractures, coupling the models to more realistic reservoir simulators, and implementing advanced multiphase flow models for the transport of proppant. Third, it may be possible to deviate from current hydraulic fracturing technology by using different proppants (possibly waste materials that need to be disposed of, e.g., asbestos) combined with different hydraulic fracturing carrier fluids (possibly supercritical CO2 itself). Because current technology is mainly aimed at enhanced oil recovery, it may not be ideally suited for the injection and storage of CO2. Finally, advanced concepts such as increasing the injectivity of the fractured geologic formations through acidization with carbonated water will be investigated. Saline formations are located through most of the continental United States. Generally, where saline formations are scarce, oil and gas reservoirs and coal beds abound. By developing the technology outlined here, it will be possible to remove CO2 at the source (power plants, industry) and inject it directly into nearby geological formations, without releasing it into the atmosphere. The goal of the proposed research is to develop a technology capable of sequestering CO2 in geologic formations at a cost of US $10 per ton.

L.A. Davis; A.L. Graham; H.W. Parker; J.R. Abbott; M.S. Ingber; A.A. Mammoli; L.A. Mondy; Quanxin Guo; Ahmed Abou-Sayed

2005-12-07T23:59:59.000Z

6

FAQs about Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

about Storage Capacity about Storage Capacity How do I determine if my tanks are in operation or idle or non-reportable? Refer to the following flowchart. Should idle capacity be included with working capacity? No, only report working capacity of tanks and caverns in operation, but not for idle tanks and caverns. Should working capacity match net available shell in operation/total net available shell capacity? Working capacity should be less than net available shell capacity because working capacity excludes contingency space and tank bottoms. What is the difference between net available shell capacity in operation and total net available shell capacity? Net available shell capacity in operation excludes capacity of idle tanks and caverns. What do you mean by transshipment tanks?

7

Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

8

Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Methodology Methodology Methodology Demonstrated Peak Working Gas Capacity Estimates: Estimates are based on aggregation of the noncoincident peak levels of working gas inventories at individual storage fields as reported monthly over a 60-month period ending in April 2010 on Form EIA-191M, "Monthly Natural Gas Underground Storage Report." The months of measurement for the peak storage volumes by facilities may differ; i.e., the months do not necessarily coincide. As such, the noncoincident peak for any region is at least as big as any monthly volume in the historical record. Data from Form EIA-191M, "Monthly Natural Gas Underground Storage Report," are collected from storage operators on a field-level basis. Operators can report field-level data either on a per reservoir basis or on an aggregated reservoir basis. It is possible that if all operators reported on a per reservoir basis that the demonstrated peak working gas capacity would be larger. Additionally, these data reflect inventory levels as of the last day of the report month, and a facility may have reached a higher inventory on a different day of the report month, which would not be recorded on Form EIA-191M.

9

EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Salt Cavern Storage Reservoir...  

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

Salt Cavern Underground Natural Gas Storage Reservoir Configuration Salt Cavern Underground Natural Gas Storage Reservoir Configuration Source: PB Energy Storage Services Inc....

10

High Capacity Hydrogen Storage Nanocomposite - Energy ...  

Energy Storage Advanced Materials High Capacity Hydrogen Storage Nanocomposite Processes to add metal hydrideds to nanocarbon structures to yield high capacity ...

11

California Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) California Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

12

Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity...  

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

Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

13

Missouri Natural Gas Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity ...  

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

Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

14

Mississippi Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Mississippi Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

15

Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity...  

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

Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

16

Pennsylvania Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

17

Washington Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Washington Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

18

Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

. . Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity by State, December 31, 1996 (Capacity in Billion Cubic Feet) Table State Interstate Companies Intrastate Companies Independent Companies Total Number of Active Fields Capacity Number of Active Fields Capacity Number of Active Fields Capacity Number of Active Fields Capacity Percent of U.S. Capacity Alabama................. 0 0 1 3 0 0 1 3 0.04 Arkansas ................ 0 0 3 32 0 0 3 32 0.40 California................ 0 0 10 470 0 0 10 470 5.89 Colorado ................ 4 66 5 34 0 0 9 100 1.25 Illinois ..................... 6 259 24 639 0 0 30 898 11.26 Indiana ................... 6 16 22 97 0 0 28 113 1.42 Iowa ....................... 4 270 0 0 0 0 4 270 3.39 Kansas ................... 16 279 2 6 0 0 18 285 3.57 Kentucky ................ 6 167 18 49 0 0 24 216 2.71 Louisiana................ 8 530 4 25 0 0 12 555 6.95 Maryland ................ 1 62

19

Underground natural gas storage reservoir management  

SciTech Connect

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

Ortiz, I.; Anthony, R.

1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

20

Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity  

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

and tank farms. Excludes storage capacity of refineries, fuel ethanol plants, and pipelines. 2 Percent exclusive use is that portion of capacity in operation that is for the...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


21

Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity  

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

Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity With Data for September 2013 | Release Date: November 27, 2013 | Next Release Date: May 29, 2013 Previous Issues Year: September 2013 March 2013 September 2012 March 2012 September 2011 March 2011 September 2010 Go Containing storage capacity data for crude oil, petroleum products, and selected biofuels. The report includes tables detailing working and net available shell storage capacity by type of facility, product, and Petroleum Administration for Defense District (PAD District). Net available shell storage capacity is broken down further to show the percent for exclusive use by facility operators and the percent leased to others. Crude oil storage capacity data are also provided for Cushing, Oklahoma, an

22

Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Containing storage capacity data for crude oil, petroleum products, and selected biofuels. The report includes tables detailing working and net available shell ...

23

,"Texas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity",11,"Annual",2011,"6301988" ,"Release...

24

,"Natural Gas Depleted Fields Storage Capacity "  

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

Depleted Fields Storage Capacity " ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Natural...

25

,"Natural Gas Salt Caverns Storage Capacity "  

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

Salt Caverns Storage Capacity " ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Natural Gas...

26

Optimization of Storage vs. Compression Capacity  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Storage Volume vs. Compression Capacity Amgad Elgowainy Argonne National Laboratory Presentation at CSD Workshop Argonne National Laboratory March 21, 2013 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 100...

27

,"Illinois Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Illinois Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","52013" ,"Release...

28

Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Definitions Definitions Definitions Since 2006, EIA has reported two measures of aggregate capacity, one based on demonstrated peak working gas storage, the other on working gas design capacity. Demonstrated Peak Working Gas Capacity: This measure sums the highest storage inventory level of working gas observed in each facility over the 5-year range from May 2005 to April 2010, as reported by the operator on the Form EIA-191M, "Monthly Underground Gas Storage Report." This data-driven estimate reflects actual operator experience. However, the timing for peaks for different fields need not coincide. Also, actual available maximum capacity for any storage facility may exceed its reported maximum storage level over the last 5 years, and is virtually certain to do so in the case of newly commissioned or expanded facilities. Therefore, this measure provides a conservative indicator of capacity that may understate the amount that can actually be stored.

29

Illinois Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 View History Total Storage Capacity 984,768 980,691...

30

,"California Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)...  

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

,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"10312013 6:21:10 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: California Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290CA2"...

31

Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Note: 1) 'Demonstrated Peak Working Gas Capacity' is the sum of the highest storage inventory level of working gas observed in each facility over the prior 5-year period as...

32

EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Aquifer Storage Reservoir...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Aquifer Storage Reservoir Configuration About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 20072008 with selected updates Aquifer Underground...

33

EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Depleted Reservoir Storage...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Depleted Reservoir Storage Configuration About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 20072008 with selected updates Depleted Production...

34

Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic...  

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

View History: Monthly Annual Download Data (XLS File) Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

35

Working crude oil storage capacity at Cushing, Oklahoma rises ...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Greenhouse gas data, ... as reported in EIA's recently released report on Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity. Utilization of working storage capacity ...

36

Estimates of Peak Underground Working Gas Storage Capacity in the ...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Estimates of Peak Underground Working Gas Storage Capacity in the United States, 2009 Update The aggregate peak capacity for U.S. underground natural gas storage is ...

37

Lower 48 States Total Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity...  

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

data. Release Date: 9302013 Next Release Date: 10312013 Referring Pages: Total Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity Lower 48 States Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity...

38

Indiana Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

39

Wyoming Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

40

Louisiana Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity ...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Louisiana Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


41

Louisiana Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

42

Virginia Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

43

New Mexico Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

44

Washington Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Washington Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

45

Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (Million...  

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

Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

46

Illinois Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

47

New York Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) New York Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

48

Maryland Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Maryland Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

49

Oklahoma Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

50

Alabama Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

51

Kansas Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

52

Utah Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Utah Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

53

Tennessee Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity ...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Tennessee Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

54

Maryland Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity...  

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

Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Maryland Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

55

Missouri Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

56

Oregon Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Oregon Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

57

Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity...  

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

Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1...

58

Colorado Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

59

Montana Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

60

Minnesota Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


61

Arkansas Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

62

Minnesota Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity ...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Minnesota Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

63

Iowa Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Iowa Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

64

Nebraska Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity...  

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

Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

65

Nebraska Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

66

California Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) California Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

67

Texas Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

68

Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity...  

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

Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

69

Colorado Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity...  

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

Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

70

Pennsylvania Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

71

Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity...  

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

Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

72

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

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Revision to Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity as of September 30, 2010 . Crude oil storage capacity data at tank farms reported for PAD District 2 and ...

73

Kentucky Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Kentucky Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

74

Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity...  

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

Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

75

Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity...  

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

Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

76

Montana Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity...  

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

Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

77

Michigan Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Michigan Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

78

Ohio Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

79

Mississippi Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Mississippi Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

80

Underground Natural Gas Working Storage Capacity - Methodology  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Summary Prices Exploration & Reserves Production Imports/Exports Pipelines Storage Consumption All Natural Gas Data Reports Analysis & Projections Most Requested Consumption Exploration & Reserves Imports/Exports & Pipelines Prices Production Projections Storage All Reports ‹ See All Natural Gas Reports Underground Natural Gas Working Storage Capacity With Data for November 2012 | Release Date: July 24, 2013 | Next Release Date: Spring 2014 Previous Issues Year: 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 Go Methodology Demonstrated Peak Working Gas Capacity Estimates: Estimates are based on aggregation of the noncoincident peak levels of working gas inventories at individual storage fields as reported monthly over a 60-month period ending in November 2012 on Form EIA-191, "Monthly Natural Gas Underground Storage

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


81

Underground Gas Storage Reservoirs (West Virginia) | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Gas Storage Reservoirs (West Virginia) Gas Storage Reservoirs (West Virginia) Underground Gas Storage Reservoirs (West Virginia) < Back Eligibility Utility Fed. Government Commercial Agricultural Investor-Owned Utility State/Provincial Govt Industrial Construction Municipal/Public Utility Local Government Residential Installer/Contractor Rural Electric Cooperative Tribal Government Low-Income Residential Schools Retail Supplier Institutional Multi-Family Residential Systems Integrator Fuel Distributor Nonprofit General Public/Consumer Transportation Program Info State West Virginia Program Type Safety and Operational Guidelines Provider West Virginia Department of Commerce Lays out guidelines for the conditions under which coal mining operations must notify state authorities of intentions to mine where underground gas

82

Working crude oil storage capacity at Cushing, Oklahoma ...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

... coal in the United States? ... 2012 working crude oil storage capacity at the Cushing, Oklahoma storage and trading hub was 61.9 million barrels, ...

83

Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity  

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

Net Available Shell Storage Capacity by PAD District as of September 30, 2013 Net Available Shell Storage Capacity by PAD District as of September 30, 2013 (Thousand Barrels) Commodity In Operation Idle 1 In Operation Idle 1 In Operation Idle 1 In Operation Idle 1 In Operation Idle 1 In Operation Idle 1 Refineries Crude Oil 17,334 831 21,870 1,721 86,629 3,468 4,655 174 39,839 1,230 170,327 7,424 Fuel Ethanol 174 - 175 1 289 - 134 - 92 - 864 1 Natural Gas Plant Liquids and Liquefied Refinery Gases 2 1,267 23 11,599 382 28,865 78 641 19 2,412 23 44,784 525 Propane/Propylene (dedicated)

84

Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity  

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

Working Storage Capacity by PAD District as of September 30, 2013 Working Storage Capacity by PAD District as of September 30, 2013 (Thousand Barrels) Commodity 1 2 3 4 5 U.S. Total Ending Stocks Utilization Rate 1 Refineries Crude Oil 15,154 17,952 72,858 4,109 35,324 145,397 90,778 62% Fuel Ethanol 151 142 257 114 79 743 482 65% Natural Gas Plant Liquids and Liquefied Refinery Gases 2 1,149 10,996 24,902 581 2,219 39,847 19,539 49% Propane/Propylene (dedicated) 3 405 3,710 3,886 54 199 8,254 4,104 NA Motor Gasoline (incl. Motor Gasoline Blending Components)

85

Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity  

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

Working and Net Available Shell Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity November 2013 With Data as of September 30, 2013 Independent Statistics & Analysis www.eia.gov U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity as of September 30, 2013 This report was prepared by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the statistical and analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. By law, EIA's data, analyses, and forecasts are independent of approval by any other officer or employee of the United States Government. The views in this report therefore should not be construed as representing those of the Department of Energy or

86

Gulf Coast (PADD 3) Shell Storage Capacity at Operable Refineries  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Propane/Propylene: 4,376: 3,520: 3,565-----1982-2013: ... Notes: Shell storage capacity is the design capacity of the tank. See Definitions, Sources, ...

87

Montana Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Montana Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

88

Utah Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Utah Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

89

Virginia Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Virginia Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

90

Kansas Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Kansas Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

91

Alabama Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Alabama Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

92

Michigan Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Michigan Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

93

Maryland Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Maryland Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

94

Arkansas Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Arkansas Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

95

Iowa Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Iowa Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

96

Colorado Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Colorado Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

97

Illinois Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Illinois Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

98

Nebraska Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Nebraska Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

99

Texas Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Texas Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

100

Ohio Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Ohio Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


101

Missouri Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Missouri Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

102

Oklahoma Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Oklahoma Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

103

Indiana Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Indiana Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

104

Wyoming Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Wyoming Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

105

Oregon Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Oregon Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

106

Kentucky Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Kentucky Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

107

New Mexico Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity...  

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

Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) New Mexico Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

108

Injecting Carbon Dioxide into Unconventional Storage Reservoirs...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

will also be investigated with a targeted CO 2 injection test into a depleted shale gas well. Different reservoir models will be used before, during, and after injection...

109

Underground natural gas storage reservoir management: Phase 2. Final report, June 1, 1995--March 30, 1996  

SciTech Connect

Gas storage operators are facing increased and more complex responsibilities for managing storage operations under Order 636 which requires unbundling of storage from other pipeline services. Low cost methods that improve the accuracy of inventory verification are needed to optimally manage this stored natural gas. Migration of injected gas out of the storage reservoir has not been well documented by industry. The first portion of this study addressed the scope of unaccounted for gas which may have been due to migration. The volume range was estimated from available databases and reported on an aggregate basis. Information on working gas, base gas, operating capacity, injection and withdrawal volumes, current and non-current revenues, gas losses, storage field demographics and reservoir types is contained among the FERC Form 2, EIA Form 191, AGA and FERC Jurisdictional databases. The key elements of this study show that gas migration can result if reservoir limits have not been properly identified, gas migration can occur in formation with extremely low permeability (0.001 md), horizontal wellbores can reduce gas migration losses and over-pressuring (unintentionally) storage reservoirs by reinjecting working gas over a shorter time period may increase gas migration effects.

Ortiz, I.; Anthony, R.V.

1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

110

Total Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity  

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

Capacity Working Gas Capacity of Salt Caverns Working Gas Capacity of Aquifers Working Gas Capacity of Depleted Fields Total Number of Existing Fields Number of Existing Salt...

111

Alabama Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 View History Total Storage Capacity 19,300 26,900 26,900 32,900 35,400 35,400 1995-2012 Salt Caverns

112

Wyoming Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 View History Total Storage Capacity 114,067 111,167 111,120 111,120 106,764 124,937 1988-2012

113

Indiana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 View History Total Storage Capacity 114,294 114,937 114,274 111,271 111,313 110,749 1988-2012

114

Louisiana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 View History Total Storage Capacity 588,711 615,858 651,968 670,880 690,295 699,646 1988-2012

115

Montana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 View History Total Storage Capacity 374,201 374,201 376,301 376,301 376,301 376,301 1988-2012

116

Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 View History Total Storage Capacity 9,560 6,200 9,500 9,500 9,500 9,500 1998-2012 Salt Caverns

117

Mississippi Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 View History Total Storage Capacity 166,909 187,251 210,128 235,638 240,241 289,416 1988-2012

118

Pennsylvania Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 View History Total Storage Capacity 759,365 759,153 776,964 776,822 776,845 774,309 1988-2012

119

Maryland Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 View History Total Storage Capacity 64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 1988-2012 Salt Caverns

120

Ohio Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 View History Total Storage Capacity 572,477 572,477 580,380 580,380 580,380 577,944 1988-2012

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


121

Texas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 View History Total Storage Capacity 690,678 740,477 766,768 783,579 812,394 831,190 1988-2012

122

Kentucky Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 View History Total Storage Capacity 220,359 220,359 220,368 221,751 221,751 221,751 1988-2012

123

Oregon Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 View History Total Storage Capacity 29,415 29,415 29,565 29,565 29,565 28,750 1989-2012 Salt Caverns

124

Michigan Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 View History Total Storage Capacity 1,060,558 1,062,339 1,069,405 1,069,898 1,075,472 1,078,979

125

Tennessee Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 View History Total Storage Capacity 1,200 1,200 1,200 0 1998-2012 Salt Caverns 0 1999-2012

126

Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity as of March...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

includes tables detailing working and net available shell storage capacity by type of facility, product, and Petroleum Administration for Defense District (PAD District). Net...

127

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

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

It includes three tables detailing working and net available shell storage capacity by facility type, product, and PAD District as of September 30, 2010.

128

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

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Unfortunately, meaningful storage capacity utilization rates for operators of crude oil tank farms and pipelines, or for operators of products pipelines, ...

129

Estimate of Maximum Underground Working Gas Storage Capacity in ...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Estimate of Maximum Underground Working Gas Storage Capacity in the United States: 2007 Update This report provides an update to an estimate for U.S. aggregate ...

130

Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic...  

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

Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013 17,902 17,902 83,592...

131

U.S. Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Acquifers Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) U.S. Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6...

132

New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity...  

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

Acquifers Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6...

133

New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity...  

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

Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4...

134

Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)  

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

New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields Estimated Production Number of Producing Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Oil...

135

Underground Natural Gas Working Storage Capacity - Energy ...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

... (see Table 1), and why any given week's storage ... Demonstrated maximum working gas volume is the sum of the highest storage inventory levels of ...

136

Constrained flow control in storage networks: Capacity maximization and balancing  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This paper studies the control of distributed storage networks with guarantees of constraints satisfaction and asymptotic stability. We consider two problems: network capacity maximization and network balancing. In the first part of the paper we describe ... Keywords: Capacity maximization, Load balancing, Model predictive control, Reachable sets, Storage networks

Claus Danielson, Francesco Borrelli, Douglas Oliver, Dyche Anderson, Tony Phillips

2013-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

137

Underground Natural Gas Working Storage Capacity - Energy Information  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Underground Natural Gas Working Storage Capacity Underground Natural Gas Working Storage Capacity With Data for November 2012 | Release Date: July 24, 2013 | Next Release Date: Spring 2014 Previous Issues Year: 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 Go Overview Natural gas working storage capacity increased by about 2 percent in the Lower 48 states between November 2011 and November 2012. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) has two measures of working gas storage capacity, and both increased by similar amounts: Demonstrated maximum volume increased 1.8 percent to 4,265 billion cubic feet (Bcf) Design capacity increased 2.0 percent to 4,575 Bcf Maximum demonstrated working gas volume is an operational measure of the highest level of working gas reported at each storage facility at any time

138

Task Force on CO2 Storage Capacity Estimation for the Technical Group (TG) of the Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum (CSLF)  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Force has previously issued a Phase I report (in August 2005) which served to document the nature of the problem such as the relationship between assessment scale and the level of detail and resolution of the storage capacity. This report of the Task Force’s Phase II activities summarizes the Phase I findings and provides suggested methodologies for the estimation of CO2 storage capacity in three types of geologic structures: uneconomic coal beds, oil and gas reservoirs, and deep saline aquifers. Estimation of CO2 Storage Capacity in Geological Media

Stefan Bachu (canada; Didier Bonijoly (france; John Bradshaw (australia; Robert Burruss (usa; Niels Peter Christensen (ec; Sam Holloway (uk

2007-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

139

Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Peak Working Natural Gas Capacity. Data and Analysis from the Energy Information Administration (U.S. Dept. of Energy)

140

Nanocomposite for High Capacity Hydrogen Storage  

Researchers at Berkeley Lab have designed a new composite material for hydrogen storage. The nanocomposite materials rapidly absorbs and releases hydr ...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


141

Underground Natural Gas Working Storage Capacity - Energy ...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

... Demonstrated maximum working gas volume is the sum of the highest storage inventory levels of working gas observed in each facility over the previous 5-year ...

142

Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Related Links: Storage Basics: ... natural gas consumption declined roughly 2 percent from the previous year a reflection of 2009's mild temperatures and weak ...

143

Carbon sequestration in natural gas reservoirs: Enhanced gas recovery and natural gas storage  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

as cushion gas for natural gas storage, Energy and Fuels,GAS RECOVERY AND NATURAL GAS STORAGE Curtis M. Oldenburgits operation as a natural gas storage reservoir. In this

Oldenburg, Curtis M.

2003-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

144

Total Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Gas Capacity Total Number of Existing Fields Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes...

145

,"Nebraska Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Nebraska Underground Natural Gas...

146

,"Kentucky Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kentucky Underground Natural Gas...

147

,"Wyoming Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Wyoming Underground Natural Gas...

148

,"Minnesota Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Minnesota Underground Natural Gas...

149

,"Maryland Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Maryland Underground Natural Gas...

150

,"Indiana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Indiana Underground Natural Gas...

151

,"West Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","West Virginia Underground Natural...

152

,"Michigan Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Michigan Underground Natural Gas...

153

,"California Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California Underground Natural...

154

,"Mississippi Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Mississippi Underground Natural...

155

,"Arkansas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Arkansas Underground Natural Gas...

156

,"Alabama Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alabama Underground Natural Gas...

157

,"Oregon Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Oregon Underground Natural Gas...

158

,"New York Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New York Underground Natural Gas...

159

,"Missouri Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Missouri Underground Natural Gas...

160

,"Oklahoma Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Oklahoma Underground Natural Gas...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


161

,"Washington Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Washington Underground Natural...

162

,"Kansas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kansas Underground Natural Gas...

163

,"New Mexico Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Underground Natural...

164

,"Montana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Montana Underground Natural Gas...

165

,"Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Virginia Underground Natural Gas...

166

,"Colorado Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Colorado Underground Natural Gas...

167

,"Utah Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Utah Underground Natural Gas...

168

,"Tennessee Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Tennessee Underground Natural Gas...

169

,"Louisiana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana Underground Natural Gas...

170

,"Ohio Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Ohio Underground Natural Gas...

171

,"Pennsylvania Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

Capacity" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Pennsylvania Underground Natural...

172

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

SciTech Connect

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

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

2012-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

173

Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Salt Caverns Capacity ...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Salt Caverns Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9; 1990's:

174

,"U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

586-8800",,,"9302013 5:36:07 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity" "Sourcekey","N5290US2","NGAEPG0SACW0NUSMMCF","NA1394NUS8"...

175

,"New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)...  

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

,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"10312013 6:21:22 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290NM2" "Date","New...

176

Natural and industrial analogues for release of CO2 from storage reservoirs: Identification of features, events, and processes and lessons learned  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

reservoirs and natural gas storage facilities, respectively,reservoirs and natural gas storage facilities. Nonetheless,USA The Yaggy natural gas storage facility is located seven

Lewicki, Jennifer L.; Birkholzer, Jens; Tsang, Chin-Fu

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

177

Utah Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

124,465 124,465 124,465 124,465 124,465 124,465 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 54,898 54,898 54,898 54,898 54,898 54,898 2012-2013 Total Number of Existing Fields 3 3 3 3 3...

178

Ohio Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

577,944 577,944 577,944 577,944 577,944 577,944 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 230,350 228,030 228,030 228,030 228,030 230,828 2012-2013 Total Number of Existing Fields 24 24...

179

Michigan Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

1,078,979 1,078,979 1,078,979 1,079,424 1,079,424 1,079,424 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 673,200 673,200 674,010 674,455 674,455 674,967 2012-2013 Total Number of Existing...

180

Maryland Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 1988-2011 Salt Caverns 0 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 1999-2011 Total Working Gas Capacity 17,300...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


181

Pennsylvania Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

774,309 774,309 774,309 774,309 774,309 774,309 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 434,174 433,084 433,084 433,084 433,084 433,214 2012-2013 Total Number of Existing Fields 51 51...

