National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for reservoirs million barrels

  1. Ohio Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)

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

    Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Ohio Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 0 17 2000's 10 6 8 8 7 7 8 8 7 5 2010's 1 1 2 7 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Proved Nonproducing Reserves of Crude Oil

  2. Oklahoma Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)

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

    Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Oklahoma Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 98 80 2000's 111 109 105 92 92 101 90 118 129 138 2010's 143 244 279 292 444 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Proved

  3. Michigan Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)

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

    Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Michigan Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 3 1 2000's 4 6 4 14 10 17 15 2 9 6 2010's 0 0 0 4 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Proved Nonproducing Reserves of

  4. Montana Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)

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

    Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Montana Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 6 83 2000's 36 43 65 79 104 88 91 90 50 42 2010's 74 59 95 104 155 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Proved Nonproducing

  5. New Mexico Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)

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

    Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) New Mexico Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 97 157 2000's 91 161 146 133 142 171 159 147 136 149 2010's 180 185 232 314 489 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  6. Arkansas Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)

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

    Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Arkansas Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 2 5 2000's 7 4 5 2 3 2 1 0 0 0 2010's 1 0 11 10 8 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Proved Nonproducing Reserves of Crude

  7. Colorado Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)

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

    Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Colorado Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 26 30 2000's 49 44 56 61 62 74 102 122 123 42 2010's 180 208 283 607 765 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Proved

  8. Florida Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)

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

    Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Florida Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 6 12 2000's 9 7 7 6 6 2 1 12 0 2 2010's 2 4 3 9 6 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Proved Nonproducing Reserves of Crude

  9. Illinois Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)

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

    Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Illinois Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 4 11 2000's 4 15 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Proved Nonproducing Reserves of Crude Oil Illinois Proved

  10. Kansas Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)

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

    Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Kansas Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 11 12 2000's 13 21 23 18 11 16 17 9 11 3 2010's 2 4 6 11 34 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Proved Nonproducing Reserves

  11. Kentucky Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)

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

    Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Kentucky Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 0 0 2000's 0 0 4 4 5 5 0 0 1 3 2010's 0 0 0 1 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Proved Nonproducing Reserves of Crude

  12. Utah Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)

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

    Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Utah Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 36 58 2000's 91 100 91 76 61 52 164 174 140 235 2010's 257 258 368 312 261 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Proved

  13. Wyoming Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)

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

    Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Wyoming Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 31 52 2000's 63 74 69 61 45 249 258 208 162 144 2010's 152 188 233 219 362 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Proved

  14. Nebraska Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Proved Nonproducing Reserves of Crude Oil Nebraska Proved Nonproducing Reserves

  15. New York Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Proved Nonproducing Reserves of Crude Oil New York Proved Nonproducing Reserves

  16. Indiana Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)

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

    Indiana Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Proved Nonproducing Reserves of Crude Oil Indiana Proved Nonproducing Reserves

  17. ,"New Mexico Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)"

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

    Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel

  18. ,"New Mexico--East Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico--East Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  19. ,"New Mexico--West Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico--West Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  20. ,"Texas--State Offshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--State Offshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  1. ,"U.S. Federal Offshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)"

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

    Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Federal Offshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  2. ,"U.S. Total Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)"

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

    Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Total Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel

  3. ,"Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  4. ,"California--State Offshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California--State Offshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  5. ,"Federal Offshore--California Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Federal Offshore--California Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  6. ,"Louisiana--South Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana--South Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  7. ,"Louisiana--State Offshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana--State Offshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  8. U.S. Total Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) U.S. Total Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 3,474 3,755 4,147 4,206 2000's 4,019 5,195 5,271 5,580 5,143 5,691 5,174 5,455 5,400 6,015 2010's 6,980 9,049 11,884 13,200 14,816 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  9. ,"Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  10. ,"Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  11. ,"New York Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million...

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... Data for" ,"Data 1","New York Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs ...

  12. Secretary Bodman Announces Sale of 11 Million Barrels of Crude...

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

    Sale of 11 Million Barrels of Crude Oil from the Nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve Secretary Bodman Announces Sale of 11 Million Barrels of Crude Oil from the Nation's Strategic ...

  13. Kansas Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels...

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

    Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Kansas Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  14. Texas Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels...

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Texas Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 ...

  15. Utah Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels...

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

    Utah Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 ... Release Date: 11192015 Next Release Date: 12312016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus ...

  16. Ohio Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels...

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

    Ohio Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 ... Release Date: 11192015 Next Release Date: 12312016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus ...

  17. North Dakota Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million

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

    Barrels) Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) North Dakota Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 17 22 2000's 29 91 62 47 52 56 53 107 148 463 2010's 969 1,421 2,207 3,278 3,456 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016

  18. Pennsylvania Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million

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

    Barrels) Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Pennsylvania Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 0 5 2000's 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Proved Nonproducing

  19. Miscellaneous States Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million

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

    Barrels) Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Miscellaneous States Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 1 1 2000's 1 1 16 17 4 4 2 5 4 7 2010's 5 7 12 9 6 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Proved

  20. West Virginia Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million

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

    Barrels) Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) West Virginia Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 3 3 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 1 1 2 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Proved Nonproducing

  1. New Mexico Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

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

    + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) New Mexico Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 780 2010's 922 960 1,069 1,277 1,558 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate Proved Reserves, as of

  2. Kansas Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

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

    + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Kansas Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 264 2010's 302 350 382 390 451 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate Proved Reserves, as of Dec. 31

  3. Utah Natural Gas Liquids Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Utah Natural Gas Liquids Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 59 1980's 127 277 2000's 108 116 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Liquids Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Utah Natural Gas Liquids Proved Reserves

  4. Wyoming Natural Gas Liquids Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Wyoming Natural Gas Liquids Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 285 1980's 341 384 2000's 1,032 1,121 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Liquids Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Wyoming Natural Gas Liquids Proved

  5. Wyoming Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

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

    + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Wyoming Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 855 2010's 823 919 932 955 1,137 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate Proved Reserves, as of Dec. 31

  6. Lower 48 States Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million

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

    Barrels) Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Lower 48 States Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 3,341 3,274 2000's 3,508 4,806 4,725 4,846 4,436 5,096 4,732 5,055 4,871 5,382 2010's 6,358 8,483 11,082 12,561 14,268 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  7. U.S. crude oil production expected to top 8 million barrels per...