182

Oregon Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

29,565 29,565 29,565 29,565 29,565 29,565 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 15,935 15,935 15,935 15,935 15,935 15,935 2012-2013 Total Number of Existing Fields 7 7 7 7 7 7...

183

Colorado Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

122,086 122,086 122,086 122,086 122,086 122,086 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 60,582 60,582 60,582 60,582 60,582 60,582 2012-2013 Total Number of Existing Fields 10 10 10 10...

184

Iowa Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

288,210 288,210 288,210 288,210 288,210 288,210 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 90,313 90,313 90,313 90,313 90,313 90,313 2012-2013 Total Number of Existing Fields 4 4 4 4 4 4...

185

Tennessee Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 0 1998-2011 Salt Caverns 0 1999-2011 Aquifers 0 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 0 1999-2011 Total Working Gas Capacity 860 860 0 2008-2011...

186

Arkansas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

21,853 21,853 21,853 21,853 21,853 21,853 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 12,178 12,178 12,178 12,178 12,178 12,178 2012-2013 Total Number of Existing Fields 2 2 2 2 2 2...

187

Iowa Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

275,200 278,238 284,747 284,811 288,010 288,210 1988-2011 Aquifers 275,200 278,238 284,747 284,811 288,010 288,210 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 0 1999-2011 Total Working Gas Capacity...

188

Washington Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

43,316 39,341 39,287 39,210 41,309 43,673 1988-2011 Aquifers 43,316 39,341 39,287 39,210 41,309 43,673 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 0 1999-2011 Total Working Gas Capacity 23,033...

189

Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

9,500 9,500 9,500 9,500 9,500 9,500 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 2012-2013 Total Number of Existing Fields 2 2 2 2 2 2...

190

Nebraska Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

39,469 34,850 34,850 34,850 34,850 34,850 1988-2011 Salt Caverns 0 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 39,469 34,850 34,850 34,850 34,850 34,850 1999-2011 Total Working Gas Capacity 13,619...

191

California Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

592,711 592,711 592,711 592,711 592,711 599,711 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 349,296 349,296 349,296 349,296 349,296 374,296 2012-2013 Total Number of Existing Fields 14 14...

192

Montana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

376,301 376,301 376,301 376,301 376,301 376,301 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 197,501 197,501 197,501 197,501 197,501 197,501 2012-2013 Total Number of Existing Fields 5 5 5...

193

Missouri Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

32,505 32,940 32,876 10,889 11,502 13,845 1988-2011 Aquifers 32,505 32,940 32,876 10,889 11,502 13,845 1999-2011 Total Working Gas Capacity 11,276 3,040 3,656 6,000 2008-2011...

194

Maryland Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

4,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 18,300 18,300 18,300 18,300 18,300 18,300 2012-2013 Total Number of Existing Fields 1 1 1 1 1 1...

195

Missouri Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

13,845 13,845 13,845 13,845 13,845 13,845 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6...

196

Indiana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

110,749 110,749 110,749 110,749 110,749 110,749 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 33,024 33,024 33,024 33,024 33,024 33,024 2012-2013 Total Number of Existing Fields 22 22 22 22...

197

Minnesota Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2...

198

West Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

524,332 524,337 524,337 524,337 524,337 524,337 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 256,454 257,322 257,319 257,315 257,311 258,072 2012-2013 Total Number of Existing Fields 30 30...

199

Illinois Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

999,931 999,931 999,931 999,931 999,931 1,000,281 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 302,962 302,962 302,962 302,962 302,962 303,312 2012-2013 Total Number of Existing Fields 28...

200

Oklahoma Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

370,838 370,838 370,838 370,838 370,838 370,838 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 180,358 180,358 180,358 180,358 180,358 180,358 2012-2013 Total Number of Existing Fields 13 13...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


201

New York Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

245,579 245,579 245,779 245,779 245,779 245,779 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 129,026 129,026 129,221 129,221 129,221 129,551 2012-2013 Total Number of Existing Fields 26 26...

202

Louisiana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

74,940 674,940 708,440 708,303 715,203 714,443 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 399,572 399,572 424,021 423,472 428,072 428,482 2012-2013 Total Number of Existing Fields 17 17...

203

Wyoming Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

124,937 124,937 124,937 157,985 157,985 157,985 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 48,705 48,705 48,705 73,705 73,705 73,705 2012-2013 Total Number of Existing Fields 9 9 9 9 9 9...

204

Kentucky Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

21,723 221,723 221,723 221,723 221,723 221,723 2002-2013 Total Working Gas Capacity 107,600 107,600 107,600 107,600 107,600 107,600 2012-2013 Total Number of Existing Fields 23 23...

205

Minnesota Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 1988-2011 Aquifers 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 1999-2011 Total Working Gas Capacity 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2008-2011 Aquifers 2,000...

206

Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)  

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

Total Working Gas Capacity Total Number of Existing Fields Period: Monthly Annual Total Working Gas Capacity Total Number of Existing Fields Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View History U.S. 9,072,508 9,104,181 9,111,242 9,117,296 9,132,250 9,171,017 1989-2013 Alaska 83,592 83,592 83,592 83,592 83,592 83,592 2013-2013 Lower 48 States 8,988,916 9,020,589 9,027,650 9,033,704 9,048,658 9,087,425 2012-2013 Alabama 35,400 35,400 35,400 35,400 35,400 35,400 2002-2013 Arkansas 21,853 21,853 21,853 21,853 21,853 21,853 2002-2013 California 592,711 592,711 592,711 599,711 599,711 599,711 2002-2013 Colorado 122,086 122,086 122,086 122,086 122,086 122,086 2002-2013

207

Basin-Scale Hydrologic Impacts of CO2 Storage: Regulatory and Capacity Implications  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

response to climate change: capacity of deep saline aquifersO.M. , 2007. CO 2 storage capacity estimation: issues andF. , 2008. CO 2 storage capacity calculations for the Dutch

Birkholzer, J.T.

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

208

,"U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

586-8800",,,"9302013 5:36:07 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity" "Sourcekey","N5290US2","NA1393NUS2","NA1392NUS2","NA1391NUS2","...

209

Natural gas storage working capacity grows 2% in 2012 - Today in ...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

This Week in Petroleum › Weekly Petroleum Status Report › Weekly Natural Gas Storage Report ... This lack of growth in natural gas storage capacity may be partly ...

210

Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity as of March 31, 2011  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity Archives With Data for March 2011 | Release Date: May 31, 2011 Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity is the U.S. Energy Information Administration's (EIA) report containing storage capacity data for crude oil, petroleum products, and selected biofuels. The report includes tables detailing working and net available shell storage capacity by type of facility, product, and Petroleum Administration for Defense District (PAD District). Net available shell storage capacity is broken down further to show the percent for exclusive use by facility operators and the percent leased to others. Crude oil storage capacity data are also provided for Cushing, Oklahoma, an important crude oil market center. Data

211

Carbon sequestration in natural gas reservoirs: Enhanced gas recovery and natural gas storage  

SciTech Connect

Natural gas reservoirs are obvious targets for carbon sequestration by direct carbon dioxide (CO{sub 2}) injection by virtue of their proven record of gas production and integrity against gas escape. Carbon sequestration in depleted natural gas reservoirs can be coupled with enhanced gas production by injecting CO{sub 2} into the reservoir as it is being produced, a process called Carbon Sequestration with Enhanced Gas Recovery (CSEGR). In this process, supercritical CO{sub 2} is injected deep in the reservoir while methane (CH{sub 4}) is produced at wells some distance away. The active injection of CO{sub 2} causes repressurization and CH{sub 4} displacement to allow the control and enhancement of gas recovery relative to water-drive or depletion-drive reservoir operations. Carbon dioxide undergoes a large change in density as CO{sub 2} gas passes through the critical pressure at temperatures near the critical temperature. This feature makes CO{sub 2} a potentially effective cushion gas for gas storage reservoirs. Thus at the end of the CSEGR process when the reservoir is filled with CO{sub 2}, additional benefit of the reservoir may be obtained through its operation as a natural gas storage reservoir. In this paper, we present discussion and simulation results from TOUGH2/EOS7C of gas mixture property prediction, gas injection, repressurization, migration, and mixing processes that occur in gas reservoirs under active CO{sub 2} injection.

Oldenburg, Curtis M.

2003-04-08T23:59:59.000Z

212

Natural and industrial analogues for release of CO2 from storage reservoirs: Identification of features, events, and processes and lessons learned  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

reservoirs and natural gas storage facilities. Nonetheless,USA The Yaggy natural gas storage facility is located sevenreservoirs and natural gas storage facilities, respectively,

Lewicki, Jennifer L.; Birkholzer, Jens; Tsang, Chin-Fu

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

213

Isotopic identification of leakage gas from underground storage reservoirs. Progress report  

SciTech Connect

The Illinois State Geological Survey reports that in areas where bacteriogenic methane occurs in the near-surface groundwater, isotopic analysis of methane reliably distinguishes this gas from gas that has leaked from underground storage reservoirs. Bacteriogenic methane generally has an isotopic-carbon composition of -64 to -90 per mil, whereas the pipeline and reservoir gases analyzed thus far have all had isotopic-carbon compositions in the range of -40 to -46 per mil.

Coleman, D.D.; Meents, W.F.; Liu, C.L.; Keogh, R.A.

1977-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

214

U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 View History Total Storage Capacity 8,402,216 8,498,535 8,655,740 8,763,798 8,849,125 8,991,335

215

Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity as of September 30, 2010 -  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity With Data for September 2010 | Release Date: July 28, 2011 Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity as of September 30, 2010 is the Energy Information Administration's (EIA) first report containing semi-annual storage capacity data. It includes three tables detailing working and net available shell storage capacity by facility type, product, and PAD District as of September 30, 2010. EIA has reported weekly and monthly inventory levels of crude oil and petroleum products for decades. New storage capacity data can help analysts place petroleum inventory levels in context and better understand petroleum market activity and price movements, especially at key market centers such as Cushing, Oklahoma.

216

AGA Producing Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million  

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

Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) AGA Producing Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1994 2,026,828 2,068,220 2,068,220 2,068,428 2,068,428 2,068,428 2,074,428 2,082,928 2,082,928 2,082,928 2,082,928 2,082,928 1995 2,082,928 2,096,611 2,096,611 2,096,176 2,096,176 2,096,176 2,090,331 2,090,331 2,090,331 2,090,331 2,090,331 2,090,331 1996 2,095,131 2,106,116 2,110,116 2,108,116 2,110,116 2,127,294 2,126,618 2,134,784 2,140,284 2,140,284 2,144,784 2,144,784 1997 2,143,603 2,149,088 2,170,288 2,170,288 2,170,178 2,170,178 2,189,642 2,194,242 2,194,242 2,194,242 2,194,242 2,194,242 1998 2,194,242 2,194,242 2,194,242 2,194,242 2,194,242 2,205,540 2,205,540 2,205,540 2,205,540 2,205,540 2,205,540 2,197,859

217

AGA Western Consuming Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity  

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

Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) AGA Western Consuming Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1994 1,226,103 1,232,392 1,232,392 1,232,392 1,232,392 1,232,392 1,232,392 1,232,392 1,232,392 1,232,392 1,232,392 1,232,392 1995 1,232,392 1,233,637 1,233,637 1,233,637 1,233,637 1,243,137 1,237,446 1,237,446 1,237,446 1,237,446 1,237,446 1,237,446 1996 1,237,446 1,237,446 1,237,446 1,237,446 1,237,446 1,228,208 1,270,505 1,270,505 1,270,505 1,270,505 1,270,505 1,270,505 1997 1,228,395 1,228,395 1,228,076 1,228,076 1,228,076 1,228,076 1,228,076 1,228,076 1,228,076 1,228,076 1,228,076 1,228,076 1998 1,228,076 1,228,076 1,228,076 1,228,076 1,228,076 1,122,586 1,122,586 1,122,586 1,122,586 1,122,586 1,122,586 1,122,586

218

AGA Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity  

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

Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) AGA Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1994 4,737,921 4,727,501 4,727,501 4,727,501 4,727,501 4,727,501 4,727,501 4,727,501 4,727,446 4,727,446 4,727,446 4,727,509 1995 4,730,109 4,647,791 4,647,791 4,647,791 4,647,791 4,647,791 4,593,948 4,593,948 4,593,948 4,593,948 4,593,948 4,593,948 1996 4,593,948 4,600,548 4,603,048 4,603,048 4,607,048 4,740,509 4,740,509 4,742,309 4,743,309 4,743,309 4,743,309 4,743,309 1997 4,681,090 4,574,740 4,586,024 4,578,486 4,586,024 4,582,146 4,582,146 4,582,146 4,585,702 4,585,702 4,585,702 4,585,702 1998 4,585,702 4,585,702 4,585,702 4,585,702 4,585,702 4,799,753 4,799,753 4,799,753 4,799,753 4,799,753 4,799,753 4,805,622

219

Potential hazards of compressed air energy storage in depleted natural gas reservoirs.  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

This report is a preliminary assessment of the ignition and explosion potential in a depleted hydrocarbon reservoir from air cycling associated with compressed air energy storage (CAES) in geologic media. The study identifies issues associated with this phenomenon as well as possible mitigating measures that should be considered. Compressed air energy storage (CAES) in geologic media has been proposed to help supplement renewable energy sources (e.g., wind and solar) by providing a means to store energy when excess energy is available, and to provide an energy source during non-productive or low productivity renewable energy time periods. Presently, salt caverns represent the only proven underground storage used for CAES. Depleted natural gas reservoirs represent another potential underground storage vessel for CAES because they have demonstrated their container function and may have the requisite porosity and permeability; however reservoirs have yet to be demonstrated as a functional/operational storage media for compressed air. Specifically, air introduced into a depleted natural gas reservoir presents a situation where an ignition and explosion potential may exist. This report presents the results of an initial study identifying issues associated with this phenomena as well as possible mitigating measures that should be considered.

Cooper, Paul W.; Grubelich, Mark Charles; Bauer, Stephen J.

2011-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

220

Estimate of Maximum Underground Working Gas Storage Capacity in the United States: 2007 Update  

Reports and Publications (EIA)

This report provides an update to an estimate for U.S. aggregate natural gas storage capacity that was released in 2006.

Information Center

2007-10-23T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


221

CO2-Driven Enhanced Gas Recovery and Storage in Depleted Shale Reservoir-A Numerical Simulation Study  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

1 CO2-Driven Enhanced Gas Recovery and Storage in Depleted Shale Reservoir- A Numerical Simulation for storage and enhanced gas recovery may be organic-rich shales, which CO2 is preferentially adsorbed comprehensive simulation studies to better understand CO2 injection process in shale gas reservoir. This paper

Mohaghegh, Shahab

222

Impact of reservoir properties on mixing of inert cushion and natural gas in storage reservoirs.  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

??Underground natural gas storage is a process which effectively balances a variable demand market with a nearly constant supply of energy provided by the pipeline… (more)

Srinivasan, Balaji S.

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

223

A method for quick assessment of CO2 storage capacity in closedand semi-closed saline formations  

SciTech Connect

Saline aquifers of high permeability bounded by overlying/underlying seals may be surrounded laterally by low-permeability zones, possibly caused by natural heterogeneity and/or faulting. Carbon dioxide (CO{sub 2}) injection into and storage in such 'closed' systems with impervious seals, or 'semi-closed' systems with nonideal (low-permeability) seals, is different from that in 'open' systems, from which the displaced brine can easily escape laterally. In closed or semi-closed systems, the pressure buildup caused by continuous industrial-scale CO{sub 2} injection may have a limiting effect on CO{sub 2} storage capacity, because geomechanical damage caused by overpressure needs to be avoided. In this research, a simple analytical method was developed for the quick assessment of the CO{sub 2} storage capacity in such closed and semi-closed systems. This quick-assessment method is based on the fact that native brine (of an equivalent volume) displaced by the cumulative injected CO{sub 2} occupies additional pore volume within the storage formation and the seals, provided by pore and brine compressibility in response to pressure buildup. With nonideal seals, brine may also leak through the seals into overlying/underlying formations. The quick-assessment method calculates these brine displacement contributions in response to an estimated average pressure buildup in the storage reservoir. The CO{sub 2} storage capacity and the transient domain-averaged pressure buildup estimated through the quick-assessment method were compared with the 'true' values obtained using detailed numerical simulations of CO{sub 2} and brine transport in a two-dimensional radial system. The good agreement indicates that the proposed method can produce reasonable approximations for storage-formation-seal systems of various geometric and hydrogeological properties.

Zhou, Q.; Birkholzer, J.; Tsang, C.F.; Rutqvist, J.

2008-02-10T23:59:59.000Z

224

Injection and Reservoir Hazard Management: Mechanical Deformation and Geochemical Alteration at the InSalah CO2 Storage Project  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Injection and Reservoir Hazard Injection and Reservoir Hazard Management: Mechanical Deformation and Geochemical Alteration at the In Salah CO 2 Storage Project Background Safe and permanent storage of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) in geologic reservoirs is critical to geologic sequestration. The In Salah Project (joint venture of British Petroleum (BP), Sonatrach, and StatoilHydro) has two fundamental goals: (1) 25-30 years of 9 billion cubic feet per year (bcfy) natural gas production from 8 fields in the Algerian

225

Water coning in porous media reservoirs for compressed air energy storage  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The general purpose of this work is to define the hydrodynamic and thermodynamic response of a CAES porous media reservoir subjected to simulated air mass cycling. This research will assist in providing design guidelines for the efficient and stable operation of the air storage reservoir. This report presents the analysis and results for the two-phase (air-water), two-dimensional, numerical modeling of CAES porous media reservoirs. The effects of capillary pressure and relative permeability were included. The fluids were considered to be immisicible; there was no phase change; and the system was isothermal. The specific purpose of this analysis was to evaluate the reservoir parameters that were believed to be important to water coning. This phenomenon may occur in reservoirs in which water underlies the air storage zone. It involves the possible intrusion of water into the wellbore or near-wellbore region. The water movement is in response to pressure gradients created during a reservoir discharge cycle. Potential adverse effects due to this water movement are associated with the pressure response of the reservoir and the geochemical stability of the near-wellbore region. The results obtained for the simulated operation of a CAES reservoir suggest that water coning should not be a severe problem, due to the slow response of the water to the pressure gradients and the relatively short duration in which those gradients exist. However, water coning will depend on site-specific conditions, particularly the fluid distributions following bubble development, and, therefore, a water coning analysis should be included as part of site evaluation.

Wiles, L.E.; McCann, R.A.

1981-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

226

EA-1044: Melton Valley Storage Tanks Capacity Increase Project- Oak Ridge  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

44: Melton Valley Storage Tanks Capacity Increase Project- Oak 44: Melton Valley Storage Tanks Capacity Increase Project- Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee EA-1044: Melton Valley Storage Tanks Capacity Increase Project- Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee SUMMARY This EA evaluates the environmental impacts of the proposal to construct and maintain additional storage capacity at the U.S. Department of Energy's Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, for liquid low-level radioactive waste. PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITIES None available at this time. DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD May 25, 1995 EA-1044: Finding of No Significant Impact Melton Valley Storage Tanks Capacity Increase Project- Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee May 25, 1995 EA-1044: Final Environmental Assessment

227

Estimates of Peak Underground Working Gas Storage Capacity in...  

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

Administration report, The Basics of Underground Storage, http:www.eia.doe.govpuboilgasnaturalgasanalysispublicationsstoragebasicsstoragebasics.html. 2 Working gas is...

228

Storage and capacity rights markets in the natural gas industry  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

This dissertation presents a different approach at looking at market power in capacity rights markets that goes beyond the functional aspects of capacity rights markets as access to transportation services. In particular, ...

Paz-Galindo, Luis A.

1999-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

229

Trends in natural gas storage capacity utilization vary by ...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-191, Monthly Underground Gas Storage Report and Short-Term Energy Outlook Note: Dashed lines indicate ...

230

Complex Hydride Compounds with Enhanced Hydrogen Storage Capacity  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The United Technologies Research Center (UTRC), in collaboration with major partners Albemarle Corporation (Albemarle) and the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL), conducted research to discover new hydride materials for the storage of hydrogen having on-board reversibility and a target gravimetric capacity of ? 7.5 weight percent (wt %). When integrated into a system with a reasonable efficiency of 60% (mass of hydride / total mass), this target material would produce a system gravimetric capacity of ? 4.5 wt %, consistent with the DOE 2007 target. The approach established for the project combined first principles modeling (FPM - UTRC) with multiple synthesis methods: Solid State Processing (SSP - UTRC), Solution Based Processing (SBP - Albemarle) and Molten State Processing (MSP - SRNL). In the search for novel compounds, each of these methods has advantages and disadvantages; by combining them, the potential for success was increased. During the project, UTRC refined its FPM framework which includes ground state (0 Kelvin) structural determinations, elevated temperature thermodynamic predictions and thermodynamic / phase diagram calculations. This modeling was used both to precede synthesis in a virtual search for new compounds and after initial synthesis to examine reaction details and options for modifications including co-reactant additions. The SSP synthesis method involved high energy ball milling which was simple, efficient for small batches and has proven effective for other storage material compositions. The SBP method produced very homogeneous chemical reactions, some of which cannot be performed via solid state routes, and would be the preferred approach for large scale production. The MSP technique is similar to the SSP method, but involves higher temperature and hydrogen pressure conditions to achieve greater species mobility. During the initial phases of the project, the focus was on higher order alanate complexes in the phase space between alkaline metal hydrides (AmH), Alkaline earth metal hydrides (AeH2), alane (AlH3), transition metal (Tm) hydrides (TmHz, where z=1-3) and molecular hydrogen (H2). The effort started first with variations of known alanates and subsequently extended the search to unknown compounds. In this stage, the FPM techniques were developed and validated on known alanate materials such as NaAlH4 and Na2LiAlH6. The coupled predictive methodologies were used to survey over 200 proposed phases in six quaternary spaces, formed from various combinations of Na, Li Mg and/or Ti with Al and H. A wide range of alanate compounds was examined using SSP having additions of Ti, Cr, Co, Ni and Fe. A number of compositions and reaction paths were identified having H weight fractions up to 5.6 wt %, but none meeting the 7.5 wt%H reversible goal. Similarly, MSP of alanates produced a number of interesting compounds and general conclusions regarding reaction behavior of mixtures during processing, but no alanate based candidates meeting the 7.5 wt% goal. A novel alanate, LiMg(AlH4)3, was synthesized using SBP that demonstrated a 7.0 wt% capacity with a desorption temperature of 150°C. The deuteride form was synthesized and characterized by the Institute for Energy (IFE) in Norway to determine its crystalline structure for related FPM studies. However, the reaction exhibited exothermicity and therefore was not reversible under acceptable hydrogen gas pressures for on-board recharging. After the extensive studies of alanates, the material class of emphasis was shifted to borohydrides. Through SBP, several ligand-stabilized Mg(BH4)2 complexes were synthesized. The Mg(BH4)2*2NH3 complex was found to change behavior with slightly different synthesis conditions and/or aging. One of the two mechanisms was an amine-borane (NH3BH3) like dissociation reaction which released up to 16 wt %H and more conservatively 9 wt%H when not including H2 released from the NH3. From FPM, the stability of the Mg(BH4)2*2NH3 compound was found to increase with the inclusion of NH3 groups in the inner-Mg coordination

Mosher, Daniel A.; Opalka, Susanne M.; Tang, Xia; Laube, Bruce L.; Brown, Ronald J.; Vanderspurt, Thomas H.; Arsenault, Sarah; Wu, Robert; Strickler, Jamie; Anton, Donald L.; Zidan, Ragaiy; Berseth, Polly

2008-02-18T23:59:59.000Z

231

Potential petrophysical and chemical property alterations in a compressed air energy storage porous rock reservoir  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Successful commercialization of Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES) systems depends on long-term stability of the underground reservoirs subjected to somewhat unique operating conditions. Specifically, these conditions include elevated and time varying temperatures, effective stresses, and air humidities. To minimize the requirements for premium fuels, it may be desirable to retain the thermal energy of compression. Porous media, e.g., sandstone, may hold promise as elevated temperature reservoirs. In this study, a reservoir composed of clean quartz sandstone and injection air temperatures of 300 to 575/sup 0/K are assumed. Numerical modeling is used to estimate temperature, stress, and humidity conditions within this reference porous media reservoir. A discussion on relative importance to CAES of several potential porous media damage mechanisms is presented. In this context, damage is defined as a reduction in intrinsic permeability (measure of air transport capability), a decrease in effective porosity (measure of storage capability), or an increase in elastic and/or inelastic deformation of the porous material. The potential damage mechanisms presented include: (1) disaggregation, (2) particulate plugging, (3) boundary layer viscosity anomalies, (4) inelastic microstructural consolidation, (5) clay swelling and dispersion, (6) hydrothermal mineral alteration, (7) oxidation reactions, and (8) well casing corrosion. These mechanisms are placed in perspective with respect to anticipated CAES conditions and mechanisms suggested are: (1) of academic interest only, (2) readily identified and controlled via engineering, or (3) potential problem areas requiring additional investigation.

Stottlemyre, J.A.; Erikson, R.L.; Smith, R.P.

1979-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

232

,"U.S. Working Storage Capacity at Operable Refineries"  

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

Storage Capacity at Operable Refineries" Storage Capacity at Operable Refineries" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Working Storage Capacity at Operable Refineries",28,"Annual",2013,"6/30/1982" ,"Release Date:","6/21/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","6/20/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","pet_pnp_capwork_dcu_nus_a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pnp_capwork_dcu_nus_a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.gov"

233

,"U.S. Working Natural Gas Total Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Total Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" Total Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Working Natural Gas Total Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","nga_epg0_sacw0_nus_mmcfa.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/nga_epg0_sacw0_nus_mmcfa.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov"

234

,"U.S. Total Shell Storage Capacity at Operable Refineries"  

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

Shell Storage Capacity at Operable Refineries" Shell Storage Capacity at Operable Refineries" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Total Shell Storage Capacity at Operable Refineries",28,"Annual",2013,"6/30/1982" ,"Release Date:","6/21/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","6/20/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","pet_pnp_capshell_dcu_nus_a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pnp_capshell_dcu_nus_a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.gov"

235

The Economics of CO2 Transport by Pipeline and Storage in Saline Aquifers and Oil Reservoirs  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Description Date 0 Original document 1/29/2008 1 Estimate for carbon content of crude oil was incorrect (see pThe Economics of CO2 Transport by Pipeline and Storage in Saline Aquifers and Oil Reservoirs Sean T for this work was provided by the US Department of Energy under contract numbers DE-FC26-00NT40935 and DE-AC26

236

Estimates of Maximum Underground Working Gas Storage Capacity in ...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

report presents three alternative ... All facilities have a design ... • Some facilities are not operated at design capacity because of operational guidelines ...

237

Stability and design criteria studies for compressed air energy storage reservoirs. Progress report, FY 1977.  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Progress made during FY-1977 in establishing design criteria to ensure the successful operation and long-term stability of Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES) reservoirs in underground porous media, such as aquifers is summarized. The formulation of pertinent criteria is important since the long-term stability of air storage reservoirs is probably the item of greatest risk to the successful demonstration and commercialization of the CAES concept. The study has been divided into four phases: (1) state-of-the-art survey, (2) analytical modeling studies, (3) laboratory studies, and (4) field testing. The first of these phases, the state-of-the-art survey for air storage in porous reservoirs, has been completed on schedule and is reported in Section 2. Sections 3 and 4 are progress reports on Phases 2 and 3. No work has been done on Phase 4. It is planned that the field testing phase of this study will be carried out in conjunction with the Department of Energy/Electric Power Research Institute (DOE/EPRI) CAES Demonstration Program. This phase is not scheduled to begin until FY-1979.

Smith, G.C.; Stottlemyre, J.A.; Wiles, L.E.; Loscutoff, W.V.; Pincus, H.J.

1978-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

238

THE OHIO RIVER VALLEY CO2 STORAGE PROJECT - PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF DEEP SALINE RESERVOIRS AND COAL SEAMS  

SciTech Connect

This report describes the geologic setting for the Deep Saline Reservoirs and Coal Seams in the Ohio River Valley CO{sub 2} Storage Project area. The object of the current project is to site and design a CO{sub 2} injection facility. A location near New Haven, WV, has been selected for the project. To assess geologic storage reservoirs at the site, regional and site-specific geology were reviewed. Geologic reports, deep well logs, hydraulic tests, and geologic maps were reviewed for the area. Only one well within 25 miles of the site penetrates the deeper sedimentary rocks, so there is a large amount of uncertainty regarding the deep geology at the site. New Haven is located along the Ohio River on the border of West Virginia and Ohio. Topography in the area is flat in the river valley but rugged away from the Ohio River floodplain. The Ohio River Valley incises 50-100 ft into bedrock in the area. The area of interest lies within the Appalachian Plateau, on the western edge of the Appalachian Mountain chain. Within the Appalachian Basin, sedimentary rocks are 3,000 to 20,000 ft deep and slope toward the southeast. The rock formations consist of alternating layers of shale, limestone, dolomite, and sandstone overlying dense metamorphic continental shield rocks. The Rome Trough is the major structural feature in the area, and there may be some faults associated with the trough in the Ohio-West Virginia Hinge Zone. The area has a low earthquake hazard with few historical earthquakes. Target injection reservoirs include the basal sandstone/Lower Maryville and the Rose Run Sandstone. The basal sandstone is an informal name for sandstones that overlie metamorphic shield rock. Regional geology indicates that the unit is at a depth of approximately 9,100 ft below the surface at the project site and associated with the Maryville Formation. Overall thickness appears to be 50-100 ft. The Rose Run Sandstone is another potential reservoir. The unit is located approximately 1,100 ft above the basal sandstone and is 100-200 ft thick. The storage capacity estimates for a 20-mile radius from the injection well ranged from 39-78 million tons (Mt) for each formation. Several other oil and gas plays have hydraulic properties conducive for injection, but the formations are generally only 5-50 ft thick in the study area. Overlying the injection reservoirs are thick sequences of dense, impermeable dolomite, limestone, and shale. These layers provide containment above the potential injection reservoirs. In general, it appears that the containment layers are much thicker and extensive than the injection intervals. Other physical parameters for the study area appear to be typical for the region. Anticipated pressures at maximum depths are approximately 4,100 psi based on a 0.45 psi/ft pressure gradient. Temperatures are likely to be 150 F. Groundwater flow is slow and complex in deep formations. Regional flow directions appear to be toward the west-northwest at less than 1 ft per year within the basal sandstone. Vertical gradients are downward in the study area. A review of brine geochemistry indicates that formation fluids have high salinity and dissolved solids. Total dissolved solids ranges from 200,000-325,000 mg/L in the deep reservoirs. Brine chemistry is similar throughout the different formations, suggesting extensive mixing in a mature basin. Unconsolidated sediments in the Ohio River Valley are the primary source of drinking water in the study area.

Michael J. Mudd; Howard Johnson; Charles Christopher; T.S. Ramakrishnan, Ph.D.

2003-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

239

,"U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

3,"Monthly","9/2013","1/15/1989" 3,"Monthly","9/2013","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","ng_stor_cap_dcu_nus_m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_stor_cap_dcu_nus_m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 7:03:21 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity" "Sourcekey","N5290US2","NGA_EPG0_SACW0_NUS_MMCF","NA1394_NUS_8" "Date","U.S. Total Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)","U.S. Working Natural Gas Total Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)","U.S. Natural Gas Count of Underground Storage Capacity (Count)"

240

Hybrid simulation and optimization-based capacity planner for integrated photovoltaic generation with storage units  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Unlike fossil-fueled generation, solar energy resources are geographically distributed and highly intermittent, which makes their direct control difficult and requires storage units. The goal of this research is to develop a flexible capacity planning ...

Esfandyar M. Mazhari; Jiayun Zhao; Nurcin Celik; Seungho Lee; Young-Jun Son; Larry Head

2009-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


241

U.S. Refinery Normal Butane/Butylene Shell Storage Capacity as ...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

U.S. Refinery Normal Butane/Butylene Shell Storage Capacity as of January 1 (Thousand Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 ...

242

Working natural gas storage capacity grows 3% year-over-year ...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

EIA estimates that the demonstrated peak working gas capacity for underground storage in the lower 48 states rose 3%, or 136 billion cubic feet (Bcf), to 4,239 Bcf in ...

243

U.S. Total Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic ...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

U.S. Total Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec; 1989: 8,119,368: 8,119,368: 8,119,368 ...

244

Estimate of Maximum Underground Working Gas Storage Capacity in the United States  

Reports and Publications (EIA)

This report examines the aggregate maximum capacity for U.S. natural gas storage. Although the concept of maximum capacityseems quite straightforward, there are numerous issues that preclude the determination of a definitive maximum volume. Thereport presents three alternative estimates for maximum capacity, indicating appropriate caveats for each.

Information Center

2006-09-19T23:59:59.000Z

245

Screening and Ranking of Hydrocarbon Reservoirs for CO2 Storage in the Alberta Basin, Canada  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Screening and Ranking of Hydrocarbon Reservoirs for CO Screening and Ranking of Hydrocarbon Reservoirs for CO 2 Storage in the Alberta Basin, Canada Stefan Bachu (Stefan.Bachu@gov.ab.ca; 780-427-1517) Alberta Energy and Utilities Board 4999-98 Avenue Edmonton, AB, T6B 2X3, Canada Introduction Human activity since the industrial revolution has had the effect of increasing atmospheric concentrations of gases with a greenhouse effect, such as carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) and methane (CH 4 ), leading to climate warming and weather changes (Bryant, 1997; Jepma and Munasinghe, 1998). Because of its relative abundance compared with the other greenhouse gases, CO 2 is by far the most important, being responsible for about 64% of the enhanced "greenhouse effect" (Bryant, 1997). Given their inherent advantages, such as availability, competitive cost, ease of

246

Preliminary stability criteria for compressed air energy storage in porous media reservoirs  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Results from the initial phase of a study to establish subsurface design and operating criteria for a Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES) facility are summarized. The primary objective was to derive a preliminary set of criteria that would help ensure the long term (30 to 40 year) integrity of CAES reservoirs in porous media, such as aquifers or abandoned natural gas reservoirs. In addition, appropriate research and development tasks were to be defined if the current technology was found to be inadequate. Preliminary stability and design criteria for storage of compressed air in porous media were determined on the basis of a survey of the open literature and the experience of experts in industry and universities. The results were separated into two categories: criteria for low temperature air injection (under 200/sup 0/F) and criteria for high temperature air injection (200 to 650/sup 0/F). Results are presented as maximum and/or minimum bounds for a number of parameters such as porosity, permeability, closure, storage pressure, caprock thickness, delta pressure, and caprock slope. One of the prime conclusions derived from an evaluation of the low temperature concept is that the technology currently exists to handle the potential design and operating problems. Therefore, there appears to be no technical roadblocks to the successful demonstration of the CAES concept, and a pilot project could be constructed in the near future.

Stottlemyre, J.A.

1978-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

247

Simulation of CO2 Sequestration at Rock Spring Uplift, Wyoming: Heterogeneity and Uncertainties in Storage Capacity, Injectivity and Leakage  

SciTech Connect

Many geological, geochemical, geomechanical and hydrogeological factors control CO{sub 2} storage in subsurface. Among them heterogeneity in saline aquifer can seriously influence design of injection wells, CO{sub 2} injection rate, CO{sub 2} plume migration, storage capacity, and potential leakage and risk assessment. This study applies indicator geostatistics, transition probability and Markov chain model at the Rock Springs Uplift, Wyoming generating facies-based heterogeneous fields for porosity and permeability in target saline aquifer (Pennsylvanian Weber sandstone) and surrounding rocks (Phosphoria, Madison and cap-rock Chugwater). A multiphase flow simulator FEHM is then used to model injection of CO{sub 2} into the target saline aquifer involving field-scale heterogeneity. The results reveal that (1) CO{sub 2} injection rates in different injection wells significantly change with local permeability distributions; (2) brine production rates in different pumping wells are also significantly impacted by the spatial heterogeneity in permeability; (3) liquid pressure evolution during and after CO{sub 2} injection in saline aquifer varies greatly for different realizations of random permeability fields, and this has potential important effects on hydraulic fracturing of the reservoir rock, reactivation of pre-existing faults and the integrity of the cap-rock; (4) CO{sub 2} storage capacity estimate for Rock Springs Uplift is 6614 {+-} 256 Mt at 95% confidence interval, which is about 36% of previous estimate based on homogeneous and isotropic storage formation; (5) density profiles show that the density of injected CO{sub 2} below 3 km is close to that of the ambient brine with given geothermal gradient and brine concentration, which indicates CO{sub 2} plume can sink to the deep before reaching thermal equilibrium with brine. Finally, we present uncertainty analysis of CO{sub 2} leakage into overlying formations due to heterogeneity in both the target saline aquifer and surrounding formations. This uncertainty in leakage will be used to feed into risk assessment modeling.

Deng, Hailin [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Dai, Zhenxue [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Jiao, Zunsheng [Wyoming State Geological Survey; Stauffer, Philip H. [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Surdam, Ronald C. [Wyoming State Geological Survey

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

248

HT Combinatorial Screening of Novel Materials for High Capacity Hydrogen Storage  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

FLORIDA SOLAR ENERGY CENTER FLORIDA SOLAR ENERGY CENTER Creating Energy Independence Since 1975 A Research Institute of the University of Central Florida HT Combinatorial Screening of HT Combinatorial Screening of Novel Materials for High Capacity Novel Materials for High Capacity Hydrogen Storage Hydrogen Storage Ali T Ali T - - Raissi Raissi Director, Hydrogen & Fuel Cell R&D Director, Hydrogen & Fuel Cell R&D Division Division High Throughput/Combinatorial Analysis of Hydrogen Storage High Throughput/Combinatorial Analysis of Hydrogen Storage Materials Workshop, Bethesda, MD Materials Workshop, Bethesda, MD 26 June 2007 26 June 2007 This presentation does not contain any proprietary or confidential information 2 Objectives Objectives Develop (i.e. design, build, test and verify) a high

249

"Table A7. Shell Storage Capacity of Selected Petroleum Products by Census"  

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

Shell Storage Capacity of Selected Petroleum Products by Census" Shell Storage Capacity of Selected Petroleum Products by Census" " Region, Industry Group, and Selected Industries, 1991" " (Estimates in Thousand Barrels)" " "," "," "," "," ","Other","RSE" "SIC"," ","Motor","Residual"," ","Distillate","Row" "Code(a)","Industry Groups and Industry","Gasoline","Fuel Oil","Diesel","Fuel Oil","Factors" ,,"Total United States" ,"RSE Column Factors:",1,0.9,1,1.1 , 20,"Food and Kindred Products",38,1448,306,531,12.1 2011," Meat Packing Plants",1,229,40,13,13.2

250

Petroleum storage and transportation capacities. Volume III. Petroleum pipeline  

SciTech Connect

Capacity data as of December 31, 1978, are presented for common carrier crude lines, refined petroleum product lines, and liquified petroleum gas/natural gas liquids (LPG/NGL) lines in the form of maps and tables. The maps include: a United States map, including all lines, for crude lines, petroleum product lines, and LPG/NGL lines, each separately; and Petroleum Administration for Defense (PAD) maps for crude and petroleum product lines, each separately. Tables presenting more detailed information than contained on the maps and intended to be used as a supplement to them are included in the Appendices. Several significant trends have developed in the years since the 1967 report was published. The United States has imported increasing amounts of foreign crude oil to supplement its declining domestic production. This foreign crude oil is imported through water terminals and their associated facilities and distributed through petroleum pipelines to inland refineries. Major amounts of imported crude oil are transported by pipeline from the Gulf Coast to the Central and upper Midwest refineries. The trend at the present time is to mix these individual crude oils having similar qualities and deliver the mixes to the refineries. Also, it has become common to batch various combinations of crude oil, refined product, LPG, and petrochemicals through a single pipeline. This ability to ship various petroleum materials in a single pipeline has enhanced the flexibility of the pipeline network.

1979-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

251

,"U.S. Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Depleted Fields Capacity (MMcf)" Depleted Fields Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","nga_epg0_sacwd_nus_mmcfa.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/nga_epg0_sacwd_nus_mmcfa.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov"

252

,"U.S. Natural Gas Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Acquifers Capacity (MMcf)" Acquifers Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Natural Gas Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1392_nus_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1392_nus_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:43:23 PM"

253

,"Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Capacity (MMcf)" Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","ngm_epg0_sac_sal_mmcfm.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/ngm_epg0_sac_sal_mmcfm.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:57:12 PM"

254

,"Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Capacity (MMcf)" Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ia2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290ia2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:10 PM"

255

,"U.S. Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Salt Caverns Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Salt Caverns Capacity (MMcf)" Salt Caverns Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Salt Caverns Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","nga_epg0_sacws_nus_mmcfa.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/nga_epg0_sacws_nus_mmcfa.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov"

256

,"U.S. Natural Gas Number of Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (Count)"  

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

Acquifers Capacity (Count)" Acquifers Capacity (Count)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Natural Gas Number of Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (Count)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1392_nus_8a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1392_nus_8a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:43:23 PM"

257

,"U.S. Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Acquifers Capacity (MMcf)" Acquifers Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","nga_epg0_sacwa_nus_mmcfa.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/nga_epg0_sacwa_nus_mmcfa.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov"

258

On the Effective Capacity of the Dense-Water Reservoir for the Nordic Seas Overflow: Some Effects of Topography and Wind Stress  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The overflow of the dense water mass across the Greenland–Scotland Ridge (GSR) from the Nordic Seas drives the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC). The Nordic Seas is a large basin with an enormous reservoir capacity. The volume of ...

Jiayan Yang; Lawrence J. Pratt

2013-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

259

Ultra-high hydrogen storage capacity of Li-decorated graphyne: A first-principles prediction  

SciTech Connect

Graphyne, consisting of sp- and sp{sup 2}-hybridized carbon atoms, is a new member of carbon allotropes which has a natural porous structure. Here, we report our first-principles calculations on the possibility of Li-decorated graphyne as a hydrogen storage medium. We predict that Li-doping significantly enhances the hydrogen storage ability of graphyne compared to that of pristine graphyne, which can be attributed to the polarization of H{sub 2} molecules induced by the charge transfer from Li atoms to graphyne. The favorite H{sub 2} molecules adsorption configurations on a single side and on both sides of a Li-decorated graphyne layer are determined. When Li atoms are adsorbed on one side of graphyne, each Li can bind four H{sub 2} molecules, corresponding to a hydrogen storage capacity of 9.26 wt. %. The hydrogen storage capacity can be further improved to 15.15 wt. % as graphyne is decorated by Li atoms on both sides, with an optimal average binding energy of 0.226 eV/H{sub 2}. The results show that the Li-decorated graphyne can serve as a high capacity hydrogen storage medium.

Zhang Hongyu; Zhang Meng; Zhao Lixia; Luo Youhua [Department of Physics, East China University of Science and Technology, Shanghai 200237 (China); Zhao Mingwen; Bu Hongxia; He Xiujie [School of Physics and State Key Laboratory of Crystal Materials, Shandong University, Jinan, 250100 Shandong (China)

2012-10-15T23:59:59.000Z

260

Review of private sector treatment, storage, and disposal capacity for radioactive waste. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect

This report is an update of a report that summarized the current and near-term commercial and disposal of radioactive and mixed waste. This report was capacity for the treatment, storage, dating and written for the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) with the objective of updating and expanding the report entitled ``Review of Private Sector Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Capacity for Radioactive Waste``, (INEL-95/0020, January 1995). The capacity to process radioactively-contaminated protective clothing and/or respirators was added to the list of private sector capabilities to be assessed. Of the 20 companies surveyed in the previous report, 14 responded to the request for additional information, five did not respond, and one asked to be deleted from the survey. One additional company was identified as being capable of performing LLMW treatability studies and six were identified as providers of laundering services for radioactively-contaminated protective clothing and/or respirators.

Smith, M.; Harris, J.G.; Moore-Mayne, S.; Mayes, R.; Naretto, C.

1995-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


261

Structural analysis of porous rock reservoirs subjected to conditions of compressed air energy storage  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Investigations are described which were performed to assess the structural behavior of porous rock compressed air energy storage (CAES) reservoirs subjected to loading conditions of temperature and pressure felt to be typical of such an operation. Analyses performed addressed not only the nominal or mean reservoir response but also the cyclic response due to charge/discharge operation. The analyses were carried out by assuming various geometrical and material related parameters of a generic site. The objective of this study was to determine the gross response of a generic porous reservoir. The site geometry for this study assumed a cylindrical model 122 m in dia and 57 m high including thicknesses for the cap, porous, and base rock formations. The central portion of the porous zone was assumed to be at a depth of 518 m and at an initial temperature of 20/sup 0/C. Cyclic loading conditions of compressed air consisted of pressure values in the range of 4.5 to 5.2 MPa and temperature values between 143 and 204/sup 0/C.Various modes of structural behavior were studied. These response modes were analyzed using loading conditions of temperature and pressure (in the porous zone) corresponding to various operational states during the first year of simulated site operation. The results of the structural analyses performed indicate that the most severely stressed region will likely be in the wellbore vicinity and hence highly dependent on the length of and placement technique utilized in the well production length. Analyses to address this specific areas are currently being pursued.

Friley, J.R.

1980-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

262

Evaluating Potential for Large Releases from CO2 StorageReservoirs: Analogs, Scenarios, and Modeling Needs  

SciTech Connect

While the purpose of geologic storage of CO{sub 2} in deep saline formations is to trap greenhouse gases underground, the potential exists for CO{sub 2} to escape from the target reservoir, migrate upward along permeable pathways, and discharge at the land surface. Such discharge is not necessarily a serious concern, as CO{sub 2} is a naturally abundant and relatively benign gas in low concentrations. However, there is a potential risk to health, safety and environment (HSE) in the event that large localized fluxes of CO{sub 2} were to occur at the land surface, especially where CO{sub 2} could accumulate. In this paper, we develop possible scenarios for large CO{sub 2} fluxes based on the analysis of natural analogues, where large releases of gas have been observed. We are particularly interested in scenarios which could generate sudden, possibly self-enhancing, or even eruptive release events. The probability for such events may be low, but the circumstances under which they might occur and potential consequences need to be evaluated in order to design appropriate site selection and risk management strategies. Numerical modeling of hypothetical test cases is needed to determine critical conditions for such events, to evaluate whether such conditions may be possible at designated storage sites, and, if applicable, to evaluate the potential HSE impacts of such events and design appropriate mitigation strategies.