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

    U.S. crude oil production expected to top 8 million barrels per day, highest output since 1988 U.S. crude oil production in 2014 is now expected to top 8 million barrels per day ...

  8. Texas--State Offshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Texas--State Offshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 ...

  9. Louisiana--North Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs...

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Louisiana--North Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 ...

  10. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    barrels per day for the first time since 1988 Estimated U.S. crude oil production in November topped 8 million barrels per day for the first time in 25 years, according to the ...

  11. New Mexico--East Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million

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

    Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) New Mexico--East Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 97 156 2000's 91 161 146 133 142 171 159 147 136 149 2010's 180 185 232 304 460 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date:

  12. New Mexico--West Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million

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

    Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) New Mexico--West Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 10 29 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Proved

  13. Secretary Bodman Announces Sale of 11 Million Barrels of Crude Oil from the

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

    Nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve | Department of Energy Sale of 11 Million Barrels of Crude Oil from the Nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve Secretary Bodman Announces Sale of 11 Million Barrels of Crude Oil from the Nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve September 14, 2005 - 10:21am Addthis WASHINGTON, DC - Secretary Samuel W. Bodman announced that the Department of Energy has approved bids for the sale of 11 million barrels of crude oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR).

  14. U.S. Federal Offshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) U.S. Federal Offshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

  15. Texas--RRC District 1 Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs...

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 1 Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 ...

  16. Texas--RRC District 9 Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs...

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 9 Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 ...

  17. Texas--RRC District 5 Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 5 Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 ...

  18. Texas--RRC District 6 Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs...

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 6 Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 ...

  19. Texas--RRC District 10 Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 10 Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 ...

  20. Texas--RRC District 8 Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs...

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 8 Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 ...

  1. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    monthly oil output in Texas recently topped 3 million barrels per day for the first time since the late 1970s and North Dakota's oil production reached a record 1 million ...

  2. U.S. crude oil production expected to top 9 million barrels per...

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

    In its new forecast, the U.S. Energy Information Administration said domestic crude oil production should average 9.3 million barrels per day in 2015. On-shore production in the ...

  3. U.S. crude oil production expected to top 9 million barrels per...

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

    In its new short-term forecast, the U.S. Energy Information Administration said monthly average oil production is on track to surpass 9 million barrels per day in December for the ...

  4. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    high of 9.6 million barrels per day set in 1970. Most of the oil production growth will come from increased drilling in the shale formations in North Dakota, Texas and New Mexico. ...

  5. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    monthly crude oil production highest in nearly 26 year Estimated U.S. crude oil production in May averaged almost 8.4 million barrels per day, the highest output for any month ...

  6. U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Sales (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Sales (Million Barrels) U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Sales (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 906 448 458 403 442 440 931 670 282 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Liquids Reserves Sales

  7. Mississippi Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) (No intransit Receipts) (Million Cubic Feet) Mississippi Natural Gas Imports (No intransit Receipts) (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 2010's 0 5,774 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 4/29/2016 Next Release Date: 5/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Imports (Summary) Mississippi U.S. Natural Gas

  8. U.S. Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Acquisitions (Million Barrels)

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

    Acquisitions (Million Barrels) U.S. Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Acquisitions (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 344 2010's 1,470 1,561 1,234 1,925 2,828 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate Reserves Acquisitions

  9. U.S. Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Adjustments (Million Barrels)

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

    Adjustments (Million Barrels) U.S. Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Adjustments (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 46 2010's 188 207 137 -595 440 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate Proved Reserves

  10. U.S. Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Extensions (Million Barrels)

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

    Extensions (Million Barrels) U.S. Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Extensions (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 1,305 2010's 1,766 3,107 5,191 4,973 5,021 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate Reserves Extensions

  11. U.S. Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Sales (Million Barrels)

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

    Sales (Million Barrels) U.S. Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Sales (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 249 2010's 803 1,024 819 1,536 2,475 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate Reserves Sales

  12. U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Acquisitions (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Acquisitions (Million Barrels) U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Acquisitions (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 1,051 550 512 433 554 596 1,048 771 332 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Liquids Reserves Acquisitions

  13. U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Adjustments (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Adjustments (Million Barrels) U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Adjustments (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 64 1980's 153 231 299 849 -123 426 367 231 11 -277 1990's -83 233 225 102 43 192 474 -15 -361 99 2000's -83 -429 62 -338 273 -89 173 -139 76 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date:

  14. U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Based Production (Million Barrels) U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 580 1980's 572 580 564 568 597 585 569 585 592 566 1990's 574 601 626 635 634 646 688 690 655 697 2000's 710 675 677 611 645 614 629 650 667 714 2010's 745 784 865 931 1,124 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

  15. U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Extensions (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Extensions (Million Barrels) U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Extensions (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 364 1980's 418 542 375 321 348 337 263 213 268 259 1990's 299 189 190 245 314 432 451 535 383 313 2000's 645 717 612 629 734 863 924 1,030 956 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date:

  16. ,"Louisiana--State Offshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana--State Offshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  17. ,"Louisiana--State Offshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana--State Offshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  18. ,"Lower 48 States Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Lower 48 States Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  19. ,"Michigan Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Michigan Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  20. ,"Miscellaneous States Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Miscellaneous States Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  1. ,"Montana Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Montana Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  2. ,"Nebraska Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Nebraska Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  3. ,"New Mexico Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  4. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  5. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  6. ,"North Dakota Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","North Dakota Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  7. ,"Oklahoma Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Oklahoma Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  8. ,"Oklahoma Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Oklahoma Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  9. ,"Texas State Offshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas State Offshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  10. ,"Texas--State Offshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--State Offshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  11. ,"Texas--State Offshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--State Offshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  12. ,"U.S. Federal Offshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Federal Offshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  13. ,"U.S. Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  14. ,"Utah Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Utah Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  15. ,"Wyoming Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Wyoming Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  16. ,"Alabama Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alabama Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  17. ,"Alaska Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alaska Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel

  18. ,"Arkansas Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Arkansas Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  19. ,"Arkansas Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Arkansas Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  20. ,"Arkansas Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Arkansas Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  1. ,"California - Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  2. ,"California Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  3. ,"California Federal Offshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California Federal Offshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  4. ,"California State Offshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California State Offshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  5. ,"California--State Offshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California--State Offshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  6. ,"California--State Offshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California--State Offshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  7. ,"Colorado Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Colorado Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  8. ,"Colorado Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Colorado Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  9. ,"Colorado Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Colorado Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  10. ,"Florida Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Florida Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  11. ,"Florida Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Florida Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  12. ,"Florida Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Florida Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  13. ,"Illinois Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Illinois Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  14. ,"Indiana Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Indiana Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  15. ,"Kansas Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kansas Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  16. ,"Kansas Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kansas Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  17. ,"Kansas Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kansas Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  18. ,"Kentucky Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kentucky Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  19. ,"Kentucky Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kentucky Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  20. ,"Kentucky Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kentucky Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  1. ,"Louisiana Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  2. ,"Louisiana State Offshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana State Offshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  3. ,"Louisiana--North Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana--North Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  4. ,"Louisiana--North Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana--North Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  5. ,"Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  6. ,"Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  7. New York Natural Gas Liquids Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (No intransit Receipts) (Million Cubic Feet) New York Natural Gas Imports (No intransit Receipts) (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 24,139 22,348 29,326 47,677 35,720 52,013 70,993 67,956 1990's 98,217 188,233 435,470 502,701 562,267 630,321 652,578 656,332 666,256 754,484 2000's 832,761 718,982 787,619 761,859 785,055 856,107 865,952 892,283 780,862 640,119 2010's 434,526 324,474 278,422 233,453 200,394 - = No Data Reported;

  8. U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 6,615 1980's 6,728 7,068 7,221 7,901 7,643 7,944 8,165 8,147 8,238 7,769 1990's 7,586 7,464 7,451 7,222 7,170 7,399 7,823 7,973 7,524 7,906 2000's 8,345 7,993 7,994 7,459 7,928 8,165 8,472 9,143 9,275 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  9. ,"California--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release

  10. ,"California--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release

  11. ,"California--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release

  12. Texas--RRC District 8A Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs...

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 8A Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 ...

  13. Texas--RRC District 7C Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs...

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 7C Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 ...

  14. Texas--RRC District 7B Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 7B Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 ...

  15. ,"Lower 48 Federal Offshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Lower 48 Federal Offshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  16. ,"Mississippi (with State Offshore) Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Mississippi (with State Offshore) Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  17. ,"New Mexico--East Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico--East Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  18. ,"New Mexico--East Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico--East Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  19. ,"New Mexico--West Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico--West Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  20. ,"New Mexico--West Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico--West Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  1. ,"Texas (with State Offshore) Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas (with State Offshore) Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  2. ,"Texas (with State Offshore) Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas (with State Offshore) Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  3. ,"Texas--RRC District 1 Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 1 Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  4. ,"Texas--RRC District 1 Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 1 Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  5. ,"Texas--RRC District 10 Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 10 Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  6. ,"Texas--RRC District 10 Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 10 Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  7. ,"Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  8. ,"Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  9. ,"Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  10. ,"Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  11. ,"Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  12. ,"Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  13. ,"Texas--RRC District 5 Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 5 Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  14. ,"Texas--RRC District 5 Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 5 Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  15. ,"Texas--RRC District 6 Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 6 Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  16. ,"Texas--RRC District 6 Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 6 Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  17. ,"Texas--RRC District 7B Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 7B Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  18. ,"Texas--RRC District 7B Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 7B Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  19. ,"Texas--RRC District 7C Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 7C Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  20. ,"Texas--RRC District 7C Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 7C Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  1. ,"Texas--RRC District 8 Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 8 Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  2. ,"Texas--RRC District 8 Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 8 Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  3. ,"Texas--RRC District 8A Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 8A Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  4. ,"Texas--RRC District 8A Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 8A Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  5. ,"Texas--RRC District 9 Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 9 Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  6. ,"Texas--RRC District 9 Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 9 Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  7. ,"Alabama (with State Offshore) Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alabama (with State Offshore) Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  8. ,"Alabama (with State Offshore) Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alabama (with State Offshore) Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  9. ,"Alaska (with Total Offshore) Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alaska (with Total Offshore) Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  10. ,"Alaska (with Total Offshore) Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alaska (with Total Offshore) Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  11. ,"Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  12. ,"Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  13. ,"Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  14. ,"California (with State Offshore) Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California (with State Offshore) Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  15. ,"California (with State Offshore) Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California (with State Offshore) Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  16. ,"California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  17. ,"California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  18. ,"Federal Offshore--California Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Federal Offshore--California Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  19. ,"Federal Offshore--California Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Federal Offshore--California Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  20. ,"Federal Offshore--Louisiana and Alabama Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Federal Offshore--Louisiana and Alabama Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  1. ,"Federal Offshore--Louisiana and Alabama Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Federal Offshore--Louisiana and Alabama Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  2. ,"Federal Offshore--Texas Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Federal Offshore--Texas Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  3. ,"Federal Offshore--Texas Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Federal Offshore--Texas Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  4. ,"Louisiana (with State Offshore) Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana (with State Offshore) Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  5. ,"Louisiana (with State Offshore) Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana (with State Offshore) Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  6. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    to account for 91% of the growth in world oil production in 2015 The United States is expected to provide nine out of every 10 barrels of new global oil supplies in 2015. In its ...