Birkholzer, Jens; Pruess, Karsten; Lewicki, Jennifer; Tsang,Chin-Fu; Karimjee, Anhar

2005-09-19T23:59:59.000Z

263

,"California Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Monthly","9/2013" Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ca2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290ca2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:09 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: California Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290CA2" "Date","California Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 37271,388480 37302,475720 37330,475720 37361,475720

264

,"Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Annual",2012 Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ut2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290ut2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:25 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290UT2" "Date","Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 32324,114980 32689,114980 33054,114980 33419,114980 33785,114980 34150,114980

265

,"Nebraska Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Annual",2012 Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ne2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290ne2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:18 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Nebraska Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290NE2" "Date","Nebraska Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 32324,88438 32689,88438 33054,143311 33419,93311 33785,93311

266

,"Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Monthly","9/2013" Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ut2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290ut2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:25 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290UT2" "Date","Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 37271,129480 37302,129480 37330,129480 37361,129480 37391,129480

267

,"Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Annual",2012 Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290mi2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290mi2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:15 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290MI2" "Date","Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 32324,982362 32689,982362 33054,994542 33419,995181 33785,994281

268

,"Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Monthly","9/2013" Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290va2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290va2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:26 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290VA2" "Date","Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 37271,4967 37302,4967 37330,4967 37361,4967 37391,4967

269

,"Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Annual",2012 Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290wy2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290wy2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:27 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290WY2" "Date","Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 32324,103831 32689,103830 33054,106130 33419,106130 33785,105668

270

,"Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Monthly","9/2013" Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290wa2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290wa2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:26 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290WA2" "Date","Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 37271,37300 37302,37300 37330,37300 37361,37300

271

,"Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Monthly","12/2012" Monthly","12/2012" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290tn2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290tn2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:23 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290TN2" "Date","Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 37271,1200 37302,1200 37330,1200 37361,1200

272

,"Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Annual",2012 Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290tx2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290tx2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:24 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290TX2" "Date","Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 32324,590248 32689,589780 33054,586502 33419,589018 33785,595229 34150,598782

273

,"Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Annual",2012 Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290pa2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290pa2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:22 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290PA2" "Date","Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 32324,805394 32689,805393 33054,640938 33419,640938

274

,"Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Annual",2012 Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ar2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290ar2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:08 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290AR2" "Date","Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 32324,36147 32689,31447 33054,31277 33419,31277 33785,31277 34150,31277

275

,"Colorado Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Monthly","9/2013" Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290co2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290co2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:10 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Colorado Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290CO2" "Date","Colorado Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 37271,100227 37302,100227 37330,100227 37361,100227

276

,"Louisiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Monthly","9/2013" Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290la2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290la2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:14 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Louisiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290LA2" "Date","Louisiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 37271,580037 37302,580037 37330,580037 37361,580037

277

,"Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Annual",2012 Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ks2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290ks2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:12 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290KS2" "Date","Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 32324,334925 32689,334925 33054,301199 33419,301199 33785,290571

278

,"Kentucky Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Monthly","9/2013" Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ky2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290ky2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:13 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Kentucky Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290KY2" "Date","Kentucky Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 37271,219914 37302,219914 37330,219914 37361,219914

279

,"Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Monthly","9/2013" Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290oh2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290oh2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:21 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290OH2" "Date","Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 37271,573784 37302,573784 37330,573784 37361,573784 37391,573784

280

,"Mississippi Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Monthly","9/2013" Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ms2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290ms2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:17 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Mississippi Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290MS2" "Date","Mississippi Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 37271,134012 37302,134012 37330,134012

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


281

,"Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Annual",2012 Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290mn2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290mn2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:15 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290MN2" "Date","Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 32324,7000 32689,7000 33054,7000 33419,7000 33785,7000 34150,7000

282

,"Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Monthly","9/2013" Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290pa2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290pa2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:23 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290PA2" "Date","Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 37271,713818 37302,713818 37330,713818

283

,"Maryland Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Annual",2012 Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290md2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290md2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:14 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Maryland Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290MD2" "Date","Maryland Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 32324,61978 32689,61978 33054,61978 33419,61978 33785,62400 34150,62400

284

,"Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Monthly","9/2013" Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ks2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290ks2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:12 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290KS2" "Date","Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 37271,301502 37302,301502 37330,301502 37361,301502

285

,"Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Monthly","9/2013" Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ar2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290ar2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:08 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290AR2" "Date","Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 37271,22000 37302,22000 37330,22000 37361,22000

286

,"Montana Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Annual",2012 Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290mt2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290mt2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:18 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Montana Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290MT2" "Date","Montana Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 32324,373963 32689,373960 33054,373960 33419,373960 33785,375010

287

,"Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Monthly","9/2013" Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290mn2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290mn2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:16 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290MN2" "Date","Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 37271,7000 37302,7000 37330,7000 37361,7000

288

,"Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Annual",2012 Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290in2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290in2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:11 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290IN2" "Date","Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 32324,114603 32689,112045 33054,97332 33419,102246 33785,106176

289

,"Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Annual",2012 Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ok2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290ok2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:21 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290OK2" "Date","Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 32324,377189 32689,364887 33054,362616 33419,362616 33785,359616

290

,"Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Monthly","9/2013" Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290tx2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290tx2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:24 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290TX2" "Date","Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 37271,699324 37302,698258 37330,699324 37361,699324

291

,"Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Monthly","9/2013" Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290or2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290or2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:22 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290OR2" "Date","Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 37271,17755 37302,21080 37330,21080 37361,21080 37391,21080

292

,"Louisiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Annual",2012 Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290la2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290la2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:13 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Louisiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290LA2" "Date","Louisiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 32324,559019 32689,559019 33054,550823 33419,559823 33785,539200

293

,"Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Monthly","9/2013" Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290in2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290in2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:11 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290IN2" "Date","Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 37271,109310 37302,109310 37330,109310 37361,109310

294

,"Alabama Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Monthly","9/2013" Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290al2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290al2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:08 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Alabama Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290AL2" "Date","Alabama Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 37271,5280 37302,5280 37330,5280 37361,5280 37391,5280

295

,"Colorado Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Annual",2012 Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290co2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290co2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:09 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Colorado Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290CO2" "Date","Colorado Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 32324,82662 32689,82662 33054,98999 33419,98999 33785,105790

296

,"Mississippi Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Annual",2012 Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ms2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290ms2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:17 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Mississippi Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290MS2" "Date","Mississippi Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 32324,108171 32689,108207 33054,108601 33419,114621 33785,114627

297

,"Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Monthly","9/2013" Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290mi2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290mi2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:15 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290MI2" "Date","Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 37271,1070717 37302,1070717 37330,1070717 37361,1070717

298

,"Nebraska Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Monthly","9/2013" Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ne2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290ne2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:19 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Nebraska Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290NE2" "Date","Nebraska Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 37271,39469 37302,39469 37330,39469 37361,39469

299

,"Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Annual",2012 Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290oh2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290oh2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:20 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290OH2" "Date","Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 32324,612547 32689,612547 33054,591494 33419,591494 33785,591494 34150,594644

300

,"Alabama Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Annual",2012 Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290al2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290al2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:07 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Alabama Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290AL2" "Date","Alabama Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 34880,2600 35246,3280 35611,3280 35976,3280 36341,3280 36707,3280

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


301

,"Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Monthly","9/2013" Monthly","9/2013" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290wy2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290wy2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:28 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290WY2" "Date","Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 37271,105869 37302,105869 37330,105869 37361,105869

302

,"Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Annual",2012 Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290wa2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290wa2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:26 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290WA2" "Date","Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 32324,36400 32689,36400 33054,32100 33419,34100 33785,34100

303

,"Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Annual",2012 Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290or2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5290or2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:30:22 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290OR2" "Date","Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" 32689,9791 33054,9791 33419,9791 33785,11445 34150,11445 34515,11622

304

Two-Stage, Integrated, Geothermal-CO2 Storage Reservoirs: An Approach for Sustainable Energy Production, CO2-Sequestration Security, and Reduced Environmental Risk  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

We introduce a hybrid two-stage energy-recovery approach to sequester CO{sub 2} and produce geothermal energy at low environmental risk and low cost by integrating geothermal production with CO{sub 2} capture and sequestration (CCS) in saline, sedimentary formations. Our approach combines the benefits of the approach proposed by Buscheck et al. (2011b), which uses brine as the working fluid, with those of the approach first suggested by Brown (2000) and analyzed by Pruess (2006), using CO{sub 2} as the working fluid, and then extended to saline-formation CCS by Randolph and Saar (2011a). During stage one of our hybrid approach, formation brine, which is extracted to provide pressure relief for CO{sub 2} injection, is the working fluid for energy recovery. Produced brine is applied to a consumptive beneficial use: feedstock for fresh water production through desalination, saline cooling water, or make-up water to be injected into a neighboring reservoir operation, such as in Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS), where there is often a shortage of a working fluid. For stage one, it is important to find economically feasible disposition options to reduce the volume of brine requiring reinjection in the integrated geothermal-CCS reservoir (Buscheck et al. 2012a). During stage two, which begins as CO{sub 2} reaches the production wells; coproduced brine and CO{sub 2} are the working fluids. We present preliminary reservoir engineering analyses of this approach, using a simple conceptual model of a homogeneous, permeable CO{sub 2} storage formation/geothermal reservoir, bounded by relatively impermeable sealing units. We assess both the CO{sub 2} sequestration capacity and geothermal energy production potential as a function of well spacing between CO{sub 2} injectors and brine/CO{sub 2} producers for various well patterns and for a range of subsurface conditions.

Buscheck, T A; Chen, M; Sun, Y; Hao, Y; Elliot, T R

2012-02-02T23:59:59.000Z

305

,"U.S. Natural Gas Underground Storage Salt Caverns Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Salt Caverns Capacity (MMcf)" Salt Caverns Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Natural Gas Underground Storage Salt Caverns Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1393_nus_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1393_nus_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:43:34 PM"

306

,"U.S. Natural Gas Number of Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Count)"  

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

Depleted Fields Capacity (Count)" Depleted Fields Capacity (Count)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Natural Gas Number of Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Count)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1391_nus_8a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1391_nus_8a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:43:06 PM"

307

,"U.S. Natural Gas Number of Underground Storage Salt Caverns Capacity (Count)"  

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

Salt Caverns Capacity (Count)" Salt Caverns Capacity (Count)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Natural Gas Number of Underground Storage Salt Caverns Capacity (Count)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1393_nus_8a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1393_nus_8a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:43:34 PM"

308

,"U.S. Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

Depleted Fields Capacity (MMcf)" Depleted Fields Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1391_nus_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1391_nus_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:43:05 PM"

309

Carbon sequestration in natural gas reservoirs: Enhanced gas recovery and natural gas storage  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

gas reservoirs for carbon sequestration and enhanced gasproduction and carbon sequestration, Society of Petroleumfeasibiilty of carbon sequestration with enhanced gas

Oldenburg, Curtis M.

2003-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

310

Preliminary formation analysis for compressed air energy storage in depleted natural gas reservoirs : a study for the DOE Energy Storage Systems Program.  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The purpose of this study is to develop an engineering and operational understanding of CAES performance for a depleted natural gas reservoir by evaluation of relative permeability effects of air, water and natural gas in depleted natural gas reservoirs as a reservoir is initially depleted, an air bubble is created, and as air is initially cycled. The composition of produced gases will be evaluated as the three phase flow of methane, nitrogen and brine are modeled. The effects of a methane gas phase on the relative permeability of air in a formation are investigated and the composition of the produced fluid, which consists primarily of the amount of natural gas in the produced air are determined. Simulations of compressed air energy storage (CAES) in depleted natural gas reservoirs were carried out to assess the effect of formation permeability on the design of a simple CAES system. The injection of N2 (as a proxy to air), and the extraction of the resulting gas mixture in a depleted natural gas reservoir were modeled using the TOUGH2 reservoir simulator with the EOS7c equation of state. The optimal borehole spacing was determined as a function of the formation scale intrinsic permeability. Natural gas reservoir results are similar to those for an aquifer. Borehole spacing is dependent upon the intrinsic permeability of the formation. Higher permeability allows increased injection and extraction rates which is equivalent to more power per borehole for a given screen length. The number of boreholes per 100 MW for a given intrinsic permeability in a depleted natural gas reservoir is essentially identical to that determined for a simple aquifer of identical properties. During bubble formation methane is displaced and a sharp N2methane boundary is formed with an almost pure N2 gas phase in the bubble near the borehole. During cycling mixing of methane and air occurs along the boundary as the air bubble boundary moves. The extracted gas mixture changes as a function of time and proximity of the bubble boundary to the well. For all simulations reported here, with a formation radius above 50 m the maximum methane composition in the produced gas phase was less than 0.5%. This report provides an initial investigation of CAES in a depleted natural gas reservoir, and the results will provide useful guidance in CAES system investigation and design in the future.

Gardner, William Payton

2013-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

311

Preliminary formation analysis for compressed air energy storage in depleted natural gas reservoirs : a study for the DOE Energy Storage Systems Program.  

SciTech Connect

The purpose of this study is to develop an engineering and operational understanding of CAES performance for a depleted natural gas reservoir by evaluation of relative permeability effects of air, water and natural gas in depleted natural gas reservoirs as a reservoir is initially depleted, an air bubble is created, and as air is initially cycled. The composition of produced gases will be evaluated as the three phase flow of methane, nitrogen and brine are modeled. The effects of a methane gas phase on the relative permeability of air in a formation are investigated and the composition of the produced fluid, which consists primarily of the amount of natural gas in the produced air are determined. Simulations of compressed air energy storage (CAES) in depleted natural gas reservoirs were carried out to assess the effect of formation permeability on the design of a simple CAES system. The injection of N2 (as a proxy to air), and the extraction of the resulting gas mixture in a depleted natural gas reservoir were modeled using the TOUGH2 reservoir simulator with the EOS7c equation of state. The optimal borehole spacing was determined as a function of the formation scale intrinsic permeability. Natural gas reservoir results are similar to those for an aquifer. Borehole spacing is dependent upon the intrinsic permeability of the formation. Higher permeability allows increased injection and extraction rates which is equivalent to more power per borehole for a given screen length. The number of boreholes per 100 MW for a given intrinsic permeability in a depleted natural gas reservoir is essentially identical to that determined for a simple aquifer of identical properties. During bubble formation methane is displaced and a sharp N2methane boundary is formed with an almost pure N2 gas phase in the bubble near the borehole. During cycling mixing of methane and air occurs along the boundary as the air bubble boundary moves. The extracted gas mixture changes as a function of time and proximity of the bubble boundary to the well. For all simulations reported here, with a formation radius above 50 m the maximum methane composition in the produced gas phase was less than 0.5%. This report provides an initial investigation of CAES in a depleted natural gas reservoir, and the results will provide useful guidance in CAES system investigation and design in the future.

Gardner, William Payton

2013-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

312

Numerical modeling of self-limiting and self-enhancing caprock alteration induced by CO2 storage in a depleted gas reservoir  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This paper presents numerical simulations of reactive transport which may be induced in the caprock of an on-shore depleted gas reservoir by the geological sequestration of carbon dioxide. The objective is to verify that CO{sub 2} geological disposal activities currently being planned for the study area are safe and do not induce any undesired environmental impact. In our model, fluid flow and mineral alteration are induced in the caprock by penetration of high CO{sub 2} concentrations from the underlying reservoir, where it was assumed that large amounts of CO{sub 2} have already been injected at depth. The main focus is on the potential effect of precipitation and dissolution processes on the sealing efficiency of caprock formations. Concerns that some leakage may occur in the investigated system arise because the seal is made up of potentially highly-reactive rocks, consisting of carbonate-rich shales (calcite+dolomite averaging up to more than 30% of solid volume fraction). Batch simulations and multi-dimensional 1D and 2D modeling have been used to investigate multicomponent geochemical processes. Numerical simulations account for fracture-matrix interactions, gas phase participation in multiphase fluid flow and geochemical reactions, and kinetics of fluid-rock interactions. The geochemical processes and parameters to which the occurrence of high CO{sub 2} concentrations are most sensitive are investigated by conceptualizing different mass transport mechanisms (i.e. diffusion and mixed advection+diffusion). The most relevant mineralogical transformations occurring in the caprock are described, and the feedback of these geochemical processes on physical properties such as porosity is examined to evaluate how the sealing capacity of the caprock could evolve in time. The simulations demonstrate that the occurrence of some gas leakage from the reservoir may have a strong influence on the geochemical evolution of the caprock. In fact, when a free CO{sub 2}-dominated phase migrates into the caprock through fractures, or through zones with high initial porosity possibly acting as preferential flow paths for reservoir fluids, low pH values are predicted, accompanied by significant calcite dissolution and porosity enhancement. In contrast, when fluid-rock interactions occur under fully liquid-saturated conditions and a diffusion-controlled regime, pH will be buffered at higher values, and some calcite precipitation is predicted which leads to further sealing of the storage reservoir.

Xu, Tianfu; Gherardi, Fabrizio; Xu, Tianfu; Pruess, Karsten

2007-09-07T23:59:59.000Z

313

An Operation-Based Scheme for a Multiyear and Multipurpose Reservoir to Enhance Macroscale Hydrologic Models  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This paper develops an operation-based numerical scheme for simulating storage in and outflow from a multiyear and multipurpose reservoir at a daily time step in order to enhance the simulation capacity of macroscale land surface hydrologic ...

Yiping Wu; Ji Chen

2012-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

314

Basin-Scale Hydrologic Impacts of CO2 Storage: Regulatory and Capacity Implications  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

most of which from natural gas storage and groundwaterconducted in the Hudson natural gas storage field in 1969 (

Birkholzer, J.T.

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

315

,"U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

12,"Annual",2012,"6/30/1988" 12,"Annual",2012,"6/30/1988" ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","ng_stor_cap_dcu_nus_a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_stor_cap_dcu_nus_a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 7:03:21 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity" "Sourcekey","N5290US2","NA1393_NUS_2","NA1392_NUS_2","NA1391_NUS_2","NGA_EPG0_SACW0_NUS_MMCF","NGA_EPG0_SACWS_NUS_MMCF","NGA_EPG0_SACWA_NUS_MMCF","NGA_EPG0_SACWD_NUS_MMCF","NA1394_NUS_8","NA1393_NUS_8","NA1392_NUS_8","NA1391_NUS_8"

316

Information retrieval system: impacts of water-level changes on uses of federal storage reservoirs of the Columbia River.  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

A project undertaken to provide the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) with information needed to conduct environmental assessments and meet requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act (Regional Act) is described. Access to information on environmental effects would help BPA fulfill its responsibilities to coordinate power generation on the Columbia River system, protect uses of the river system (e.g., irrigation, recreation, navigation), and enhance fish and wildlife production. Staff members at BPA identified the need to compile and index information resources that would help answer environmental impact questions. A computer retrieval system that would provide ready access to the information was envisioned. This project was supported by BPA to provide an initial step toward a compilation of environmental impact information. Scientists at Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) identified, gathered, and evaluated information related to environmental effects of water level on uses of five study reservoirs and developed and implemented and environmental data retrieval system, which provides for automated storage and retrieval of annotated citations to published and unpublished information. The data retrieval system is operating on BPA's computer facility and includes the reservoir water-level environmental data. This project was divided into several tasks, some of which were conducted simultaneously to meet project deadlines. The tasks were to identify uses of the five study reservoirs, compile and evaluate reservoir information, develop a data entry and retrieval system, identify and analyze research needs, and document the data retrieval system and train users. Additional details of the project are described in several appendixes.

Fickeisen, D.H.; Cowley, P.J.; Neitzel, D.A.; Simmons, M.A.

1982-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

317

Impact of injecting inert cushion gas into a gas storage reservoir.  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

??Underground natural gas storage is a process which ensures constant supply of natural gas by storing the excess gas produced and quickly supply when required.… (more)

Lekkala, Sudheer R.

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

318

Prediction of the effects of compositional mixing in a reservoir on conversion to natural gas storage.  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

??The increased interest in the development of new Gas Storage Fields over the lastseveral decades has created some interesting challenges for the industry. Most existinggas… (more)

Brannon, Alan W.

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

319

Basin-Scale Hydrologic Impacts of CO2 Storage: Regulatory and Capacity Implications  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

most of which from natural gas storage and groundwaterconducted in the Hudson natural gas storage field in 1969 (storage of carbon dioxide in unused aquifers and in depleted natural gas

Birkholzer, J.T.

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

320

Greenhouse gas cycling in experimental boreal reservoirs.  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

??Hydroelectric reservoirs account for 59% of the installed electricity generating capacity in Canada and 26% in Ontario. Reservoirs also provide irrigation capacity, drinking water, and… (more)

Venkiteswaran, Jason James

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


321

CHARACTERIZATION OF CONDITIONS OF NATURAL GAS STORAGE RESERVOIRS AND DESIGN AND DEMONSTRATION OF REMEDIAL TECHNIQUES FOR DAMAGE MECHANISMS FOUND THEREIN  

SciTech Connect

The underground gas storage (UGS) industry uses over 400 reservoirs and 17,000 wells to store and withdrawal gas. As such, it is a significant contributor to gas supply in the United States. It has been demonstrated that many UGS wells show a loss of deliverability each year due to numerous damage mechanisms. Previous studies estimate that up to one hundred million dollars are spent each year to recover or replace a deliverability loss of approximately 3.2 Bscf/D per year in the storage industry. Clearly, there is a great potential for developing technology to prevent, mitigate, or eliminate the damage causing deliverability losses in UGS wells. Prior studies have also identified the presence of several potential damage mechanisms in storage wells, developed damage diagnostic procedures, and discussed, in general terms, the possible reactions that need to occur to create the damage. However, few studies address how to prevent or mitigate specific damage types, and/or how to eliminate the damage from occurring in the future. This study seeks to increase our understanding of two specific damage mechanisms, inorganic precipitates (specifically siderite), and non-darcy damage, and thus serves to expand prior efforts as well as complement ongoing gas storage projects. Specifically, this study has resulted in: (1) An effective lab protocol designed to assess the extent of damage due to inorganic precipitates; (2) An increased understanding of how inorganic precipitates (specifically siderite) develop; (3) Identification of potential sources of chemical components necessary for siderite formation; (4) A remediation technique that has successfully restored deliverability to storage wells damaged by the inorganic precipitate siderite (one well had nearly a tenfold increase in deliverability); (5) Identification of the types of treatments that have historically been successful at reducing the amount of non-darcy pressure drop in a well, and (6) Development of a tool that can be used by operators to guide treatment selection in wells with significant non-darcy damage component. In addition, the effectiveness of the remediation treatment designed to reduce damage caused by the inorganic precipitate siderite was measured, and the benefits of this work are extrapolated to the entire U.S. storage industry. Similarly the potential benefits realized from more effective identification and treatment of wells with significant nondarcy damage component are also presented, and these benefits are also extrapolated to the entire U.S. storage industry.

J.H. Frantz Jr; K.G. Brown; W.K. Sawyer; P.A. Zyglowicz; P.M. Halleck; J.P. Spivey

2004-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

322

Development of Regenerable High Capacity Boron Nitrogen Hydrides as Hydrogen Storage Materials  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The objective of this three-phase project is to develop synthesis and hydrogen extraction processes for nitrogen/boron hydride compounds that will permit exploitation of the high hydrogen content of these materials. The primary compound of interest in this project is ammonia-borane (NH{sub 3}BH{sub 3}), a white solid, stable at ambient conditions, containing 19.6% of its weight as hydrogen. With a low-pressure on-board storage and an efficient heating system to release hydrogen, ammonia-borane has a potential to meet DOE's year 2015 specific energy and energy density targets. If the ammonia-borane synthesis process could use the ammonia-borane decomposition products as the starting raw material, an efficient recycle loop could be set up for converting the decomposition products back into the starting boron-nitrogen hydride. This project is addressing two key challenges facing the exploitation of the boron/nitrogen hydrides (ammonia-borane), as hydrogen storage material: (1) Development of a simple, efficient, and controllable system for extracting most of the available hydrogen, realizing the high hydrogen density on a system weight/volume basis, and (2) Development of a large-capacity, inexpensive, ammonia-borane regeneration process starting from its decomposition products (BNHx) for recycle. During Phase I of the program both catalytic and non-catalytic decomposition of ammonia borane are being investigated to determine optimum decomposition conditions in terms of temperature for decomposition, rate of hydrogen release, purity of hydrogen produced, thermal efficiency of decomposition, and regenerability of the decomposition products. The non-catalytic studies provide a base-line performance to evaluate catalytic decomposition. Utilization of solid phase catalysts mixed with ammonia-borane was explored for its potential to lower the decomposition temperature, to increase the rate of hydrogen release at a given temperature, to lead to decomposition products amenable for regeneration, and direct catalytic hydrogenation of the decomposition products. Two different approaches of heating ammonia-borane are being investigated: (a) 'heat to material approach' in which a fixed compartmentalized ammonia-borane is heated by a carefully controlled heating pattern, and (b) 'material to heat approach' in which a small amount of ammonia-borane is dispensed at a time in a fixed hot zone. All stages of AB decomposition are exothermic which should allow the small 'hot zone' used in the second approach for heating to be self-sustaining. During the past year hydrogen release efforts focused on the second approach determining the amount of hydrogen released, kinetics of hydrogen release, and the amounts of impurities released as a function of AB decomposition temperature in the 'hot zone.'

Damle, A.

2010-02-03T23:59:59.000Z

323

Exploratory Simulation Studies of Caprock Alteration Induced byStorage of CO2 in Depleted Gas Reservoirs  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report presents numerical simulations of isothermalreactive flows which might be induced in the caprock of an Italiandepleted gas reservoir by the geological sequestration of carbon dioxide.Our objective is to verify that CO2 geological disposal activitiesalready planned for the study area are safe and do not induce anyundesired environmental impact.Gas-water-rock interactions have beenmodelled under two different intial conditions, i.e., assuming that i)caprock is perfectly sealed, or ii) partially fractured. Field conditionsare better approximated in terms of the "sealed caprock model". Thefractured caprock model has been implemented because it permits toexplore the geochemical beahvior of the system under particularly severeconditions which are not currently encountered in the field, and then todelineate a sort of hypothetical maximum risk scenario.Major evidencessupporting the assumption of a sealed caprock stem from the fact that nogas leakages have been detected during the exploitation phase, subsequentreservoir repressurization due to the ingression of a lateral aquifer,and during several cycles of gas storage in the latest life of reservoirmanagement.An extensive program of multidisciplinary laboratory tests onrock properties, geochemical and microseismic monitoring, and reservoirsimulation studies is underway to better characterize the reservoir andcap-rock behavior before the performance of a planned CO2 sequestrationpilot test.In our models, fluid flow and mineral alteration are inducedin the caprock by penetration of high CO2 concentrations from theunderlying reservoir, i.e., it was assumed that large amounts of CO2 havebeen already injected at depth. The main focus is on the potential effectof these geochemical transformations on the sealing efficiency of caprockformations. Batch and multi-dimensional 1D and 2D modeling has been usedto investigate multicomponent geochemical processes. Our simulationsaccount for fracture-matrix interactions, gas phase participation inmultiphase fluid flow and geochemical reactions, and kinetics offluid-rock interactions.The main objectives of the modeling are torecognize the geochemical processes or parameters to which theadvancement of high CO2 concentrations in the caprock is most sensitive,and to describe the most relevant mineralogical transformations occurringin the caprock as a consequence of such CO2 storage in the underlyingreservoir. We also examine the feedback of these geochemical processes onphysical properties such as porosity, and evaluate how the sealingcapacity of the caprock evolves in time.