  7. Alaska Crude Oil + Lease Condensate New Reservoir Discoveries...

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 2010's...

  8. Louisiana--South Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs

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

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Louisiana--South Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 143 146 2000's 123 134 139 150 115 148 162 164 122 129 2010's 126 113 125 155 188 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next

  9. Louisiana--State Offshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs

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

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Louisiana--State Offshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 37 38 2000's 50 66 30 26 24 28 22 18 13 12 2010's 12 9 19 13 16 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date:

  10. Alabama (with State Offshore) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs

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

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Alabama (with State Offshore) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 4 2 2000's 2 4 1 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 1 2 2 15 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016

  11. Alaska (with Total Offshore) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs

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

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Alaska (with Total Offshore) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 806 932 2000's 511 389 546 734 707 595 442 400 529 633 2010's 622 566 802 639 548 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015

  12. California--State Offshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs

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

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) California--State Offshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 7 0 2000's 32 30 42 25 30 35 34 27 23 46 2010's 47 62 53 52 46 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date:

  13. Federal Offshore--California Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs

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

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Federal Offshore--California Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 21 15 2000's 42 62 62 93 55 32 37 20 12 12 2010's 13 13 25 17 18 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release

  14. U.S. Crude Oil + Lease Condensate New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields

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

    (Million Barrels) New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields (Million Barrels) U.S. Crude Oil + Lease Condensate New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 95 2010's 169 88 129 343 219 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus

  15. U.S. Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves New Reservoir in

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

    Old Fields (Million Barrels) New Reservoir in Old Fields (Million Barrels) U.S. Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves New Reservoir in Old Fields (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 14 2010's 8 29 7 24 12 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Lease

  16. Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs

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

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 137 134 2000's 130 148 61 61 16 70 85 42 26 51 2010's 199 248 293 280 281 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next

  17. Alaska Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Alaska Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 ...

  18. Mississippi Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Mississippi Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 ...

  19. Nebraska Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Nebraska Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 ...

  20. Louisiana Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Louisiana Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 ...

  1. Alabama Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Alabama Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 ...

  2. California Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) California Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 ...

  3. Indiana Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Indiana Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 ...

  4. Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore Crude Oil Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    (Million Barrels) Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore Crude Oil Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's...

  5. New Mexico Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) New Mexico Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

  6. Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore Crude Oil Production (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Barrels) Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore Crude Oil Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 267 266...

  7. New Mexico Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Sales (Million...

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

    Sales (Million Barrels) New Mexico Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Sales (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's...

  8. An analysis of increasing the size of the strategic petroleum reserve to one billion barrels

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-01-01

    The Department of Energy's Office of Energy Emergency Policy and Evaluation requested that the Energy Information Administration complete an analysis of the proposed expansion in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) from its currently planned size of 750 million barrels to 1000 million barrels. Because the SPR contains only 580 million barrels at this point in time, the benefits and costs of increasing the SPR from 600 to 750 million barrels were also estimated. This report documents the assumptions, methodology, and results of the analysis. 17 figs., 15 tabs.

  9. U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6...

  10. U.S. Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Barrels) U.S. Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's...

  11. California Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) California Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved ... Natural Gas Liquids Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 California Natural Gas Liquids Proved ...

  12. Michigan Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    Michigan Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 ... Release Date: 11192015 Next Release Date: 12312016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus ...

  13. Kentucky Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    Kentucky Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 ... Release Date: 11192015 Next Release Date: 12312016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus ...

  14. Colorado Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    Colorado Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 ... Release Date: 11192015 Next Release Date: 12312016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus ...

  15. ,"Texas Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves ...

  16. Oklahoma Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    Oklahoma Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 ... Release Date: 11192015 Next Release Date: 12312016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus ...

  17. ,"Mississippi Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... Data for" ,"Data 1","Mississippi Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves ...

  18. Arkansas Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    Arkansas Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 ... Release Date: 11192015 Next Release Date: 12312016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus ...

  19. North Dakota Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    North Dakota Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 ... Release Date: 11192015 Next Release Date: 12312016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus ...

  20. Illinois Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    Illinois Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 ... Release Date: 11192015 Next Release Date: 12312016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus ...

  1. Montana Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    Montana Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 ... Release Date: 11192015 Next Release Date: 12312016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus ...

  2. Pennsylvania Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    Pennsylvania Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 ... Release Date: 11192015 Next Release Date: 12312016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus ...

  3. Florida Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million...

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

    Florida Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 ... Release Date: 11192015 Next Release Date: 12312016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus ...