Gherardi, Fabrizio; Xu, Tianfu; Pruess, Karsten

2005-11-23T23:59:59.000Z

324

High-Capacity Hydrogen-Based Green-Energy Storage Solutions for ...  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Integrating intermittent renewable energy sources, by safe and cost-effective energy storage systems based on solid state hydrogen is today achievable thanks ...

325

Working natural gas storage capacity grows 3% year-over-year | U.S ...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

tags: natural gas storage. Email Updates. RSS Feeds. Facebook. Twitter. YouTube. Add us to your site. Have a question, comment, or suggestion for a future article?

326

PRELIMINARY CHARACTERIZATION OF CO2 SEPARATION AND STORAGE PROPERTIES OF COAL GAS RESERVOIRS  

SciTech Connect

An attractive alternative of sequestering CO{sub 2} is to inject it into coalbed methane reservoirs, particularly since it has been shown to enhance the production of methane during near depletion stages. The basis for enhanced coalbed methane recovery and simultaneous sequestration of carbon dioxide in deep coals is the preferential sorption property of coal, with its affinity for carbon dioxide being significantly higher than that for methane. Yet, the sorption behavior of coal under competitive sorptive environment is not fully understood. Hence, the original objective of this research study was to carry out a laboratory study to investigate the effect of studying the sorption behavior of coal in the presence of multiple gases, primarily methane, CO{sub 2} and nitrogen, in order to understand the mechanisms involved in displacement of methane and its movement in coal. This had to be modified slightly since the PVT property of gas mixtures is still not well understood, and any laboratory work in the area of sorption of gases requires a definite equation of state to calculate the volumes of different gases in free and adsorbed forms. This research study started with establishing gas adsorption isotherms for pure methane and CO{sub 2}. The standard gas expansion technique based on volumetric analysis was used for the experimental work with the additional feature of incorporating a gas chromatograph for analysis of gas composition. The results were analyzed first using the Langmuir theory. As expected, the Langmuir analysis indicated that CO{sub 2} is more than three times as sorptive as methane. This was followed by carrying out a partial desorption isotherm for methane, and then injecting CO{sub 2} to displace methane. The results indicated that CO{sub 2} injection at low pressure displaced all of the sorbed methane, even when the total pressure continued to be high. However, the displacement appeared to be occurring due to a combination of the preferential sorption property of coal and reduction in the partial pressure of methane. As a final step, the Extended Langmuir (EL) model was used to model the coal-methane-CO{sub 2} binary adsorption system. The EL model was found to be very accurate in predicting adsorption of CO{sub 2}, but not so in predicting desorption of methane. The selectivity of CO{sub 2} over methane was calculated to be 4.3:1. This is, of course, not in very good agreement with the measured values which showed the ratio to be 3.5:1. However, the measured results are in good agreement with the field observation at one of the CO{sub 2} injection sites. Based on the findings of this study, it was concluded that low pressure injection of CO{sub 2} can be fairly effective in displacing methane in coalbed reservoirs although this might be difficult to achieve in field conditions. Furthermore, the displacement of methane appears to be not only due to the preferential sorption of methane, but reduction in partial pressure as well. Hence, using a highly adsorbing gas, such as CO{sub 2}, has the advantages of inert gas stripping and non-mixing since the injected gas does not mix with the recovered methane.

John Kemeny; Satya Harpalani

2004-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

327

Rigorous Screening Technology for Identifying Suitable CO2 Storage Sites II  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report serves as the final technical report and users manual for the 'Rigorous Screening Technology for Identifying Suitable CO2 Storage Sites II SBIR project. Advanced Resources International has developed a screening tool by which users can technically screen, assess the storage capacity and quantify the costs of CO2 storage in four types of CO2 storage reservoirs. These include CO2-enhanced oil recovery reservoirs, depleted oil and gas fields (non-enhanced oil recovery candidates), deep coal seems that are amenable to CO2-enhanced methane recovery, and saline reservoirs. The screening function assessed whether the reservoir could likely serve as a safe, long-term CO2 storage reservoir. The storage capacity assessment uses rigorous reservoir simulation models to determine the timing, ultimate storage capacity, and potential for enhanced hydrocarbon recovery. Finally, the economic assessment function determines both the field-level and pipeline (transportation) costs for CO2 sequestration in a given reservoir. The screening tool has been peer reviewed at an Electrical Power Research Institute (EPRI) technical meeting in March 2009. A number of useful observations and recommendations emerged from the Workshop on the costs of CO2 transport and storage that could be readily incorporated into a commercial version of the Screening Tool in a Phase III SBIR.

George J. Koperna Jr.; Vello A. Kuuskraa; David E. Riestenberg; Aiysha Sultana; Tyler Van Leeuwen

2009-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

328

Polymorphisms in the 5-httlpr gene mediate storage capacity of visual working memory  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Working memory (WM) is a limited capacity system that permeates nearly all levels of cognition, ranging from perceptual awareness to intelligence. Through behavioral, electrophysiological, and neuroimaging work, substantial gains have been made in understanding ...

David E. Anderson; Theodore A. Bell; Edward Awh

2012-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

329

BATTERY-POWERED, ELECTRIC-DRIVE VEHICLES PROVIDING BUFFER STORAGE FOR PV CAPACITY VALUE  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

installed over 1.5 MW of rooftop PV [2]. These systems generate value primarily through the energy produced and the intermittent nature of the solar resource create challenges to realizing the capacity value of PV installations

Perez, Richard R.

330

Graphene Enhances Li Storage Capacity of Porous Single-crystalline Silicon Nanowires  

SciTech Connect

We demonstrated that graphene significantly enhances the reversible capacity of porous silicon nanowires used as the anode in Li-ion batteries. We prepared our experimental nanomaterials, viz., graphene and porous single-crystalline silicon nanowires, respectively, using a liquid-phase graphite exfoliation method and an electroless HF/AgNO{sub 3} etching process. The Si porous nanowire/graphene electrode realized a charge capacity of 2470 mAh g{sup -1} that is much higher than the 1256 mAh g{sup -1} of porous Si nanowire/C-black electrode and 6.6 times the theoretical capacity of commercial graphite. This relatively high capacity could originate from the favorable charge-transportation characteristics of the combination of graphene with the porous Si 1D nanostructure.

Wang, X.; Han, W.

2010-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

331

U.S. Weekly Natural Gas Storage Data  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

... Production and Net Imports Natural Gas Storage Storage Reservoirs by Type Underground Natural Gas Storage Facilities in the ... (written copies ...

332

New High Capacity Getter for Vacuum-Insulated Mobile Liquid Hydrogen Storage Systems  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Current ''Non evaporable getters'' (NEGs), based on the principle of metallic surface sorption of gas molecules, are important tools for the improving the performance of many vacuum systems. High porosity alloys or powder mixtures of Zr, Ti, Al, V, Fe and other metals are the base materials for this type of getters. The continuous development of vacuum technologies has created new challenges for the field of getter materials. The main sorption parameters of the current NEGs, namely, pumping speed and sorption capacity, have reached certain upper limits. Chemically active metals are the basis of a new generation of NEGs. The introduction of these new materials with high sorption capacity at room temperature is a long-awaited development. These new materials enable the new generation of NEGs to reach faster pumping speeds, significantly higher sticking rates and sorption capacities up to 104 times higher during their lifetimes. Our development efforts focus on producing these chemically active metals with controlled insulation or protection. The main structural forms of our new getter materials are spherical powders, granules and porous multi-layers. The full pumping performance can take place at room temperature with activation temperatures ranging from room temperature to 650 C. In one of our first pilot projects, our proprietary getter solution was successfully introduced as a getter pump in a double-wall mobile LH2 tank system. Our getters were shown to have very high sorption capacity of all relevant residual gases, including H2. This new concept opens the opportunity for significant vacuum improvements, especially in the field of H2 pumping which is an important task in many different vacuum applications.

H. Londer; G. R. Myneni; P. Adderley; G. Bartlok; J. Setina; W. Knapp; D. Schleussner

2006-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

333

Mechanism for high hydrogen storage capacity on metal-coated carbon nanotubes: A first principle analysis  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The hydrogen adsorption and binding mechanism on metals (Ca, Sc, Ti and V) decorated single walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs) are investigated using first principle calculations. Our results show that those metals coated on SWCNTs can uptake over 8 wt% hydrogen molecules with binding energy range -0.2--0.6 eV, promising potential high density hydrogen storage material. The binding mechanism is originated from the electrostatic Coulomb attraction, which is induced by the electric field due to the charge transfer from metal 4s to 3d. Moreover, we found that the interaction between the H{sub 2}-H{sub 2} further lowers the binding energy. - Graphical abstract: Five hydrogen molecules bound to individual Ca decorated (8, 0) SWCNT : a potential hydrogen-storage material. Highlights: Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer Each transition metal atom can adsorb more than four hydrogen molecules. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer The interation between metal and hydrogen molecule is electrostatic coulomb attraction. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer The electric field is induced by the charge transfer from metal 4s to metal 3d. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer The adsorbed hydrogen molecules which form supermolecule can further lower the binding energy.

Lu, Jinlian; Xiao, Hong [Department of Physics and Institute for nanophysics and Rare-earth Luminescence, Xiangtan University, Xiangtan, Hunan Province 411105 (China)] [Department of Physics and Institute for nanophysics and Rare-earth Luminescence, Xiangtan University, Xiangtan, Hunan Province 411105 (China); Cao, Juexian, E-mail: jxcao@xtu.edu.cn [Department of Physics and Institute for nanophysics and Rare-earth Luminescence, Xiangtan University, Xiangtan, Hunan Province 411105 (China)] [Department of Physics and Institute for nanophysics and Rare-earth Luminescence, Xiangtan University, Xiangtan, Hunan Province 411105 (China)

2012-12-15T23:59:59.000Z

334

Storage  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Storage Storage DUF6 Health Risks line line Accidents Storage Conversion Manufacturing Disposal Transportation Storage A discussion of depleted UF6 cylinder storage activities and associated risks. Management Activities for Cylinders in Storage The long-term management of the existing DUF6 storage cylinders and the continual effort to remediate and maintain the safe condition of the DUF6 storage cylinders will remain a Departmental responsibility for many years into the future. The day to day management of the DUF6 cylinders includes actions designed to cost effectively maintain and improve their storage conditions, such as: General storage cylinder and storage yard maintenance; Performing regular inspections of cylinders; Restacking and respacing the cylinders to improve drainage and to

335

Storage  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Environmental Risks » Storage Environmental Risks » Storage Depleted UF6 Environmental Risks line line Storage Conversion Manufacturing Disposal Environmental Risks of Depleted UF6 Storage Discussion of the potential environmental impacts from storage of depleted UF6 at the three current storage sites, as well as potential impacts from the storage of depleted uranium after conversion to an oxide form. Impacts Analyzed in the PEIS The PEIS included an analysis of the potential environmental impacts from continuing to store depleted UF6 cylinders at the three current storage sites, as well as potential impacts from the storage of depleted uranium after conversion to an oxide form. Impacts from Continued Storage of UF6 Cylinders Continued storage of the UF6 cylinders would require extending the use of a

336

NETL: Carbon Storage - Geologic Storage  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Geologic Storage Geologic Storage Carbon Storage Geologic Storage Focus Area Geologiccarbon dioxide (CO2) storage involves the injection of supercritical CO2 into deep geologic formations (injection zones) overlain by competent sealing formations and geologic traps that will prevent the CO2 from escaping. Current research and field studies are focused on developing better understanding 11 major types of geologic storage reservoir classes, each having their own unique opportunities and challenges. Understanding these different storage classes provides insight into how the systems influence fluids flow within these systems today, and how CO2 in geologic storage would be anticipated to flow in the future. The different storage formation classes include: deltaic, coal/shale, fluvial, alluvial, strandplain, turbidite, eolian, lacustrine, clastic shelf, carbonate shallow shelf, and reef. Basaltic interflow zones are also being considered as potential reservoirs. These storage reservoirs contain fluids that may include natural gas, oil, or saline water; any of which may impact CO2 storage differently. The following summarizes the potential for storage and the challenges related to CO2 storage capability for fluids that may be present in more conventional clastic and carbonate reservoirs (saline water, and oil and gas), as well as unconventional reservoirs (unmineable coal seams, organic-rich shales, and basalts):

337

Optimum Reservoir Operation for Flood Control and Conservation Purposes  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Rapid population and economic growth in Texas is accompanied by increased needs for water supply and flood control. Depleting groundwater reserves are resulting in an increased reliance on surface water. The rising cost of fossil fuel during the 1970's has focused attention on increasing hydroelectric power generation. Instream flow needs for fish and wildlife habitat and maintenance of fresh water inflows to bays and estuaries have received increased attention in recent years. The climate of the state is characterized by extremes of floods and droughts. Reservoirs are necessary to control and utilize the highly variable streamflow. Due to a number of economic, environmental, institutional, and political factors, construction of additional new reservoir projects is much more difficult now than in the past. Consequently, optimizing the beneficial use of existing reservoirs is becoming increasingly more important. In addition to ever increasing water related needs, other factors affecting reservoir operation change over time as well. Watershed and flood plain conditions are dynamic. Construction of numerous small flood retarding dams by the Soil Conservation Service and other entities in the watersheds of major reservoirs have reduced flood inflows to the reservoirs. Construction of numerous small ponds for recreation or watering livestock have also decreased reservoir inflows and yields. Increased runoff caused by watershed urbanization is significantly contributing to flooding problems in certain locations. The existing flood control reservoirs were planned and designed based on the expectation of ever increasing intensification of flood plain land use. However, the National Flood Insurance Program has resulted in zoning and regulation of 100-year flood plains. With stringent flood plain management, susceptibility to flooding could actually decrease over time as existing activities choose to leave the flood plain and regulation prevents other activities from moving into the flood plain. Reservoir sedimentation reduces available storage capacity. Construction of additional reservoirs, as well as other related types of projects such as conveyance facilities, flood control levees and channel improvements, and electric power plants, affect the operation of existing reservoirs. Technological advancements in hydrologic data collection, streamflow forecasting, system modeling and analysis, and computer technology provide opportunities for refining operating policies. Reservoir storage capacities and operating policies are generally established prior to construction and tend to remain constant thereafter. However, public needs and objectives and numerous factors affecting reservoir effectiveness significantly change over time. The increasing necessity to use limited storage capacity as effectively as possible warrants periodic reevaluations of operating policies. Operating procedures should be responsive to changing needs and conditions. Reallocation of storage capacity between flood control and conservation purposes represents one general strategy for modifying operating policies in response to changing needs and conditions. Reservoir operation is based upon the conflicting objectives of maximizing the amount of water available for conservation purposes and maximizing the amount of empty space available for storing flood waters. Conservation purposes include municipal, industrial, and agricultural water supply, hydroelectric power, recreation, and instream flow maintenance. Common practice is to operate a reservoir only for conservation purposes or only for flood control or to designate a certain reservoir volume, or pool, for conservation purposes and a separate pool for flood control. The conservation and flood control pools in a multiple purpose reservoir are fixed by a designated top of conservation (bottom of flood control) pool elevation. Planning, design, and operating problems associated with flood control are handled separately from those associated with conservation. Institutional arra

Wurbs, Ralph A.; Cabezas, L. Morris; Tibbets, Michael N.

1985-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

338

Assessing the Effect of Timing of Availability for Carbon Dioxide Storage in the Largest Oil and Gas Pools in the Alberta Basin: Description of Data and Methodology  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Carbon dioxide capture from large stationary sources and storage in geological media is a technologically-feasible mitigation measure for the reduction of anthropogenic emissions of CO2 to the atmosphere in response to climate change. Carbon dioxide (CO2) can be sequestered underground in oil and gas reservoirs, in deep saline aquifers, in uneconomic coal beds and in salt caverns. The Alberta Basin provides a very large capacity for CO2 storage in oil and gas reservoirs, along with significant capacity in deep saline formations and possible unmineable coal beds. Regional assessments of potential geological CO2 storage capacity have largely focused so far on estimating the total capacity that might be available within each type of reservoir. While deep saline formations are effectively able to accept CO2 immediately, the storage potential of other classes of candidate storage reservoirs, primarily oil and gas fields, is not fully available at present time. Capacity estimates to date have largely overlooked rates of depletion in these types of storage reservoirs and typically report the total estimated storage capacity that will be available upon depletion. However, CO2 storage will not (and cannot economically) begin until the recoverable oil and gas have been produced via traditional means. This report describes a reevaluation of the CO2 storage capacity and an assessment of the timing of availability of the oil and gas pools in the Alberta Basin with very large storage capacity (>5 MtCO2 each) that are being looked at as likely targets for early implementation of CO2 storage in the region. Over 36,000 non-commingled (i.e., single) oil and gas pools were examined with effective CO2 storage capacities being individually estimated. For each pool, the life expectancy was estimated based on a combination of production decline analysis constrained by the remaining recoverable reserves and an assessment of economic viability, yielding an estimated depletion date, or year that it will be available for CO2 storage. The modeling framework and assumptions used to assess the impact of the timing of CO2 storage resource availability on the region’s deployment of CCS technologies is also described. The purpose of this report is to describe the data and methodology for examining the carbon dioxide (CO2) storage capacity resource of a major hydrocarbon province incorporating estimated depletion dates for its oil and gas fields with the largest CO2 storage capacity. This allows the development of a projected timeline for CO2 storage availability across the basin and enables a more realistic examination of potential oil and gas field CO2 storage utilization by the region’s large CO2 point sources. The Alberta Basin of western Canada was selected for this initial examination as a representative mature basin, and the development of capacity and depletion date estimates for the 227 largest oil and gas pools (with a total storage capacity of 4.7 GtCO2) is described, along with the impact on source-reservoir pairing and resulting CO2 transport and storage economics. The analysis indicates that timing of storage resource availability has a significant impact on the mix of storage reservoirs selected for utilization at a given time, and further confirms the value that all available reservoir types offer, providing important insights regarding CO2 storage implementation to this and other major oil and gas basins throughout North America and the rest of the world. For CCS technologies to deploy successfully and offer a meaningful contribution to climate change mitigation, CO2 storage reservoirs must be available not only where needed (preferably co-located with or near large concentrations of CO2 sources or emissions centers) but also when needed. The timing of CO2 storage resource availability is therefore an important factor to consider when assessing the real opportunities for CCS deployment in a given region.

Dahowski, Robert T.; Bachu, Stefan

2007-03-05T23:59:59.000Z

339

Predicting Well Stimulation Results in a Gas Storage Field in the Absence of Reservoir Data, Using Neural Networks  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Sand. The Clinton is a tight gas-bearing sandstone. Natural fracturing is thought to account storage field located in Northeastern Ohio. The formation is a tight gas sandstone known as the Clinton for production in economic quantities. Sand occurs in lenses and is largely discontinuous from one well

Mohaghegh, Shahab

340

Underground pumped hydroelectric storage  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Underground pumped hydroelectric energy storage was conceived as a modification of surface pumped storage to eliminate dependence upon fortuitous topography, provide higher hydraulic heads, and reduce environmental concerns. A UPHS plant offers substantial savings in investment cost over coal-fired cycling plants and savings in system production costs over gas turbines. Potential location near load centers lowers transmission costs and line losses. Environmental impact is less than that for a coal-fired cycling plant. The inherent benefits include those of all pumped storage (i.e., rapid load response, emergency capacity, improvement in efficiency as pumps improve, and capacity for voltage regulation). A UPHS plant would be powered by either a coal-fired or nuclear baseload plant. The economic capacity of a UPHS plant would be in the range of 1000 to 3000 MW. This storage level is compatible with the load-leveling requirements of a greater metropolitan area with population of 1 million or more. The technical feasibility of UPHS depends upon excavation of a subterranean powerhouse cavern and reservoir caverns within a competent, impervious rock formation, and upon selection of reliable and efficient turbomachinery - pump-turbines and motor-generators - all remotely operable.

Allen, R.D.; Doherty, T.J.; Kannberg, L.D.

1984-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


341

Tomorrow`s energy today for cities and counties - keep it cool with thermal energy storage  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Cool thermal energy storage (TES) is described as a means for electric utilities to provide electricity from off-peak times, particularly in the summer when air-conditioning accounts for 50% or more of electricity consumption. Cool TES uses off-peak power to provide cooling capacity by extracting heat from a storage medium such as ice or other phase change material. A refrigeration system may may be utilized at night to provide a reservoir of cold material. During the day, the reservoir is tapped to provide cooling capacity. The advantages of TES are discussed.

NONE

1995-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

342

Development of high through-put Sr isotope analysis for monitoring reservoir integrity for CO{sub 2} storage.  

SciTech Connect

Recent innovations in multi-collector ICP-mass spectrometry (MC-ICP-MS) have allowed for rapid and precise measurements of isotope ratios in geological samples. Naturally occurring Sr isotopes has the potential for use in Monitoring, Verification, and Accounting (MVA) associated with geologic CO2 storage. Sr isotopes can be useful for: Sensitive tracking of brine migration; Determining seal rock leakage; Studying fluid/rock reactions. We have optimized separation chemistry procedures that will allow operators to prepare samples for Sr isotope analysis off site using rapid, low cost methods.

Wall, Andy; Jain, Jinesh; Stewart, Brian; Capo, Rosemary; Hakala, Alexandra J.; Hammack, Richard; Guthrie, George

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

343

Uncertainty analysis of capacity estimates and leakage potential for geologic storage of carbon dioxide in saline aquifers  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

The need to address climate change has gained political momentum, and Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is a technology that is seen as being feasible for the mitigation of carbon dioxide emissions. However, there is ...

Raza, Yamama

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

344

Carbon Storage R&D | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Coal Carbon Capture and Storage Capture Storage Utilization MVA Regional Partnerships Oil & Gas Carbon dioxide storage in geologic formations includes oil and gas reservoirs,...

345

Net Withdrawals of Natural Gas from Underground Storage (Summary)  

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

Pipeline and Distribution Use Price Citygate Price Residential Price Commercial Price Industrial Price Vehicle Fuel Price Electric Power Price Proved Reserves as of 12/31 Reserves Adjustments Reserves Revision Increases Reserves Revision Decreases Reserves Sales Reserves Acquisitions Reserves Extensions Reserves New Field Discoveries New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields Estimated Production Number of Producing Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Oil Wells Gross Withdrawals From Shale Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Coalbed Wells Repressuring Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed Vented and Flared Marketed Production Natural Gas Processed NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent Dry Production Imports By Pipeline LNG Imports Exports Exports By Pipeline LNG Exports Underground Storage Capacity Underground Storage Injections Underground Storage Withdrawals Underground Storage Net Withdrawals LNG Storage Additions LNG Storage Withdrawals LNG Storage Net Withdrawals Total Consumption Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption Lease Fuel Plant Fuel Pipeline & Distribution Use Delivered to Consumers Residential Commercial Industrial Vehicle Fuel Electric Power Period: Monthly Annual

346

Liquid heat capacity lasers  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

The heat capacity laser concept is extended to systems in which the heat capacity lasing media is a liquid. The laser active liquid is circulated from a reservoir (where the bulk of the media and hence waste heat resides) through a channel so configured for both optical pumping of the media for gain and for light amplification from the resulting gain.