  4. EIA revises up forecast for U.S. 2013 crude oil production by 70,000 barrels per day

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

    EIA revises up forecast for U.S. 2013 crude oil production by 70,000 barrels per day The forecast for U.S. crude oil production keeps going higher. The U.S. Energy Information Administration revised upward its projection for crude oil output in 2013 by 70,000 barrels per day and for next year by 190,000 barrels per day. U.S. oil production is now on track to average 7.5 million barrels per day this year and rise to 8.4 million barrels per day in 2014, according to EIA's latest monthly forecast.

  5. Nebraska Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Nebraska Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) No Data Available For This Series - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Lease Condensate Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Nebraska Lease Condensate Proved Reserves, Reserve Changes, and

  6. Reviving Abandoned Reservoirs with High-Pressure Air Injection: Application in a Fractured and Karsted Dolomite Reservoir

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Robert Loucks; Stephen C. Ruppel; Dembla Dhiraj; Julia Gale; Jon Holder; Jeff Kane; Jon Olson; John A. Jackson; Katherine G. Jackson

    2006-09-30

    Despite declining production rates, existing reservoirs in the United States contain vast volumes of remaining oil that is not being effectively recovered. This oil resource constitutes a huge target for the development and application of modern, cost-effective technologies for producing oil. Chief among the barriers to the recovery of this oil are the high costs of designing and implementing conventional advanced recovery technologies in these mature, in many cases pressure-depleted, reservoirs. An additional, increasingly significant barrier is the lack of vital technical expertise necessary for the application of these technologies. This lack of expertise is especially notable among the small operators and independents that operate many of these mature, yet oil-rich, reservoirs. We addressed these barriers to more effective oil recovery by developing, testing, applying, and documenting an innovative technology that can be used by even the smallest operator to significantly increase the flow of oil from mature U.S. reservoirs. The Bureau of Economic Geology and Goldrus Producing Company assembled a multidisciplinary team of geoscientists and engineers to evaluate the applicability of high-pressure air injection (HPAI) in revitalizing a nearly abandoned carbonate reservoir in the Permian Basin of West Texas. The Permian Basin, the largest oil-bearing basin in North America, contains more than 70 billion barrels of remaining oil in place and is an ideal venue to validate this technology. We have demonstrated the potential of HPAI for oil-recovery improvement in preliminary laboratory tests and a reservoir pilot project. To more completely test the technology, this project emphasized detailed characterization of reservoir properties, which were integrated to access the effectiveness and economics of HPAI. The characterization phase of the project utilized geoscientists and petroleum engineers from the Bureau of Economic Geology and the Department of Petroleum Engineering (both at The University of Texas at Austin) to define the controls on fluid flow in the reservoir as a basis for developing a reservoir model. The successful development of HPAI technology has tremendous potential for increasing the flow of oil from deep carbonate reservoirs in the Permian Basin, a target resource that can be conservatively estimated at more than 1.5 billion barrels. Successful implementation in the field chosen for demonstration, for example, could result in the recovery of more than 34 million barrels of oil that will not otherwise be produced. Geological and petrophysical analysis of available data at Barnhart field reveals the following important observations: (1) the Barnhart Ellenburger reservoir is similar to most other Ellenburger reservoirs in terms of depositional facies, diagenesis, and petrophysical attributes; (2) the reservoir is characterized by low to moderate matrix porosity much like most other Ellenburger reservoirs in the Permian Basin; (3) karst processes (cave formation, infill, and collapse) have substantially altered stratigraphic architecture and reservoir properties; (4) porosity and permeability increase with depth and may be associated with the degree of karst-related diagenesis; (5) tectonic fractures overprint the reservoir, improving overall connectivity; (6) oil-saturation profiles show that the oil-water contact (OWC) is as much as 125 ft lower than previous estimations; (7) production history and trends suggest that this reservoir is very similar to other solution-gas-drive reservoirs in the Permian Basin; and (8) reservoir simulation study showed that the Barnhart reservoir is a good candidate for HPAI and that application of horizontal-well technology can improve ultimate resource recovery from the reservoir.

  7. Alabama Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 3,691 1,856 3,634 3,342 4,651 6,493 8,348 8,892 7,157 7,473 7,007 6,324 2002 9,105 8,006 7,301 7,217 7,316 12,396 15,228 15,892 11,855 7,064 5,415 5,608 2003 9,428 5,069 4,057 5,528 4,274 8,673 12,971 17,126 6,906 2,735 3,573 5,791 2004 9,038 8,270 8,672 8,552 10,409 11,388 17,481 14,662 9,689 7,254 4,995 6,647 2005 6,019 4,524 6,532 3,991 6,678 11,921 15,974 17,573 9,582 5,720 6,523 9,749 2006 4,041 5,197 7,726 9,059 11,642

  8. Alaska Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 3,189 2,833 2,962 2,255 2,427 2,439 2,574 2,392 2,865 2,986 3,235 2002 2,769 2,342 2,663 2,562 2,398 2,518 2,786 2,482 2,601 2,861 2,605 3,118 2003 3,346 2,960 2,855 2,590 2,515 2,769 2,869 2,668 2,628 2,848 2,990 3,365 2004 3,694 3,316 2,860 2,640 3,027 3,275 3,317 2,960 2,999 2,788 3,003 3,762 2005 3,422 2,993 3,098 2,769 2,815 2,968 3,527 3,809 3,157 3,507 3,443 3,776 2006 3,831 3,390 3,554 3,174 3,327 3,641 3,800 3,741 3,237

  9. Arkansas Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 116,522 156,627 169,257 1970's 181,351 172,154 166,522 157,529 123,975 116,237 109,533 104,096 106,792 109,452 1980's 111,808 92,986 124,611 127,561 135,161 155,099 131,075 141,151 166,573 174,158 1990's 174,956 164,702 202,479 196,370 187,673 187,242 221,822 208,514 188,372 170,006 2000's 171,642 166,804 161,871 169,599 187,069 190,533 270,293 269,886 446,457 679,952 2010's 926,639 1,072,212 1,146,168 1,139,654

  10. Colorado Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 116,857 121,424 118,754 1970's 105,804 108,537 116,949 137,725 144,629 171,629 183,972 188,792 183,693 191,239 1980's 188,001 195,706 209,892 163,545 173,257 178,233 163,684 164,557 191,544 216,737 1990's 242,997 285,961 323,041 400,985 453,207 523,084 572,071 637,375 696,321 722,738 2000's 752,985 817,206 937,245 1,011,285 1,079,235 1,133,086 1,202,821 1,242,571 1,389,399 1,499,070 2010's 1,578,379 1,637,576

  11. Florida Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 123 108 50 1970's 903 15,521 33,857 38,137 44,383 43,165 48,171 51,595 50,190 1980's 40,638 32,470 22,515 21,056 12,585 10,545 8,833 8,281 7,484 7,534 1990's 6,483 4,884 6,657 7,085 7,486 6,463 6,006 6,114 5,796 5,933 2000's 6,491 5,710 3,353 3,087 3,123 2,616 2,540 1,778 2,436 257 2010's 12,409 15,125 773 292 369

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 639 550 577 597 660 571 638 645 665 708

  12. Kentucky Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 89,168 89,024 81,304 1970's 77,892 72,723 63,648 62,396 71,876 60,511 66,137 60,902 70,044 59,520 1980's 57,180 61,312 51,924 46,720 61,518 73,126 80,195 70,125 73,629 72,417 1990's 75,333 78,904 79,690 86,966 73,081 74,754 81,435 79,547 81,869 76,770 2000's 81,545 81,723 88,259 87,608 94,259 92,795 95,320 95,437 114,116 113,300 2010's 135,330 124,243 106,122 94,665 78,737

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug

  13. Louisiana Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 14,443 11,997 14,142 21,746 20,692 21,707 32,832 38,346 25,901 19,391 10,270 11,549 2002 20,006 19,396 24,864 27,662 28,456 34,039 40,542 41,790 32,420 23,674 16,204 14,750 2003 19,955 15,360 14,860 18,716 20,153 22,791 26,663 28,685 20,590 18,689 15,461 14,484 2004 17,038 17,344 19,280 15,608 19,393 22,176 24,790 27,960 23,911 22,987 16,905 17,970 2005 19,636 15,729 19,997 22,435 28,666 30,717 32,870 31,768 29,702 18,668 13,130

  14. Michigan Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 33,589 40,480 36,163 1970's 38,851 25,662 34,221 44,579 69,133 102,113 119,262 129,954 148,047 159,731 1980's 158,302 152,593 153,051 138,910 144,537 131,855 127,287 146,996 146,145 155,988 1990's 172,151 195,749 194,815 204,635 222,657 238,203 245,740 305,950 278,076 277,364 2000's 296,556 275,036 274,476 236,987 259,681 261,112 263,009 264,907 153,130 153,736 2010's 131,118 138,162 129,333 123,622 114,946

  15. Montana Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 25,866 19,313 41,229 1970's 42,705 32,720 33,474 56,175 54,873 40,734 42,563 46,819 46,522 53,888 1980's 51,867 56,565 56,517 51,967 51,474 52,494 46,592 46,456 51,654 51,307 1990's 50,429 51,999 53,867 54,528 50,416 50,264 50,996 52,437 57,645 61,163 2000's 69,936 81,397 86,075 86,027 96,762 107,918 112,845 116,848 112,529 98,245 2010's 87,539 74,624 66,954 63,242 59,930 57,218

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

  16. North Dakota Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 40,462 41,023 33,587 1970's 34,889 33,864 32,472 27,703 31,206 24,786 31,470 29,173 30,499 18,468 1980's 42,346 42,573 53,818 69,319 70,496 72,633 55,098 62,258 57,747 51,174 1990's 52,169 53,479 54,883 59,851 57,805 49,468 49,674 52,401 53,185 52,862 2000's 52,426 54,732 57,048 55,693 55,009 52,557 55,273 60,255 52,444 59,369 2010's 81,837 97,102 172,242 235,711 326,537 460,406

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

  17. Ohio Natural Gas Liquids Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 281 271 571 602 1,060 923 2,372 2,889 627 354 404 191 2002 184 740 645 1,261 655 2,444 6,411 5,335 3,175 1,034 410 428 2003 928 730 1,377 1,393 887 1,052 2,489 6,891 954 608 751 713 2004 822 888 881 809 4,107 2,668 2,843 2,634 1,400 68 862 276 2005 1,665 606 1,524 1,614 743 4,721 6,150 6,032 2,104 952 677 1,151 2006 563 500 564 503 1,213 1,904 6,113 5,191 1,347 2,246 1,958 1,081 2007 1,513 1,977 904 1,690 3,052 3,115 3,799

  18. Oklahoma Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 1,412,952 1,390,884 1,523,715 1970's 1,594,943 1,684,260 1,806,887 1,770,980 1,638,942 1,605,410 1,726,513 1,769,519 1,773,582 1,835,366 1980's 1,891,824 2,019,199 1,985,384 1,779,541 2,046,339 1,993,405 1,971,988 2,073,461 2,167,050 2,237,037 1990's 2,258,471 2,153,852 2,017,356 2,049,942 1,934,864 1,811,734 1,734,887 1,703,888 1,669,367 1,594,002 2000's 1,612,890 1,615,384 1,581,606 1,558,155 1,655,769