Comaskey, Brian J. (Walnut Creek, CA); Scheibner, Karl F. (Tracy, CA); Ault, Earl R. (Livermore, CA)

2007-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

347

Bottling Electricity: Storage as a Strategic Tool for Managing Variability and Capacity Concerns in the Modern Grid  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

ELECTRICITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE MISSION The mission of the Electricity Advisory Committee is to provide advice to the U.S. Department of Energy in implementing the Energy Policy Act of 2005, executing the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, and modernizing the nation's electricity delivery infrastructure. ELECTRICITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE GOALS The goals of the Electricity Advisory Committee are to provide advice on: * Electricity policy issues pertaining to the U.S. Department of Energy * Recommendations concerning U.S. Department of Energy electricity programs and initiatives * Issues related to current and future capacity of the electricity delivery system (generation, transmission, and distribution, regionally and nationally)

348

EOS7C Version 1.0: TOUGH2 Module for Carbon Dioxide or Nitrogen in Natural Gas (Methane) Reservoirs  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

as cushion gas for natural gas storage, Energy&Fuels ,2 as a cushion gas for natural gas storage can be found inin natural gas reservoirs and gas storage reservoirs (

Oldenburg, Curtis M.; Moridis, George J.; Spycher, Nicholas; Pruess, Karsten

2004-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

349

Distributed Generation with Heat Recovery and Storage  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

between heat storage costs and capacity can be determineda given kWh of heat storage capacity is worth to a typicalequation (22) sets the heat storage capacity to the maximum

Siddiqui, Afzal; Marnay, Chris; Firestone, Ryan M.; Zhou, Nan

2005-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

350

Blackfoot Reservoir Geothermal Area | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Blackfoot Reservoir Geothermal Area Blackfoot Reservoir Geothermal Area (Redirected from Blackfoot Reservoir Area) Jump to: navigation, search GEOTHERMAL ENERGYGeothermal Home Geothermal Resource Area: Blackfoot Reservoir Geothermal Area Contents 1 Area Overview 2 History and Infrastructure 3 Regulatory and Environmental Issues 4 Exploration History 5 Well Field Description 6 Geology of the Area 7 Geofluid Geochemistry 8 NEPA-Related Analyses (0) 9 Exploration Activities (3) 10 References Area Overview Geothermal Area Profile Location: Idaho Exploration Region: Northern Basin and Range Geothermal Region GEA Development Phase: 2008 USGS Resource Estimate Mean Reservoir Temp: Estimated Reservoir Volume: Mean Capacity: Click "Edit With Form" above to add content History and Infrastructure Operating Power Plants: 0

351

Reservoir technology research at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The research being carried out at LBL as part of DOE/GTD's Reservoir Technology Program includes field, theoretical and modeling activities. The purpose is to develop, improve and validate methods and instrumentation to: (1) determine geothermal reservoir parameters, (2) detect and characterize reservoir fractures and boundaries, and (3) identify and evaluate the importance of reservoir processes. The ultimate objective of this work is to advance the state-of-the-art for characterizing geothermal reservoirs and evaluating their productive capacity and longevity under commercial exploitation. LBL's FY1986 accomplishments, FY1987 progress to date, and possible future activities under DOE's Reservoir Technology Program are discussed.

Lippmann, M.J.

1987-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

352

"Technologies to Ensure Permanent Geologic Carbon Storage,"  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

of carbon dioxide (CO of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ). DE-FOA-0000652, titled, "Technologies to Ensure Permanent Geologic Carbon Storage," addresses key geologic storage challenges and uncertainties that include improving and validating containment, improving injection operations, increasing reservoir storage efficiency, and mitigating potential releases of CO 2 from the engineered containment system. The following four technical areas of interest are addressed: Area of Interest 1 - Studies of Existing Wellbores Exposed to CO 2 ; Area of Interest 2 - Advanced Wellbore Integrity Technologies; Area of Interest 3 - Field Methods to Optimize Capacity and Ensure Storage Containment; and Area of Interest 4 - Enhanced Simulation Tools to Improve Predictions and

353

Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields...  

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

Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1...

354

The Basics of Underground Natural Gas Storage  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Analysis > The Basics of Underground Natural Gas Storage Analysis > The Basics of Underground Natural Gas Storage The Basics of Underground Natural Gas Storage Latest update: August 2004 Printer-Friendly Version Natural gas-a colorless, odorless, gaseous hydrocarbon-may be stored in a number of different ways. It is most commonly held in inventory underground under pressure in three types of facilities. These are: (1) depleted reservoirs in oil and/or gas fields, (2) aquifers, and (3) salt cavern formations. (Natural gas is also stored in liquid form in above-ground tanks. A discussion of liquefied natural gas (LNG) is beyond the scope of this report. For more information about LNG, please see the EIA report, The Global Liquefied Natural Gas Market: Status & Outlook.) Each storage type has its own physical characteristics (porosity, permeability, retention capability) and economics (site preparation and maintenance costs, deliverability rates, and cycling capability), which govern its suitability to particular applications. Two of the most important characteristics of an underground storage reservoir are its capacity to hold natural gas for future use and the rate at which gas inventory can be withdrawn-its deliverability rate (see Storage Measures, below, for key definitions).

355

Blackfoot Reservoir Geothermal Area | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Blackfoot Reservoir Geothermal Area Blackfoot Reservoir Geothermal Area Jump to: navigation, search GEOTHERMAL ENERGYGeothermal Home Geothermal Resource Area: Blackfoot Reservoir Geothermal Area Contents 1 Area Overview 2 History and Infrastructure 3 Regulatory and Environmental Issues 4 Exploration History 5 Well Field Description 6 Geology of the Area 7 Geofluid Geochemistry 8 NEPA-Related Analyses (0) 9 Exploration Activities (3) 10 References Area Overview Geothermal Area Profile Location: Idaho Exploration Region: Northern Basin and Range Geothermal Region GEA Development Phase: 2008 USGS Resource Estimate Mean Reservoir Temp: Estimated Reservoir Volume: Mean Capacity: Click "Edit With Form" above to add content History and Infrastructure Operating Power Plants: 0 No geothermal plants listed.

356

Natural Gas Aquifers Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1,347,516 1,351,832 1,340,633 1,233,017 1,231,897 1,237,269 1,347,516 1,351,832 1,340,633 1,233,017 1,231,897 1,237,269 1999-2012 Alabama 0 1999-2012 Arkansas 0 1999-2012 California 0 0 1999-2012 Colorado 0 1999-2012 Illinois 876,960 874,384 885,848 772,381 777,294 779,862 1999-2012 Indiana 81,490 81,991 81,328 81,268 81,310 80,746 1999-2012 Iowa 278,238 284,747 284,811 288,010 288,210 288,210 1999-2012 Kansas 0 1999-2012 Kentucky 9,567 9,567 9,567 9,567 9,567 9,567 1999-2012 Louisiana 0 1999-2012 Michigan 0 1999-2012 Minnesota 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 1999-2012 Mississippi 0 1999-2012 Missouri 32,940 32,876 10,889 11,502 13,845 13,845 1999-2012 Montana 0 1999-2012 New Mexico 0 1999-2012 New York 0 1999-2012 Ohio 0 1999-2012 Oklahoma 170 1999-2012 Oregon 0 1999-2012 Pennsylvania

357

Individual working memory capacity is uniquely correlated with feature-based attention when combined with spatial attention  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

of mental storage capacity. 87-114. Zhang, W. , & Luck, S.of working memory capacity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,of mental storage capacity. The Behavioral and Brain

Bengson, Jesse J.; Mangun, George R.

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

358

Injection and Reservoir Hazard Management: The Role of Injection-Induced Mechanical Deformation and Geochemical Alteration at In Salah CO2 Storage Project: Status ReportQuarter end, June 2009  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The In Salah Gas Project (ISG), a joint venture (JV) of BP, Sonatrach, and StatoilHydro, has two fundamental goals: (1) 25-30 years of 9 bcfy natural gas production from 8 fields in the Algerian Central Sahara, and (2) successful minimization of the associated environmental footprint by capture and subsurface isolation of the excess CO{sub 2} extracted from production streams and subsurface isolation in the Krechba sandstone reservoir. The In Salah project provides an opportunity to study key physical and chemical processes in operational deployment of geological carbon sequestration. The objectives of the research are to study two components relevant to storage effectiveness and operational success at In Salah: Reactive chemistry of the brine-CO{sub 2}-reservoir-caprock-wellbore system, and the geomechanical effects of large-scale injection on crustal deformation and fault leakage hazards. Results from this work will enhance predictive capability of field performance, provide a new basis for interpretation of geophysical monitoring at In Salah, and provide additional information relevant to the creation of geological sequestration standards. The Joint Industry Partners (JIP: BP, StatoilHydro, Sonatrach) and LLNL will share data and results to achieve the objectives of the proposed work. The objective of the work performed at LLNL is to integrate LLNL core strengths in geochemistry and geomechanics to better understand and predict the fate of injected CO{sub 2} in the field. The mechanical, chemical and transport properties of the reservoir-caprock system are coupled. We are using LLNL-developed quantitative tools to assess the potential for CO{sub 2} migration/leakage caused by injection-induced deformation. The geomechanical work is focused upon fault activation, fluid induced fracturing of the caprock and permeability field evolution of the fractured reservoir. These results will be used in concert with reactive transport calculations to predict the ultimate fate of the CO{sub 2}. We will integrate laboratory and reactive transport modeling to assess CO{sub 2} plume migration and partitioning between different trapping mechanisms. Geochemical reactive transport modeling will be used to address multiphase flow (supercritical CO{sub 2} and water), CO{sub 2} dissolution, mineral sequestration, and porosity/permeability changes. The reactive transport portion of the work ultimately couples with geomechanical modeling. In particular, the distribution of the pressure perturbation induced by injection drives the geomechanical response. Subsequently, the geochemical work determines if water-rock interactions eventually enhance or suppress fractures. A key focus of this work is to establish the site specific interactions of geomechanics, reactive flow and transport. This involves building and refining models of the reservoir and overburden. The models will undergo continual refinement in response to data collected in the field and experiments performed at LLNL and elsewhere. This project commenced in FY08, with DOE funding starting in April, FY08. We have successfully initiated a cross-disciplinary study of the In Salah CO{sub 2} sequestration project and have met all FY08 and FY09 Q1, Q2 and Q3 milestones. During the reporting period, we continued to acquire and process data from the JIP to import into our own geomechanical and geochemical computational tools. The lab testing program continued using both locally formulated cements and field samples from Krechba. The geomechanical studies indicate that pore fluid pressures induced by injection will lead to significant permeability enhancement of the combination of fracture network and fault network within the reservoir in the vicinity of the injectors. We continued reactive transport calculations for CO{sub 2} rich fluids flowing through fractures. These calculations demonstrate that although porosity and permeability changes are expected in response to CO{sub 2} injection they are not anticipated to have a significant effect upon transport properties within the reservoir or c

Morris, J P; McNab, W W; Carroll, S K; Hao, Y; Foxall, W; Wagoner, J L

2009-07-30T23:59:59.000Z

359

Distributed Generation with Heat Recovery and Storage  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Doubling combined heat and power capacity in the UnitedCost Savings from Heat Storage Capacity Figure 49. LargeR 2 = 0.6683 Heat Storage Capacity (kWh) Fig. 48 Weekday

Siddiqui, Afzal S.; Marnay, Chris; Firestone, Ryan M.; Zhou, Nan

2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

360

Joule-Thomson Cooling Due to CO2 Injection into Natural Gas Reservoirs  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

as cushion gas for natural gas storage, Energy & Fuels, 17(super-cushion gas for natural gas storage (Oldenburg, 2003).storage of carbon dioxide in depleted natural gas reservoirs

Oldenburg, Curtis M.

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


361

H 2 Storage Projects  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

... 10. Titanium-decorated carbon nanotubes: a potential high-capacity hydrogen storage madium. ... 3. Exohydrogenated single-wall carbon nanotubes. ...

362

California Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields...  

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

Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) California Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic...

363

New Mexico Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields...  

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

Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)...

364

Refinery Capacity Report 2007  

Reports and Publications (EIA)

Data series include fuel, electricity, and steam purchased for consumption at the refinery; refinery receipts of crude oil by method of transportation; current and projected capacities for atmospheric crude oil distillation, downstream charge, production, and storage capacities. Respondents are operators of all operating and idle petroleum refineries (including new refineries under construction) and refineries shut down during the previous year, located in the 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and other U.S. possessions.

Information Center

2007-06-29T23:59:59.000Z

365

Refinery Capacity Report 2009  

Reports and Publications (EIA)

Data series include fuel, electricity, and steam purchased for consumption at the refinery; refinery receipts of crude oil by method of transportation; current and projected capacities for atmospheric crude oil distillation, downstream charge, production, and storage capacities. Respondents are operators of all operating and idle petroleum refineries (including new refineries under construction) and refineries shut down during the previous year, located in the 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and other U.S. possessions.

Information Center

2009-06-25T23:59:59.000Z

366

Refinery Capacity Report 2008  

Reports and Publications (EIA)

Data series include fuel, electricity, and steam purchased for consumption at the refinery; refinery receipts of crude oil by method of transportation; current and projected capacities for atmospheric crude oil distillation, downstream charge, production, and storage capacities. Respondents are operators of all operating and idle petroleum refineries (including new refineries under construction) and refineries shut down during the previous year, located in the 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and other U.S. possessions.

Information Center

2008-06-20T23:59:59.000Z

367

NETL: Carbon Storage FAQs  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

different options for CO2 storage? different options for CO2 storage? Oil and gas reservoirs, many containing carbon dioxide (CO2), as well as natural deposits of almost pure CO2, can be found in many places in the United States and around the world. These are examples of long-term storage of CO2 by nature, where "long term" means millions of years. Their existence demonstrates that naturally occurring geologic formations and structures of various kinds are capable of securely storing CO2 deep in the subsurface for very long periods of time. Because of the economic importance of oil and gas, scientists and engineers have studied these natural deposits for many decades in order to understand the physical and chemical processes which led to their formation. There are also many decades of engineering experience in subsurface operations similar to those needed for CO2 storage. The most directly applicable experience comes from the oil industry, which, for 40 years, has injected CO2 in depleted oil reservoirs for the recovery of additional product through enhanced oil recovery (EOR). Additional experience comes from natural gas storage operations, which have utilized depleted gas reservoirs, as well as reservoirs containing only water. Scientists and engineers are now combining the knowledge obtained from study of natural deposits with experience from analogous operations as a basis for studying the potential for large-scale storage of CO2 in the deep subsurface.

368

2012 Storage Report: Progress and Prospects - EAC Recommendations...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Worldwide ...20 Figure 6: Energy Storage Capacity (MW), Excluding Traditional Pumped Hydro, Worldwide ....21 Figure...

369

Compressed air energy storage system  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

An internal combustion reciprocating engine is operable as a compressor during slack demand periods utilizing excess power from a power grid to charge air into an air storage reservoir and as an expander during peak demand periods to feed power into the power grid utilizing air obtained from the air storage reservoir together with combustible fuel. Preferably the internal combustion reciprocating engine is operated at high pressure and a low pressure turbine and compressor are also employed for air compression and power generation.

Ahrens, Frederick W. (Naperville, IL); Kartsounes, George T. (Naperville, IL)

1981-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

370

EIA - Natural Gas Storage Data & Analysis  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Storage Storage Weekly Working Gas in Underground Storage U.S. Natural gas inventories held in underground storage facilities by East, West, and Producing regions (weekly). Underground Storage - All Operators Total storage by base gas and working gas, and storage activity by State (monthly, annual). Underground Storage by Type U.S. storage and storage activity by all operators, salt cavern fields and nonsalt cavern (monthly, annual). Underground Storage Capacity Storage capacity, working gas capacity, and number of active fields for salt caverns, aquifers, and depleted fields by State (monthly, annual). Liquefied Natural Gas Additions to and Withdrawals from Storage By State (annual). Weekly Natural Gas Storage Report Estimates of natural gas in underground storage for the U.S. and three regions of the U.S.

371

Adsorption of water vapor on reservoir rocks  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Progress is reported on: adsorption of water vapor on reservoir rocks; theoretical investigation of adsorption; estimation of adsorption parameters from transient experiments; transient adsorption experiment -- salinity and noncondensible gas effects; the physics of injection of water into, transport and storage of fluids within, and production of vapor from geothermal reservoirs; injection optimization at the Geysers Geothermal Field; a model to test multiwell data interpretation for heterogeneous reservoirs; earth tide effects on downhole pressure measurements; and a finite-difference model for free surface gravity drainage well test analysis.

Not Available

1993-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

372

The Rosetta Resources CO2 Storage Project - A WESTCARB GeologicPilot Test  

SciTech Connect

WESTCARB, one of seven U.S. Department of Energypartnerships, identified (during its Phase I study) over 600 gigatonnesof CO2 storage capacity in geologic formations located in the Westernregion. The Western region includes the WESTCARB partnership states ofAlaska, Arizona, California, Nevada, Oregon and Washington and theCanadian province of British Columbia. The WESTCARB Phase II study iscurrently under way, featuring three geologic and two terrestrial CO2pilot projects designed to test promising sequestration technologies atsites broadly representative of the region's largest potential carbonsinks. This paper focuses on two of the geologic pilot studies plannedfor Phase II -referred to-collectively as the Rosetta-Calpine CO2 StorageProject. The first pilot test will demonstrate injection of CO2 into asaline formation beneath a depleted gas reservoir. The second test willgather data for assessing CO2 enhanced gas recovery (EGR) as well asstorage in a depleted gas reservoir. The benefit of enhanced oil recovery(EOR) using injected CO2 to drive or sweep oil from the reservoir towarda production well is well known. EaR involves a similar CO2 injectionprocess, but has received far less attention. Depleted natural gasreservoirs still contain methane; therefore, CO2 injection may enhancemethane production by reservoir repressurization or pressure maintenance.CO2 injection into a saline formation, followed by injection into adepleted natural gas reservoir, is currently scheduled to start inOctober 2006.

Trautz, Robert; Benson, Sally; Myer, Larry; Oldenburg, Curtis; Seeman, Ed; Hadsell, Eric; Funderburk, Ben

2006-01-30T23:59:59.000Z

373

Dry Cask Storage Characterization Project  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Nuclear utilities have developed independent spent fuel storage installations (ISFSIs) as a means of expanding their spent-fuel storage capacity on an interim basis until a geologic repository is available to accept the fuel for permanent storage. This report provides a technical basis for demonstrating the feasibility of extended spent-fuel storage in ISFSIs.

2002-09-26T23:59:59.000Z

374

Distributed Generation with Heat Recovery and Storage  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

of electricity and natural gas DER No Heat Storage: thefired natural gas AC (a) Capacity of heat storage unit (but no heat storage, a 200 kW natural gas reciprocating

Siddiqui, Afzal; Marnay, Chris; Firestone, Ryan M.; Zhou, Nan

2005-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

375

How safe is CO2 storage? Natural analogues for CO2 storage sites  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

How safe is CO2 storage? Natural analogues for CO2 storage sites Johannes Miocic, Stuart Gilfillan. Introduction Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is the only technology available to reduce greenhouse gas and analysed a global dataset of natural CO2 reservoirs as analogues for CO2 storage sites. Initial results

376

A Novel Approach For the Simulation of Multiple Flow Mechanisms and Porosities in Shale Gas Reservoirs  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

The state of the art of modeling fluid flow in shale gas reservoirs is dominated by dual porosity models that divide the reservoirs into matrix blocks that significantly contribute to fluid storage and fracture networks which principally control flow capacity. However, recent extensive microscopic studies reveal that there exist massive micro- and nano- pore systems in shale matrices. Because of this, the actual flow mechanisms in shale reservoirs are considerably more complex than can be simulated by the conventional dual porosity models and Darcy’s Law. Therefore, a model capturing multiple pore scales and flow can provide a better understanding of complex flow mechanisms occurring in these reservoirs. Through the use of a unique simulator, this research work establishes a micro-scale multiple-porosity model for fluid flow in shale reservoirs by capturing the dynamics occurring in three separate porosity systems: organic matter (mainly kerogen); inorganic matter; and natural fractures. Inorganic and organic portions of shale matrix are treated as sub-blocks with different attributes, such as wettability and pore structures. In the organic matter or kerogen, gas desorption and diffusion are the dominant physics. Since the flow regimes are sensitive to pore size, the effects of smaller pores (mainly nanopores and picopores) and larger pores (mainly micropores and nanopores) in kerogen are incorporated in the simulator. The separate inorganic sub-blocks mainly contribute to the ability to better model dynamic water behavior. The multiple porosity model is built upon a unique tool for simulating general multiple porosity systems in which several porosity systems may be tied to each other through arbitrary transfer functions and connectivities. This new model will allow us to better understand complex flow mechanisms and in turn to extend simulation to the reservoir scale including hydraulic fractures through upscaling techniques

Yan, Bicheng

2013-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

377

Hydrogen Storage in Carbon Nanotubes  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

STORAGE IN CARBON NANOTUBES JOHN E. FISCHER UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA * SOME BASIC NOTIONS * BINDING SITES AND ENERGIES * PROCESSING TO ENHANCE CAPACITY: EX: ELECTROCHEMICAL Li...

378

MONTHLY UNDERGROUND GAS STORAGE REPORT FORM EIA-191M ...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Page 2 DEFINITIONS Base (Cushion) Gas: The volume of gas needed as a permanent inventory to maintain adequate storage reservoir pressures and deliverability rates.

379

From Fundamental Understanding to Predicting New Nanomaterials for High-Capacity Hydrogen Storage - DOE Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program FY 2012 Annual Progress Report  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

0 0 DOE Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program FY 2012 Annual Progress Report Taner Yildirim 1,2 1 Department of Materials Science and Eng. University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, PA 19104 2 National Institute of Standards and Technology, NCNR Gaithersburg, MD 20899 Phone: (301) 975-6228 Email: taner@seas.upenn.edu DOE Program Manager: Dr. Thiyaga P. Thiyagarajan Phone: (301) 903-9706 Email: P.Thiyagarajan@science.doe.gov Objectives Use neutron scattering methods along with first- * principles computation to achieve fundamental understanding of the chemical and structural interactions governing the storage and release of hydrogen/methane and carbon capture in a wide spectrum of candidate materials. Study the effect of scaffolding, nanosizing, doping of *

380

INJECTING CARBON DIOXIDE INTO UNCONVENTIONAL STORAGE RESERVOIRS...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

CBM wells over a one-year period Perform a small Huff and Puff test in a Devonian shale gas well Duration: 4 years (October 1, 2011 - September 30, 2015) Research...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


381

High Capacity High Speed Optical Data Storage System Based on Diffraction-Free Nanobeam. Final Report, 09-02-98 to 03-17-99  

SciTech Connect

Physical Optics Corporation (POC) investigated the development of an optical data storage system built around a current well-engineered high-speed optical disk system with an innovative diffraction-free micro-optical element to produce a beam {approximately}250 nm wide with {approximately}4-5 mm depth of focus, allowing the system to address data at {approximately}100 Mbits/second and to store it 100 to 1,000 times more densely ({approximately}10 Gbit/in.{sup 2}) than in present systems. In Phase 1 of this project POC completed a thorough feasibility study by system design and analysis, successfully demonstrated fabrication of the key components, and conducted a proof-of-principle experimental demonstration. Specifically, production of a subwavelength ({approximately}380 nm) large depth of focus ({approximately}4-5 mm) addressing beam was demonstrated by fabricating a special microdiffractive optical element and recording this beam on a standard optical recording disk coated with a photopolymer material.

Tin Aye

1999-06-16T23:59:59.000Z

382

Reservoir assessment of The Geysers Geothermal field  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Big Sulphur Creek fault zone, in The Geysers Geothermal field, may be part of a deep-seated, wrench-style fault system. Hydrothermal fluid in the field reservoir may rise through conduits beneath the five main anomalies associated with the Big Sulphur Creek wrench trend. Some geophysical anomalies (electrical resistivity and audio-magnetotelluric) evidently are caused by the hot water geothermal field or zones of altered rocks; others (gravity, P-wave delays, and possibly electrical resistivity) probably respresent the underlying heat source, a possible magma chamber; and others (microearthquake activity) may be related to the steam reservoir. A large negative gravity anomaly and a few low-resistivity anomalies suggest areas generally favorable for the presence of steam zones, but these anomalies apparently do not directly indicate the known steam reservoir. At the current generating capacity of 930 MWe, the estimated life of The Geysers Geothermal field reservoir is 129 years. The estimated reservoir life is 60 years for the anticipated maximum generating capacity of 2000 MWe as of 1990. Wells at The Geysers are drilled with conventional drilling fluid (mud) until the top of the steam reservoir is reached; then, they are drilled with air. Usually, mud, temperature, caliper, dual induction, and cement bond logs are run on the wells.

Thomas, R.P.; Chapman, R.H.; Dykstra, H.

1981-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

383

A Parsimonious Stochastic Water Reservoir: Schreiber’s 1904 Equation  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

A parsimonious model is presented, leading to Schreiber’s aridity–runoff relation as equilibrium solution of the rainfall–runoff chain. The chain commences with a fast stochastic water reservoir of small capacity, representing interception and ...