  19. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Liquids Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 486 712 1,140 773 1,109 1,771 2,262 3,427 2,964 2,732 2,582 2,675 2002 1,487 3,362 3,212 1,733 2,051 5,822 8,680 10,396 5,545 3,617 2,284 2,064 2003 1,872 1,635 2,717 2,468 2,210 3,279 6,446 8,721 3,401 3,391 2,248 2,849 2004 4,087 6,499 3,712 3,302 11,504 7,421 12,436 10,361 8,535 1,074 3,120 4,135 2005 3,681 2,103 5,459 2,436 2,771 10,076 14,795 14,914 10,640 5,409 4,766 3,590 2006 2,157 4,828 8,760 5,619 6,787 11,967

  20. Texas Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 101,920 87,176 100,334 115,391 131,842 151,710 190,037 191,478 135,134 118,063 91,505 91,523 2002 105,480 90,578 104,754 116,473 125,291 156,428 182,218 190,565 148,525 124,397 103,613 101,970 2003 106,379 100,241 103,485 101,849 141,494 143,084 172,747 183,393 119,762 103,052 89,312 89,060 2004 92,080 90,099 98,499 103,954 118,578 137,272 160,095 157,525 131,609 120,125 89,952 94,619 2005 93,970 83,671 93,732 104,415 116,656

  1. Utah Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 48,965 46,151 46,733 1970's 42,781 42,418 39,474 42,715 50,522 55,354 57,416 60,696 58,416 58,605 1980's 87,766 91,191 94,255 63,158 74,698 83,405 90,013 87,158 101,372 120,089 1990's 145,875 144,817 171,293 225,401 270,858 241,290 250,767 257,139 277,340 262,614 2000's 269,285 283,913 274,739 268,058 277,969 301,223 348,320 376,409 433,566 444,162 2010's 432,045 457,525 490,393 470,863 453,207 422,423

    Year

  2. West Virginia Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 211,460 236,971 231,759 1970's 242,452 234,027 214,951 208,676 202,306 154,484 153,322 152,767 148,564 150,505 1980's 156,551 161,251 150,850 130,078 143,730 144,883 135,431 160,000 174,942 177,192 1990's 178,000 198,605 182,000 171,024 183,773 186,231 169,839 172,268 180,000 1,760,150 2000's 264,139 191,889 190,249 187,723 197,217 221,108 225,530 231,184 244,880 264,436 2010's 265,174 394,125 539,860 741,853

  3. Miscellaneous States Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Barrels) Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Miscellaneous States Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 2 1980's 3 21 2 1 2 2 3 3 1990's 2 3 6 6 7 7 7 9 8 8 2000's 7 6 8 8 8 9 11 14 14 0 2010's 9 10 12 32 350 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015

  4. Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing...

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 ...

  5. Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing...

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 ...

  6. Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing...

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 ...

  7. New Mexico Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Reserves in...

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

    in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) New Mexico Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

  8. Parcperdue geopressure-geothermal project. Study a geopressured reservoir by drilling and producing a well in a limited geopressured water sand. Final technical report, September 28, 1979-December 31, 1983

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hamilton, J.R.; Stanley, J.G.

    1984-01-15

    The behavior of geopressured reservoirs was investigated by drilling and producing a well in small, well defined, geopressured reservoir; and performing detailed pressure transient analysis together with geological, geophysical, chemical, and physical studies. The Dow-DOE L. R. Sweezy No. 1 well was drilled to a depth of 13,600 feet in Parcperdue field, just south of Lafayette, Louisiana, and began production in April, 1982. The production zone was a poorly consolidated sandstone which constantly produced sand into the well stream, causing damage to equipment and causing other problems. The amount of sand production was kept manageable by limiting the flow rate to below 10,000 barrels per day. Reservoir properties of size, thickness, depth, temperature, pressure, salinity, porosity, and permeability were close to predicted values. The reservoir brine was undersaturated with respect to gas, containing approximately 20 standard cubic feet of gas per barrel of brine. Shale dewatering either did not occur or was insignificant as a drive mechanism. Production terminated when the gravel-pack completion failed and the production well totally sanded in, February, 1983. Total production up to the sanding incident was 1.94 million barrels brine and 31.5 million standard cubic feet gas.

  9. Heavy oil reservoirs recoverable by thermal technology. Annual report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kujawa, P.

    1981-02-01

    The purpose of this study was to compile data on reservoirs that contain heavy oil in the 8 to 25/sup 0/ API gravity range, contain at least ten million barrels of oil currently in place, and are non-carbonate in lithology. The reservoirs within these constraints were then analyzed in light of applicable recovery technology, either steam-drive or in situ combustion, and then ranked hierarchically as candidate reservoirs. The study is presented in three volumes. Volume I presents the project background and approach, the screening analysis, ranking criteria, and listing of candidate reservoirs. The economic and environmental aspects of heavy oil recovery are included in appendices to this volume. This study provides an extensive basis for heavy oil development, but should be extended to include carbonate reservoirs and tar sands. It is imperative to look at heavy oil reservoirs and projects on an individual basis; it was discovered that operators, and industrial and government analysts will lump heavy oil reservoirs as poor producers, however, it was found that upon detailed analysis, a large number, so categorized, were producing very well. A study also should be conducted on abandoned reservoirs. To utilize heavy oil, refiners will have to add various unit operations to their processes, such as hydrotreaters and hydrodesulfurizers and will require, in most cases, a lighter blending stock. A big problem in producing heavy oil is that of regulation; specifically, it was found that the regulatory constraints are so fluid and changing that one cannot settle on a favorable recovery and production plan with enough confidence in the regulatory requirements to commit capital to the project.