Klaus Fraedrich

2010-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

384

Storage Sub-committee  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Storage Sub-committee Storage Sub-committee 2012 Work Plan Confidential 1 2012 Storage Subcommittee Work Plan * Report to Congress. (legislative requirement) - Review existing and projected research and funding - Review existing DOE, Arpa-e projects and the OE 5 year plan - Identify gaps and recommend additional topics - Outline distributed (review as group) * Develop and analysis of the need for large scale storage deployment (outline distributed again) * Develop analysis on regulatory issues especially valuation and cost recovery Confidential 2 Large Scale Storage * Problem Statement * Situation Today * Benefits Analysis * Policy Issues * Technology Gaps * Recommendations * Renewables Variability - Reserves and capacity requirements - Financial impacts - IRC Response to FERC NOI and update

385

Status of Norris Reservoir  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

This is one in a series of reports prepared by the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) for those interested in the conditions of TVA reservoirs. This overview of Norris Reservoir summarizes reservoir and watershed characteristics, reservoir uses, conditions that impair reservoir uses, water quality and aquatic biological conditions, and activities of reservoir management agencies. This information was extracted from the most up-to-date publications and data available, and from interviews with water resource professionals in various federal, state, and local agencies, and in public and private water supply and wastewater treatment facilities. 14 refs., 3 figs.

Not Available

1990-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

386

First principles screening of destabilized metal hydrides for high capacity H2 storage using scandium (presentation had varying title: Accelerating Development of Destabilized Metal Hydrides for Hydrogen Storage Using First Principles Calculations)  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Favorable thermodynamics are a prerequisite for practical H2 storage materials for vehicular applications. Destabilization of metal hydrides is a versatile route to finding materials that reversibly store large quantities of H2. First principles calculations have proven to be a useful tool for screening large numbers of potential destabilization reactions when tabulated thermodynamic data are unavailable. We have used first principles calculations to screen potential destabilization schemes that involve Sc-containing compounds. Our calculations use a two-stage strategy in which reactions are initially assessed based on their reaction enthalpy alone, followed by more detailed free energy calculations for promising reactions. Our calculations indicate that mixtures of ScH2 + 2LiBH4, which will release 8.9 wt.% H2 at completion and will have an equilibrium pressure of 1 bar at around 330 K, making this compound a promising target for experimental study. Along with thermodynamics, favorable kinetics are also of enormous importance for practical usage of these materials. Experiments would help identify possible kinetic barriers and modify them by developing suitable catalysts.

Alapati, S.; Johnson, J.K.; Sholl, D.S.; Dai, B. (Univ. of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA)--last author not shown on publication, only presentation

2007-10-31T23:59:59.000Z

387

Bottling Electricity: Storage as a Strategic Tool for Managing...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Bottling Electricity: Storage as a Strategic Tool for Managing Variability and Capacity Concerns in the Modern Grid - EAC Report (December 2008) Bottling Electricity: Storage as a...

388

Hydrogen Storage Properties of a Nanostructured Palladium Alloy ...  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Additionally, results on hydrogen storage capacity and hydrogen absorption kinetics will ... Birnessite MnO2 Nanoflakes for Efficient Energy Storage at Elevated ...

389

Fractured geothermal reservoir growth induced by heat extraction  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Field testing of a hydraulically-stimulated, hot dry rock geothermal system at the Fenton Hill site in northern New Mexico has indicated that significant reservoir growth occurred as energy was extracted. Tracer, microseismic, and geochemical measurements provided the primary quantitative evidence for documenting the increases in accessible reservoir volume and fractured rock surface area that were observed during energy extraction operations which caused substantial thermal drawdown in portions of the reservoir. These temporal increases suggest that augmentation of reservoir heat production capacity in hot dry rock systems may be possible.

Tester, J.W.; Murphy, H.D.; Grigsby, C.O.; Robinson, B.A.; Potter, R.M.

1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

390

Air ejector augmented compressed air energy storage system  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

Energy is stored in slack demand periods by charging a plurality of underground reservoirs with air to the same peak storage pressure, during peak demand periods throttling the air from one storage reservoir into a gas turbine system at a constant inlet pressure until the air pressure in the reservoir falls to said constant inlet pressure, thereupon permitting air in a second reservoir to flow into said gas turbine system while drawing air from the first reservoir through a variable geometry air ejector and adjusting said variable geometry air ejector, said air flow being essentially at the constant inlet pressure of the gas turbine system.

Ahrens, Frederick W. (Naperville, IL); Kartsounes, George T. (Naperville, IL)

1980-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

391

Status of Wheeler Reservoir  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

This is one in a series of status reports prepared by the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) for those interested in the conditions of TVA reservoirs. This overview of Wheeler Reservoir summarizes reservoir purposes and operation, reservoir and watershed characteristics, reservoir uses and use impairments, and water quality and aquatic biological conditions. The information presented here is from the most recent reports, publications, and original data available. If no recent data were available, historical data were summarized. If data were completely lacking, environmental professionals with special knowledge of the resource were interviewed. 12 refs., 2 figs.

Not Available

1990-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

392

Status of Cherokee Reservoir  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

This is the first in a series of reports prepared by Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) for those interested in the conditions of TVA reservoirs. This overviews of Cherokee Reservoir summarizes reservoir and watershed characteristics, reservoir uses and use impairments, water quality and aquatic biological conditions, and activities of reservoir management agencies. This information was extracted from the most current reports, publications, and data available, and interviews with water resource professionals in various Federal, state, and local agencies and in public and private water supply and wastewater treatment facilities. 11 refs., 4 figs., 1 tab.

Not Available

1990-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

393

NETL: NATCARB - CO2 Storage Formations  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Storage Formations Storage Formations NATCARB CO2 Storage Formations CO2 Storage Resource Methodology NATCARB Viewer The NATCARB Viewer is available at: http://www.natcarbviewer.com. 2012 Atlas IV DOE's Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships (RCSPs) were charged with providing a high-level, quantitative estimate of carbon dioxide (CO2) storage resource available in subsurface environments of their regions. Environments considered for CO2 storage were categorized into five major geologic systems: oil and gas reservoirs, unmineable coal areas, saline formations, shale, and basalt formations. Where possible, CO2 storage resource estimates have been quantified for oil and gas reservoirs, saline formations, and unmineable coal in the fourth edition of the United States Carbon Utilization and Storage Atlas (Atlas IV). Shale and basalt

394

Capacity Value of Concentrating Solar Power Plants  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

This study estimates the capacity value of a concentrating solar power (CSP) plant at a variety of locations within the western United States. This is done by optimizing the operation of the CSP plant and by using the effective load carrying capability (ELCC) metric, which is a standard reliability-based capacity value estimation technique. Although the ELCC metric is the most accurate estimation technique, we show that a simpler capacity-factor-based approximation method can closely estimate the ELCC value. Without storage, the capacity value of CSP plants varies widely depending on the year and solar multiple. The average capacity value of plants evaluated ranged from 45%?90% with a solar multiple range of 1.0-1.5. When introducing thermal energy storage (TES), the capacity value of the CSP plant is more difficult to estimate since one must account for energy in storage. We apply a capacity-factor-based technique under two different market settings: an energy-only market and an energy and capacity market. Our results show that adding TES to a CSP plant can increase its capacity value significantly at all of the locations. Adding a single hour of TES significantly increases the capacity value above the no-TES case, and with four hours of storage or more, the average capacity value at all locations exceeds 90%.

Madaeni, S. H.; Sioshansi, R.; Denholm, P.

2011-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

395

Hydrothermal Reservoirs | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Hydrothermal Reservoirs Hydrothermal Reservoirs Jump to: navigation, search GEOTHERMAL ENERGYGeothermal Home Hydrothermal Reservoirs Dictionary.png Hydrothermal Reservoir: Hydrothermal Reservoirs are underground zones of porous rock containing hot water and steam, and can be naturally occurring or human-made. Other definitions:Wikipedia Reegle Natural, shallow hydrothermal reservoirs naturally occurring hot water reservoirs, typically found at depths of less than 5 km below the Earth's surface where there is heat, water and a permeable material (permeability in rock formations results from fractures, joints, pores, etc.). Often, hydrothermal reservoirs have an overlying layer that bounds the reservoir and also serves as a thermal insulator, allowing greater heat retention. If hydrothermal reservoirs

396

CARBON MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR EXISTING U.S. GENERATION CAPACITY: A VINTAGE-BASED APPROACH  

SciTech Connect

This paper examines the existing stock of fossil-fired power generation capacity in the United States within the context of climate change. At present, there are over 1,337 fossil-fired power generating units of at least 100 MW in capacity, that began operating between the early 1940's and today. Together these units provide some 453 GW of electric power, and simply retiring this stock early or repowering with advanced technology as a means of addressing their greenhouse gas emissions will not be a realistic option for them all. Considering a conservative 40-year operating life, there are over 667 fossil-fired power plants, representing a capacity of over 291 GW, that have a minimum of a decade's worth of productive life remaining. This paper draws upon specialized tools developed by Battelle to analyze the characteristics of this subset of U.S. power generation assets and explore the relationships between plant type, location, emissions, and vintage. It examines the economics of retrofit capture technologies and the proximity of these existing power plants to geologic reservoirs with promise for long-term storage of CO2. The costs for retrofitting these plants and disposing of their CO2 into nearby geologic reservoirs are presented.

Dahowski, Robert T.; Dooley, James J.; Gale, J.; Kaya, Y.

2003-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

397

GENERATING CAPACITY  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Evidence from the U.S. and some other countries indicates that organized wholesale markets for electrical energy and operating reserves do not provide adequate incentives to stimulate the proper quantity or mix of generating capacity consistent with mandatory reliability criteria. A large part of the problem can be associated with the failure of wholesale spot market prices for energy and operating reserves to rise to high enough levels during periods when generating capacity is fully utilized. Reforms to wholesale energy markets, the introduction of well-design forward capacity markets, and symmetrical treatment of demand response and generating capacity resources to respond to market and institutional imperfections are discussed. This policy reform program is compatible with improving the efficiency of spot wholesale electricity markets, the continued evolution of competitive retail markets, and restores incentives for efficient investment in generating capacity consistent with operating reliability criteria applied by system operators. It also responds to investment disincentives that have been associated with volatility in wholesale energy prices, limited hedging opportunities and to concerns about regulatory opportunism. 1

Paul L. Joskow; Paul L. Joskow; Paul L. Joskow

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

398

Pumped storage provides grid reliability even with net generation ...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

tags: electricity generation capacity hydroelectric storage. Email Updates. RSS Feeds. Facebook. Twitter. YouTube. Add us to your site.

399

Comparative Evaluation of Generalized River/Reservoir System Models  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

This report reviews user-oriented generalized reservoir/river system models. The terms reservoir/river system, reservoir system, reservoir operation, or river basin management "model" or "modeling system" are used synonymously to refer to computer modeling systems that simulate the storage, flow, and diversion of water in a system of reservoirs and river reaches. Generalized means that a computer modeling system is designed for application to a range of concerns dealing with river basin systems of various configurations and locations, rather than being site-specific customized to a particular system. User-oriented implies the modeling system is designed for use by professional practitioners (model-users) other than the original model developers and is thoroughly tested and well documented. User-oriented generalized modeling systems should be convenient to obtain, understand, and use and should work correctly, completely, and efficiently. Modeling applications often involve a system of several simulation models, utility software products, and databases used in combination. A reservoir/river system model is itself a modeling system, which often serves as a component of a larger modeling system that may include watershed hydrology and river hydraulics models, water quality models, databases and various software tools for managing time series, spatial, and other types of data. Reservoir/river system models are based on volume-balance accounting procedures for tracking the movement of water through a system of reservoirs and river reaches. The model computes reservoir storage contents, evaporation, water supply withdrawals, hydroelectric energy generation, and river flows for specified system operating rules and input sequences of stream inflows and net evaporation rates. The hydrologic period-of-analysis and computational time step may vary greatly depending on the application. Storage and flow hydrograph ordinates for a flood event occurring over a few days may be determined at intervals of an hour or less. Water supply capabilities may be modeled with a monthly time step and several decade long period-of-analysis capturing the full range of fluctuating wet and dry periods including extended drought. Stream inflows are usually generated outside of the reservoir/river system model and provided as input to the model. However, reservoir/river system models may also include capabilities for modeling watershed precipitation-runoff processes to generate inflows to the river/reservoir system. Some reservoir/river system models simulate water quality constituents along with water quantities. Some models include features for economic evaluation of system performance based on cost and benefit functions expressed as a function of flow and storage.

Wurbs, Ralph A.

2005-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

400

Pennsylvania Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


401

Oklahoma Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View

402

Natural Gas Depleted Fields Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6,801,291 6,805,490 6,917,547 7,074,773 7,104,948 7,038,245 6,801,291 6,805,490 6,917,547 7,074,773 7,104,948 7,038,245 1999-2012 Alabama 11,000 11,000 11,000 11,000 13,500 13,500 1999-2012 Arkansas 22,000 22,000 21,760 21,760 21,359 21,853 1999-2012 California 487,711 498,705 513,005 542,511 570,511 592,411 1999-2012 Colorado 98,068 95,068 105,768 105,768 105,858 124,253 1999-2012 Illinois 103,731 103,606 103,606 218,106 220,070 220,070 1999-2012 Indiana 32,804 32,946 32,946 30,003 30,003 30,003 1999-2012 Iowa 0 1999-2012 Kansas 287,996 281,291 281,370 283,891 283,800 283,974 1999-2012 Kentucky 210,792 210,792 210,801 212,184 212,184 212,184 1999-2012 Louisiana 527,051 527,051 528,626 528,626 528,626 402,626 1999-2012 Maryland 64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 1999-2012

403

Mississippi Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View

404

Wyoming Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View

405

Texas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View

406

Louisiana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View

407

Utah Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

129,480 129,480 129,480 129,480 129,480 124,465 1988-2011 Salt Caverns 0 1999-2011 Aquifers 11,980 11,980 11,980 11,980 11,980 4,265 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 117,500 117,500...

408

West Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

513,416 536,702 528,442 531,456 531,480 524,324 1988-2011 Salt Caverns 0 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 513,416 536,702 528,442 531,456 531,480 524,324 1999-2011 Total Working Gas...

409

Pennsylvania Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Area: Period: Download ... 51: 1999-2011-= No Data Reported; --= Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data ...

410

Indiana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View

411

Michigan Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View

412

Maryland Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View

413

New York Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View

414

Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View

415

Natural Gas Salt Caverns Storage Capacity  

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

253,410 341,213 397,560 456,009 512,279 715,821 1999-2012 253,410 341,213 397,560 456,009 512,279 715,821 1999-2012 Alabama 8,300 15,900 15,900 21,900 21,900 21,900 1999-2012 Arkansas 0 1999-2012 California 0 1999-2012 Colorado 0 1999-2012 Illinois 0 1999-2012 Indiana 0 1999-2012 Kansas 931 931 931 931 931 931 1999-2012 Kentucky 0 1999-2012 Louisiana 61,660 88,806 123,341 142,253 161,668 297,020 1999-2012 Maryland 0 1999-2012 Michigan 3,851 3,827 3,821 3,834 3,834 3,834 1999-2012 Mississippi 45,383 62,424 62,301 82,411 90,452 139,627 1999-2012 Montana 0 1999-2012 Nebraska 0 1999-2012 New Mexico 0 1999-2012 New York 2,340 2,340 2,340 2,340 2,340 0 1999-2012 Ohio 0 1999-2012 Oklahoma 0 1999-2012 Oregon 0 1999-2012 Pennsylvania 0 1999-2012 Tennessee 0 1999-2012 Texas 124,686 160,786 182,725 196,140 224,955 246,310 1999-2012

416

West Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View

417

Kansas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View

418

Montana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View

419

Minnesota Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View

420

Kentucky Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


421

Tennessee Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View

422

Missouri Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View

423

Oregon Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View

424

Alabama Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California Colorado Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern Consuming Region AGA Western Consuming Region Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View

425

Natural Gas Salt Caverns Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

253,410 341,213 397,560 456,009 512,279 715,821 1999-2012 253,410 341,213 397,560 456,009 512,279 715,821 1999-2012 Alabama 8,300 15,900 15,900 21,900 21,900 21,900 1999-2012 Arkansas 0 1999-2012 California 0 1999-2012 Colorado 0 1999-2012 Illinois 0 1999-2012 Indiana 0 1999-2012 Kansas 931 931 931 931 931 931 1999-2012 Kentucky 0 1999-2012 Louisiana 61,660 88,806 123,341 142,253 161,668 297,020 1999-2012 Maryland 0 1999-2012 Michigan 3,851 3,827 3,821 3,834 3,834 3,834 1999-2012 Mississippi 45,383 62,424 62,301 82,411 90,452 139,627 1999-2012 Montana 0 1999-2012 Nebraska 0 1999-2012 New Mexico 0 1999-2012 New York 2,340 2,340 2,340 2,340 2,340 0 1999-2012 Ohio 0 1999-2012 Oklahoma 0 1999-2012 Oregon 0 1999-2012 Pennsylvania 0 1999-2012 Tennessee 0 1999-2012 Texas 124,686 160,786 182,725 196,140 224,955 246,310 1999-2012

426

California Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

484,711 487,711 498,705 513,005 542,511 570,511 1988-2011 Salt Caverns 0 1999-2011 Aquifers 0 0 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 484,711 487,711 498,705 513,005 542,511 570,511 1999-2011...

427

California Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 459,673 466,818 1990's 291,678 467,678 472,108 472,108 472,108 472,908 469,695 396,430 388,370...

428

California Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...  

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

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2002 388,480 475,720 475,720 475,720 475,720 475,720 475,720 475,720 475,720 475,720 474,920 474,920 2003 474,920 474,920...

429

Ohio Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

572,477 572,477 572,477 580,380 580,380 580,380 1988-2011 Salt Caverns 0 1999-2011 Aquifers 0 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 572,477 572,477 572,477 580,380 580,380 580,380 1999-2011...

430

Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)  

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

Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Oil Wells Gross Withdrawals From Shale Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Coalbed Wells Repressuring Nonhydrocarbon Gases...

431

Texas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming AGA Producing Region AGA Eastern...

432

Underground Natural Gas Working Storage Capacity - Energy ...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Petroleum & Other Liquids. Crude oil, gasoline, heating oil, diesel, propane, and other liquids including biofuels and natural gas liquids. Natural Gas

433

Michigan Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1,031,290 1,060,558 1,062,339 1,069,405 1,069,898 1,075,472 1988-2011 Salt Caverns 3,838 3,851 3,827 3,821 3,834 3,834 1999-2011 Aquifers 0 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 1,027,452...

434

Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)  

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

Power Price Gross Withdrawals Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Oil Wells Gross Withdrawals From Shale Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Coalbed Wells...

435

Indiana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

-No Data Reported; --= Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Notes: Existing fields ...

436

Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million ...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9; 1980's: 805,394: 805,393: 1990's: 640,938: 640,938: 669,354: 664,693: 658,578: 654,570 ...

437

Total Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

-No Data Reported; --= Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Notes: Existing fields ...

438

Natural Gas Depleted Fields Storage Capacity  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

-No Data Reported; --= Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Notes: Existing fields ...

439

Kansas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

-No Data Reported; --= Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Notes: Existing fields ...

440

Mississippi Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million ...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec; 2002: 134,012: 134,012: 134,012: 134,012: 134,012: 134,012: 141,912: 141,912: 141,912: 141,912: 144,787: 144,787 ...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


441

Mississippi Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

-No Data Reported; --= Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Notes: Existing fields ...

442

Mississippi Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

150,809 166,909 187,251 210,128 235,638 240,241 1988-2011 Salt Caverns 45,383 45,383 62,424 62,301 82,411 90,452 1999-2011 Aquifers 0 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 105,427 121,527...

443

Oklahoma Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

380,038 373,738 371,324 371,338 371,338 372,838 1988-2011 Salt Caverns 0 1999-2011 Aquifers 0 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 380,038 373,738 371,324 371,338 371,338 372,838 1999-2011...

444

Arkansas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

22,000 22,000 22,000 21,760 21,760 21,359 1988-2011 Salt Caverns 0 1999-2011 Aquifers 0 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 22,000 22,000 22,000 21,760 21,760 21,359 1999-2011 Total Working...

445

Oregon Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

26,703 29,415 29,415 29,565 29,565 29,565 1989-2011 Salt Caverns 0 1999-2011 Aquifers 0 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 26,703 29,415 29,415 29,565 29,565 29,565 1999-2011 Total Working...

446

Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9,692 9,560 6,200 9,500 9,500 9,500 1998-2011 Salt Caverns 6,275 6,260 6,200 6,200 6,200 6,200 1999-2011 Aquifers 0 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 3,417 3,300 3,300 3,300 3,300...

447

Texas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

690,061 690,678 740,477 766,768 783,579 812,394 1988-2011 Salt Caverns 126,026 124,686 160,786 182,725 196,140 224,955 1999-2011 Aquifers 0 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 564,035...

448

New York Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

213,225 229,013 228,613 245,579 245,579 245,579 1988-2011 Salt Caverns 2,340 2,340 2,340 2,340 2,340 2,340 1999-2011 Aquifers 0 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 210,885 226,673 226,273...

449

Alaska Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

Monthly Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Feb-13 Mar-13 Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13...

450

Indiana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

114,294 114,294 114,937 114,274 111,271 111,313 1988-2011 Salt Caverns 0 1999-2011 Aquifers 81,490 81,490 81,991 81,328 81,268 81,310 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 32,804 32,804 32,946...

451

Colorado Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

98,068 98,068 95,068 105,768 105,768 105,858 1988-2011 Salt Caverns 0 1999-2011 Aquifers 0 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 98,068 98,068 95,068 105,768 105,768 105,858 1999-2011 Total...

452

Pennsylvania Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

750,054 759,365 759,153 776,964 776,822 776,845 1988-2011 Salt Caverns 0 1999-2011 Aquifers 0 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 750,054 759,365 759,153 776,964 776,822 776,845 1999-2011...

453

California Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

-No Data Reported; --= Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Notes: Existing fields ...

454

Louisiana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

599,165 588,711 615,858 651,968 670,880 690,295 1988-2011 Salt Caverns 68,739 61,660 88,806 123,341 142,253 161,668 1999-2011 Aquifers 0 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 530,426 527,051...

455

Kentucky Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

18,394 220,359 220,359 220,368 221,751 221,751 1988-2011 Salt Caverns 0 1999-2011 Aquifers 9,567 9,567 9,567 9,567 9,567 9,567 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 208,827 210,792 210,792...

456

Kansas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

288,383 288,926 282,221 282,300 284,821 284,731 1988-2011 Salt Caverns 1,088 931 931 931 931 931 1999-2011 Aquifers 0 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 287,295 287,996 281,291 281,370...

457

Montana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

74,201 374,201 374,201 376,301 376,301 376,301 1988-2011 Salt Caverns 0 1999-2011 Aquifers 0 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 374,201 374,201 374,201 376,301 376,301 376,301 1999-2011...

458

Alabama Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

19,300 19,300 26,900 26,900 32,900 35,400 1995-2011 Salt Caverns 8,300 8,300 15,900 15,900 21,900 21,900 1999-2011 Aquifers 0 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 11,000 11,000 11,000 11,000...

459

New Mexico Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

82,652 78,424 80,000 80,000 84,300 84,300 1988-2011 Salt Caverns 0 1999-2011 Aquifers 4,227 0 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 78,424 78,424 80,000 80,000 84,300 84,300 1999-2011 Total...

460

Wyoming Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

114,096 114,067 111,167 111,120 111,120 106,764 1988-2011 Salt Caverns 0 1999-2011 Aquifers 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 6,733 1999-2011 Depleted Fields 104,096 104,067...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


461

Oklahoma Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

-No Data Reported; --= Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Notes: Existing fields ...

462

Geothermal reservoir technology  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

A status report on Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory's Reservoir Technology projects under DOE's Hydrothermal Research Subprogram is presented. During FY 1985 significant accomplishments were made in developing and evaluating methods for (1) describing geothermal systems and processes; (2) predicting reservoir changes; (3) mapping faults and fractures; and (4) field data analysis. In addition, LBL assisted DOE in establishing the research needs of the geothermal industry in the area of Reservoir Technology. 15 refs., 5 figs.

Lippmann, M.J.

1985-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

463

Geothermal Reservoir Dynamics - TOUGHREACT  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Swelling in a Fractured Geothermal Reservoir, presented atTHC) Modeling Based on Geothermal Field Data, Geothermics,and Silica Scaling in Geothermal Production-Injection Wells

2005-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

464

Sub-Seafloor Carbon Dioxide Storage Potential on the Juan de Fuca Plate, Western North America  

SciTech Connect

The Juan de Fuca plate, off the western coast of North America, has been suggested as a site for geological sequestration of waste carbon dioxide because of its many attractive characteristics (high permeability, large storage capacity, reactive rock types). Here we model CO2 injection into fractured basalts comprising the upper several hundred meters of the sub-seafloor basalt reservoir, overlain with low-permeability sediments and a large saline water column, to examine the feasibility of this reservoir for CO2 storage. Our simulations indicate that the sub-seafloor basalts of the Juan de Fuca plate may be an excellent CO2 storage candidate, as multiple trapping mechanisms (hydrodynamic, density inversions, and mineralization) act to keep the CO2 isolated from terrestrial environments. Questions remain about the lateral extent and connectivity of the high permeability basalts; however, the lack of wells or boreholes and thick sediment cover maximize storage potential while minimizing potential leakage pathways. Although promising, more study is needed to determine the economic viability of this option.

Jerry Fairley; Robert Podgorney

2012-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

465

High Capacity Lithium-Ion Battery Characterization for Vehicular Applications.  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

?? A lithium-ion battery is one of the key research topics in energy storage technologies. Major characterization tests such as static capacity, open circuit voltage… (more)

Ahmed, Sazzad Hossain

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

466

Open versus closed loop capacity equilibria in electricity markets ...  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

first used to represent short-run bidding and production games among power ...... capacity is dispatchable thermal plant and there is no significant storage (e.g.,.

467

Designing Nanostructured Hybrid Materials for Energy Storage ...  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The resulting devices fabricated with low-cost materials through the scalable ... which can offer >5 times higher charge storage capacity than current technology.

468

PCM energy storage during defective thermal cycling.  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

??Incomplete thermal cycling affects storage capacities of phase change materials (PCMs). Existing PCM measuring methods are presented with their drawbacks. A new device named “the… (more)

Koekenbier, S.F.

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

469

System-level modeling for geological storage of CO2  

SciTech Connect

One way to reduce the effects of anthropogenic greenhousegases on climate is to inject carbon dioxide (CO2) from industrialsources into deep geological formations such as brine formations ordepleted oil or gas reservoirs. Research has and is being conducted toimprove understanding of factors affecting particular aspects ofgeological CO2 storage, such as performance, capacity, and health, safetyand environmental (HSE) issues, as well as to lower the cost of CO2capture and related processes. However, there has been less emphasis todate on system-level analyses of geological CO2 storage that considergeological, economic, and environmental issues by linking detailedrepresentations of engineering components and associated economic models.The objective of this study is to develop a system-level model forgeological CO2 storage, including CO2 capture and separation,compression, pipeline transportation to the storage site, and CO2injection. Within our system model we are incorporating detailedreservoir simulations of CO2 injection and potential leakage withassociated HSE effects. The platform of the system-level modelingisGoldSim [GoldSim, 2006]. The application of the system model is focusedon evaluating the feasibility of carbon sequestration with enhanced gasrecovery (CSEGR) in the Rio Vista region of California. The reservoirsimulations are performed using a special module of the TOUGH2 simulator,EOS7C, for multicomponent gas mixtures of methane and CO2 or methane andnitrogen. Using this approach, the economic benefits of enhanced gasrecovery can be directly weighed against the costs, risks, and benefitsof CO2 injection.

Zhang, Yingqi; Oldenburg, Curtis M.; Finsterle, Stefan; Bodvarsson, Gudmundur S.

2006-04-24T23:59:59.000Z

470

The Political Economy of Wind Power in China  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

s State Grid to raise pumped storage hydropower capacity. ?SGCC has been building pumped storage reservoirs across themaintain grid stability. Pumped storage reservoirs generally

Swanson, Ryan Landon

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

471

NV Energy Electricity Storage Valuation  

SciTech Connect

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

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

2013-06-30T23:59:59.000Z

472

TREATMENT OF HYDROCARBON, ORGANIC RESIDUE AND PRODUCTION CHEMICAL DAMAGE MECHANISMS THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF CARBON DIOXIDE IN NATURAL GAS STORAGE WELLS  

SciTech Connect

Core specimens and several material samples were collected from two natural gas storage reservoirs. Laboratory studies were performed to characterize the samples that were believed to be representative of a reservoir damage mechanism previously identified as arising from the presence of hydrocarbons, organic residues or production chemicals. A series of laboratory experiments were performed to identify the sample materials, use these materials to damage the flow capacity of the core specimens and then attempt to remove or reduce the induced damage using either carbon dioxide or a mixture of carbon dioxide and other chemicals. Results of the experiments showed that pure carbon dioxide was effective in restoring flow capacity to the core specimens in several different settings. However, in settings involving asphaltines as the damage mechanism, both pure carbon dioxide and mixtures of carbon dioxide and other chemicals provided little effectiveness in damage removal.

Lawrence J. Pekot; Ron Himes

2004-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

473

Hydrogen Storage  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Oct 10, 2012 ... Energy Storage: Materials, Systems and Applications: Hydrogen Storage Program Organizers: Zhenguo "Gary" Yang, Pacific Northwest ...

474

Geysers reservoir studies  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

LBL is conducting several research projects related to issues of interest to The Geysers operators, including those that deal with understanding the nature of vapor-dominated systems, measuring or inferring reservoir processes and parameters, and studying the effects of liquid injection. All of these topics are directly or indirectly relevant to the development of reservoir strategies aimed at stabilizing or increasing production rates of non-corrosive steam, low in non-condensable gases. Only reservoir engineering studies will be described here, since microearthquake and geochemical projects carried out by LBL or its contractors are discussed in accompanying papers. Three reservoir engineering studies will be described in some detail, that is: (a) Modeling studies of heat transfer and phase distribution in two-phase geothermal reservoirs; (b) Numerical modeling studies of Geysers injection experiments; and (c) Development of a dual-porosity model to calculate mass flow between rock matrix blocks and neighboring fractures.

Bodvarsson, G.S.; Lippmann, M.J.; Pruess, K.

1993-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

475

Transient well testing in two-phase geothermal reservoirs  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

A study of well test analysis techniques in two-phase geothermal reservoirs has been conducted using a three-dimensional, two-phase, wellbore and reservoir simulation model. Well tests from Cerro Prieto and the Hawaiian Geothermal project have been history matched. Using these well tests as a base, the influence of reservoir permeability, porosity, thickness, and heat capacity, along with flow rate and fracturing were studied. Single and two-phase transient well test equations were used to analyze these tests with poor results due to rapidly changing fluid properties and inability to calculate the flowing steam saturation in the reservoir. The injection of cold water into the reservoir does give good data from which formation properties can be calculated.

Aydelotte, S.R.

1980-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

476

Underground-Energy-Storage Program, 1982 annual report  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Two principal underground energy storage technologies are discussed--Seasonal Thermal Energy Storage (STES) and Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES). The Underground Energy Storage Program objectives, approach, structure, and milestones are described, and technical activities and progress in the STES and CAES areas are summarized. STES activities include aquifer thermal energy storage technology studies and STES technology assessment and development. CAES activities include reservoir stability studies and second-generation concepts studies. (LEW)

Kannberg, L.D.

1983-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

477

Reservoir and injection technology and Heat Extraction Project  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

For the Stanford Geothermal Program in the fiscal year 1989, the task areas include predictive modeling of reservoir behavior and tracer test interpretation and testing. Major emphasis is in reservoir technology, reinjection technology, and heat extraction. Predictive modeling of reservoir behavior consists of a multi-pronged approach to well test analysis under a variety of conditions. The efforts have been directed to designing and analyzing well tests in (1) naturally fractured reservoirs; (2) fractured wells; (3) complex reservoir geometries; and, (4) gas reservoirs including inertial and other effects. The analytical solutions for naturally fractured reservoirs are determined using fracture size distribution. In the study of fractured wells, an elliptical coordinate system is used to obtain semi-analytical solutions to finite conductivity fractures. Effort has also been directed to the modeling and creation of a user friendly computer program for steam/gas reservoirs including wellbore storage, skin and non-Darcy flow effects. This work has a complementary effort on modeling high flow rate wells including inertial effects in the wellbore and fractures. In addition, work on gravity drainage systems is being continued.

Horne, R.N.; Ramey, H.H. Jr.; Miller, F.G.; Brigham, W.E.; Kruger, P.

1989-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

478

Reservoir characterization of Pennsylvanian sandstone reservoirs. Final report  

SciTech Connect

This final report summarizes the progress during the three years of a project on Reservoir Characterization of Pennsylvanian Sandstone Reservoirs. The report is divided into three sections: (i) reservoir description; (ii) scale-up procedures; (iii) outcrop investigation. The first section describes the methods by which a reservoir can be described in three dimensions. The next step in reservoir description is to scale up reservoir properties for flow simulation. The second section addresses the issue of scale-up of reservoir properties once the spatial descriptions of properties are created. The last section describes the investigation of an outcrop.

Kelkar, M.

1995-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

479

The lifetime of carbon capture and storage as a climate-change mitigation technology  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

In carbon capture and storage (CCS), CO[subscript 2] is captured at power plants and then injected underground into reservoirs like deep saline aquifers for long-term storage. While CCS may be critical for the continued ...

Szulczewski, Michael Lawrence

480

Method and apparatus for storage battery electrolyte circulation  

SciTech Connect

An electrolyte reservoir in fluid communication with the cell of a storage battery is intermittently pressurized with a pulse of compressed gas to cause a flow of electrolyte from the reservoir to the upper region of less dense electrolyte in the cell. Upon termination of the pressure pulse, more dense electrolyte is forced into the reservoir from the lower region of the cell by the differential pressure head between the cell and reservoir electrolyte levels. The compressed gas pulse is controlled to prevent the entry of gas from the reservoir into the cell.

Inkmann, Mark S. (Milwaukee, WI)

1980-09-09T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "reservoir storage capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


481

Reservoir Protection (Oklahoma)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

The Oklahoma Water Resource Board has the authority to make rules for the control of sanitation on all property located within any reservoir or drainage basin. The Board works with the Department...

482

Geology and Reservoir Simulation  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Service: 1-800-553-7681 Geology and Reservoir Simulation Background Natural gas from shale is becoming ever more recognized as an abundant and economically viable fuel in the...

483

Session: Reservoir Technology  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

This session at the Geothermal Energy Program Review X: Geothermal Energy and the Utility Market consisted of five papers: ''Reservoir Technology'' by Joel L. Renner; ''LBL Research on the Geysers: Conceptual Models, Simulation and Monitoring Studies'' by Gudmundur S. Bodvarsson; ''Geothermal Geophysical Research in Electrical Methods at UURI'' by Philip E. Wannamaker; ''Optimizing Reinjection Strategy at Palinpinon, Philippines Based on Chloride Data'' by Roland N. Horne; ''TETRAD Reservoir Simulation'' by G. Michael Shook

Renner, Joel L.; Bodvarsson, Gudmundur S.; Wannamaker, Philip E.; Horne, Roland N.; Shook, G. Michael

1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

484

Forecourt Storage and Compression Options  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

pressure, capacity ­ Compressor output, power, electric demand ­ Station and dispenser load profiles Pro > Station demand profiles > Operational analysis results ­ Compressor-storage relationships and On-Board Storage Analysis Workshop DOE Headquarters 25 January 2006 Mark E. Richards Gas Technology

485

An Experimental Study on the Longterm Stability of Particle Motion in Hadron Storage Rings  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

technologies (inching optical laser storage, super computers, multiprocessing computer arrays) were explored ............................................176 Storage Capacity: 2 Terabits Online ..........................176 Brief Inventory of Major

486

Capacity Markets for Electricity  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

ternative Approaches for Power Capacity Markets”, Papers andand Steven Stoft, “Installed Capacity and Price Caps: Oil onElectricity Markets Have a Capacity requirement? If So, How

Creti, Anna; Fabra, Natalia

2004-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

487

2. Gas Productive Capacity  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

2. Gas Productive Capacity Gas Capacity to Meet Lower 48 States Requirements The United States has sufficient dry gas productive capacity at the wellhead to meet ...

488

A North Sea application of slug testing for quick reservoir analysis  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The application of slug testing in the Valhall Field, a North Sea reservoir, is presented. Specific field examples are given which show this pressure transient testing method to be a quick and reliable way to determine reservoir flow capacity and wellbore skin factor. Some of these examples show confirmation of a channel behind pipe that was indicated by a cement bond log. A review of the theoretical basis of the method is also given. Although this method has found wide application in ground water hydrology, it has been used on a very limited basis in the petroleum industry. As applied here, the test is conducted on an isolated zone at the time of perforating underbalanced with the well filled with diesel. The primary advantage of this test is the extremely short time required to collect sufficient data for analysis, even when permeability is relatively low or skin factor is high. The test also eliminates problems associated with wellbore storage. Therefore, both required rig time and the production deferred due to data collection are minimized. This advantage is especially important in costly offshore applications and should lead to use of the technique in many other fields worldwide.

Waller, H.N. Jr.; Krase, L.D.

1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

489

Thermodynamic behaviour of simplified geothermal reservoirs  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Starting from the basic laws of conservation of mass and energy, the differential equations that represent the thermodynamic behavior of a simplified geothermal reservoir are derived. Its application is limited to a reservoir of high permeability as it usually occurs in the central zone of a geothermal field. A very practical method to solve numerically the equations is presented, based on the direct use of the steam tables. The method, based in one general equation, is extended and illustrated with a numerical example to the case of segregated mass extraction, variable influx and heat exchange between rock and fluid. As it is explained, the method can be easily coupled to several influx models already developed somewhere else. The proposed model can become an important tool to solve practical problems, where like in Los Azufres Mexico, the geothermal field can be divided in an inner part where flashing occurs and an exterior field where storage of water plays the main role.

Hiriart, G.; Sanchez, E.

1985-01-22T23:59:59.000Z

490

Base Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Summary)  

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

Citygate Price Residential Price Commercial Price Industrial Price Electric Power Price Gross Withdrawals Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Oil Wells Gross Withdrawals From Shale Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Coalbed Wells Repressuring Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed Vented and Flared Marketed Production NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent Dry Production Imports By Pipeline LNG Imports Exports Exports By Pipeline LNG Exports Underground Storage Capacity Gas in Underground Storage Base Gas in Underground Storage Working Gas in Underground Storage Underground Storage Injections Underground Storage Withdrawals Underground Storage Net Withdrawals Total Consumption Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption Pipeline & Distribution Use Delivered to Consumers Residential Commercial Industrial Vehicle Fuel Electric Power Period:

491

Storage Water Heaters | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Storage Water Heaters Storage Water Heaters Storage Water Heaters June 15, 2012 - 6:00pm Addthis Consider energy efficiency when selecting a conventional storage water heater to avoid paying more over its lifetime. | Photo courtesy of ©iStockphoto/JulNichols. Consider energy efficiency when selecting a conventional storage water heater to avoid paying more over its lifetime. | Photo courtesy of ©iStockphoto/JulNichols. Conventional storage water heaters remain the most popular type of water heating system for the home. Here you'll find basic information about how storage water heaters work; what criteria to use when selecting the right model; and some installation, maintenance, and safety tips. How They Work A single-family storage water heater offers a ready reservoir -- from 20 to

492

Guntong field: Development and management of a multiple-reservoir offshore waterflood  

SciTech Connect

The Guntong field, the largest waterflood field in offshore peninsular Malaysia, with an oil-in-place (OIP) of about 200 million m{sup 3}, has been producing since 1985. The field contains 13 stacked reservoirs with small gas caps and limited aquifer support. This paper describes some of the significant reservoir, geologic, and facility challenges faced during development and management of this complex reservoir system. A combination of five-spot and peripheral waterflood patterns was selected to provide the required areal coverage, and reservoirs were commingled into two operational groups. Key reservoir management strategies to maximize performance include determination of optimum target reservoir pressures, use of a PC-based program to guide production and injection targets, and meeting pattern-balancing and capacity-enhancement programs. The response to the reservoir management efforts has been favorable, with an all-time-high production rate of 14,000 m{sup 3}/d recorded in 1994.

Chik, A.N.; Selamat, S.; Elias, M.R.; White, J.P.; Wakatake, M.T.

1996-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

493

Geothermal Reservoir Assessment Based on Slim Hole Drilling, Volume 1: Analytical Method  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

EPRI tested and documented slim hole drilling as a geothermal resource evaluation method. The results of this work confirm that lower cost reservoir evaluations can be performed using slim hole methods. On the basis of this report's probabilistic reservoir size estimate, the Kilauea East Rift Zone on the island of Hawaii could support 100-300 MWe of geothermal power capacity.

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

494

Geothermal Reservoir Assessment Based on Slim Hole Drilling, Volume 2: Application in Hawaii  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

EPRI tested and documented slim hole drilling as a geothermal resource evaluation method. The results of this work confirm that lower cost reservoir evaluations can be performed using slim hole methods. On the basis of this report's probabilistic reservoir size estimate, the Kilauea East Rift Zone on the island of Hawaii could support 100-300 MWe of geothermal power capacity.

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

495

GEOTHERMAL RESERVOIR SIMULATIONS WITH SHAFT79  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

that well blocks must geothermal reservoir s·tudies, paperof Califomia. LBL-10066 GEOTHERMAL RESERVOIR SIMULATIONSbe presented at the Fifth Geothermal Reservoir Engineering

Pruess, Karsten

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

496

A life cycle cost analysis framework for geologic storage of hydrogen : a scenario analysis.  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The U.S. Department of Energy has an interest in large scale hydrogen geostorage, which would offer substantial buffer capacity to meet possible disruptions in supply. Geostorage options being considered are salt caverns, depleted oil/gas reservoirs, aquifers and potentially hard rock cavrns. DOE has an interest in assessing the geological, geomechanical and economic viability for these types of hydrogen storage options. This study has developed an ecocomic analysis methodology to address costs entailed in developing and operating an underground geologic storage facility. This year the tool was updated specifically to (1) a version that is fully arrayed such that all four types of geologic storage options can be assessed at the same time, (2) incorporate specific scenarios illustrating the model's capability, and (3) incorporate more accurate model input assumptions for the wells and storage site modules. Drawing from the knowledge gained in the underground large scale geostorage options for natural gas and petroleum in the U.S. and from the potential to store relatively large volumes of CO{sub 2} in geological formations, the hydrogen storage assessment modeling will continue to build on these strengths while maintaining modeling transparency such that other modeling efforts may draw from this project.

Kobos, Peter Holmes; Lord, Anna Snider; Borns, David James

2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

497

A life cycle cost analysis framework for geologic storage of hydrogen : a user's tool.  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has an interest in large scale hydrogen geostorage, which could offer substantial buffer capacity to meet possible disruptions in supply or changing seasonal demands. The geostorage site options being considered are salt caverns, depleted oil/gas reservoirs, aquifers and hard rock caverns. The DOE has an interest in assessing the geological, geomechanical and economic viability for these types of geologic hydrogen storage options. This study has developed an economic analysis methodology and subsequent spreadsheet analysis to address costs entailed in developing and operating an underground geologic storage facility. This year the tool was updated specifically to (1) incorporate more site-specific model input assumptions for the wells and storage site modules, (2) develop a version that matches the general format of the HDSAM model developed and maintained by Argonne National Laboratory, and (3) incorporate specific demand scenarios illustrating the model's capability. Four general types of underground storage were analyzed: salt caverns, depleted oil/gas reservoirs, aquifers, and hard rock caverns/other custom sites. Due to the substantial lessons learned from the geological storage of natural gas already employed, these options present a potentially sizable storage option. Understanding and including these various geologic storage types in the analysis physical and economic framework will help identify what geologic option would be best suited for the storage of hydrogen. It is important to note, however, that existing natural gas options may not translate to a hydrogen system where substantial engineering obstacles may be encountered. There are only three locations worldwide that currently store hydrogen underground and they are all in salt caverns. Two locations are in the U.S. (Texas), and are managed by ConocoPhillips and Praxair (Leighty, 2007). The third is in Teeside, U.K., managed by Sabic Petrochemicals (Crotogino et al., 2008; Panfilov et al., 2006). These existing H{sub 2} facilities are quite small by natural gas storage standards. The second stage of the analysis involved providing ANL with estimated geostorage costs of hydrogen within salt caverns for various market penetrations for four representative cities (Houston, Detroit, Pittsburgh and Los Angeles). Using these demand levels, the scale and cost of hydrogen storage necessary to meet 10%, 25% and 100% of vehicle summer demands was calculated.

Kobos, Peter Holmes; Lord, Anna Snider; Borns, David James; Klise, Geoffrey T.

2011-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

498

Grid Applications for Energy Storage  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Applications for Energy Storage Applications for Energy Storage Flow Cells for Energy Storage Workshop Washington DC 7-8 March 2012 Joe Eto jheto@lbl.gov (510) 486-7284 Referencing a Recent Sandia Study,* This Talk Will: Describe and illustrate selected grid applications for energy storage Time-of-use energy cost management Demand charge management Load following Area Regulation Renewables energy time shift Renewables capacity firming Compare Sandia's estimates of the economic value of these applications to the Electricity Storage Association's estimates of the capital costs of energy storage technologies *Eyer, J. and G. Corey. Energy Storage for the Electricity Grid: Benefits and Market Potential Assessment Guide. February 2010. SAND2010-0815 A Recent Sandia Study Estimates the Economic

499

Second workshop geothermal reservoir engineering: Proceedings  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The Arab oil embargo of 1973 focused national attention on energy problems. A national focus on development of energy sources alternative to consumption of hydrocarbons led to the initiation of research studies of reservoir engineering of geothermal systems, funded by the National Science Foundation. At that time it appeared that only two significant reservoir engineering studies of geothermal reservoirs had been completed. Many meetings concerning development of geothermal resources were held from 1973 through the date of the first Stanford Geothermal Reservoir Engineering workshop December 15-17, 1975. These meetings were similar in that many reports dealt with the objectives of planned research projects rather than with results. The first reservoir engineering workshop held under the Stanford Geothermal Program was singular in that for the first time most participants were reporting on progress inactive research programs rather than on work planned. This was true for both laboratory experimental studies and for field experiments in producing geothermal systems. The Proceedings of the December 1975 workshop (SGP-TR-12) is a remarkable document in that results of both field operations and laboratory studies were freely presented and exchanged by all participants. With this in mind the second reservoir engineering workshop was planned for December 1976. The objectives were again two-fold. First, the workshop was designed as a forum to bring together researchers active in various physical and mathematical branches of the developing field of geothermal reservoir engineering, to give participants a current and updated view of progress being made in the field. The second purpose was to prepare this Proceedings of Summaries documenting the state of the art as of December 1976. The proceedings will be distributed to all interested members of the geothermal community involved in the development and utilization of the geothermal resources in the world. Many notable occurrences took place between the first workshop in December 1975 and this present workshop in December 1976. For one thing, the newly formed Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA) has assumed the lead role in geothermal reservoir engineering research. The second workshop under the Stanford Geothermal Program was supported by a grant from ERDA. In addition, two significant meetings on geothermal energy were held in Rotarua, New Zealand and Taupo, New Zealand. These meetings concerned geothermal reservoir engineering, and the reinjection of cooled geothermal fluids back into a geothermal system. It was clear to attendees of both the New Zealand and the December workshop meetings that a great deal of new information had been developed between August and December 1976. Another exciting report made at the meeting was a successful completion of a new geothermal well on the big island of Hawaii which produces a geothermal fluid that is mainly steam at a temperature in excess of 600 degrees F. Although the total developed electrical power generating capacity due to all geothermal field developments in 1976 is on the order of 1200 megawatts, it was reported that rapid development in geothermal field expansion is taking place in many parts of the world. Approximately 400 megawatts of geothermal power were being developed in the Philippine Islands, and planning for expansion in production in Cerro Prieto, Mexico was also announced. The Geysers in the United States continued the planned expansion toward the level of more than 1000 megawatts. The Second Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering convened at Stanford December 1976 with 93 attendees from 4 nations, and resulted in the presentation of 44 technical papers, summaries of which are included in these Proceedings. The major areas included in the program consisted of reservoir physics, well testing, field development, well stimulation, and mathematical modeling of geothermal reservoirs. The planning forth is year's workshop and the preparation of the proceedings was carried out mainly by my associate Paul

Kruger, P.; Ramey, H.J. Jr. (eds.)

1976-12-03T23:59:59.000Z

500

Real natural gas reservoir data Vs. natural gas reservoir models  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The gas reservoir per se model is an exceedingly simple model of a natural gas reservoir designed to develop the physical relationship between ultimate recovery and rate(s) of withdrawal for production regulation policy assessment. To be responsive, ...

Ellis A. Monash; John Lohrenz

1979-03-01T23:59:59.000Z