  10. North Dakota Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) North Dakota Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 14 1980's 19 16 18 15 16 15 16 14 12 11 1990's 10 9 10 9 9 9 8 7 7 7 2000's 7 7 6 5 4 4 4 4 4 12 2010's 73 9 12 6 2 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  11. North Dakota Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) North Dakota Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 33 1980's 42 52 53 54 57 59 53 53 40 48 1990's 50 47 54 46 46 44 40 40 41 46 2000's 47 50 41 40 39 45 51 54 51 104 2010's 157 193 297 466 540 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  12. Ohio Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Ohio Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 0 1980's 0 0 2 0 1 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Lease Condensate Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31

  13. Oklahoma Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Oklahoma Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 72 1980's 67 66 78 89 86 95 89 79 79 68 1990's 65 61 63 68 60 69 69 75 85 82 2000's 96 89 94 104 124 142 160 152 164 180 2010's 216 271 346 450 480 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  14. Oklahoma Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Oklahoma Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 511 1980's 537 565 667 740 683 731 768 702 686 586 1990's 592 567 566 575 592 605 615 610 613 667 2000's 639 605 601 582 666 697 732 797 870 985 2010's 1,270 1,445 1,452 1,408 1,752 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid

  15. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 0 1980's 0 0 0 2 2 2 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Lease Condensate Proved Reserves as of

  16. Lower 48 States Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million

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

    Barrels) + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Lower 48 States Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 18,749 2010's 21,459 25,098 30,051 33,622 37,076 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus Lease

  17. Michigan Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Michigan Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 10 1980's 10 9 6 6 7 5 11 21 17 18 1990's 15 18 16 13 11 7 5 5 8 6 2000's 3 2 5 4 4 3 6 5 4 19 2010's 15 15 15 3 2 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  18. Montana Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Montana Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 0 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 2 0 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release

  19. New Mexico - East Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million

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

    Barrels) Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) New Mexico - East Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 748 2010's 891 921 1,029 1,215 1,466 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus Lease

  20. New Mexico - West Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million

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

    Barrels) Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) New Mexico - West Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 32 2010's 31 39 40 62 92 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate Proved

  1. New Mexico Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) New Mexico Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 65 1980's 63 64 56 56 49 50 63 63 97 70 1990's 75 68 72 71 65 62 61 55 53 58 2000's 92 79 59 51 59 59 57 56 78 80 2010's 99 94 104 106 82 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  2. New Mexico Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) New Mexico Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 465 1980's 478 496 475 495 462 395 514 708 926 863 1990's 915 840 994 925 946 881 998 814 876 896 2000's 804 794 779 824 805 781 804 788 726 715 2010's 764 776 662 679 789 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid

  3. Arkansas Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Arkansas Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 1 1980's 1 1 3 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1990's 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 4 2 2 2000's 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2010's 2 2 2 1 2 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release

  4. Arkansas Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Arkansas Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 16 1980's 15 15 12 9 10 9 15 15 11 8 1990's 7 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 2000's 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2010's 2 3 3 4 5 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next

  5. Colorado Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Colorado Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 7 1980's 11 9 12 10 13 18 21 24 19 18 1990's 17 16 33 24 38 30 33 20 25 26 2000's 28 47 67 70 103 98 96 107 104 97 2010's 115 132 142 275 251 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  6. Colorado Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Colorado Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 170 1980's 183 195 174 173 142 155 127 142 162 191 1990's 152 181 193 190 210 243 254 244 235 277 2000's 288 298 329 325 362 386 382 452 612 722 2010's 879 925 705 762 813 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure

  7. Florida Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Florida Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 0 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 1 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release

  8. Florida Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Florida Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 21 1980's 27 17 11 17 17 14 9 16 10 1990's 8 7 8 9 18 17 22 17 18 16 2000's 11 12 14 17 12 7 3 2 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015

  9. Kansas Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Kansas Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 2 1980's 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 1990's 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 8 3 3 2000's 3 2 2 3 4 6 5 4 6 5 2010's 7 7 7 18 37 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release

  10. Kansas Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Kansas Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 400 1980's 387 407 300 441 422 370 437 459 342 327 1990's 311 426 442 378 396 367 336 263 331 355 2000's 303 300 261 245 267 218 204 194 175 162 2010's 195 192 174 138 186 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  11. Kentucky Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Kentucky Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 0 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1990's 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 2000's 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 2010's 1 5 4 5 5 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release

  12. Kentucky Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Kentucky Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 26 1980's 25 25 35 31 24 27 29 23 24 15 1990's 24 24 32 25 39 42 45 47 53 69 2000's 56 72 65 65 71 69 104 88 96 101 2010's 124 88 81 95 108 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.

  13. Colorado Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Barrels) Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Colorado Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 10 1980's 10 11 10 9 8 9 8 8 9 10 1990's 10 12 13 14 15 18 17 21 18 19 2000's 21 22 23 24 26 26 26 27 38 48 2010's 58 63 57 52 61 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015

  14. Michigan Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Barrels) Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Michigan Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 11 1980's 12 12 11 10 10 8 9 8 8 8 1990's 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 2000's 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 2010's 3 2 2 2 2 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date:

  15. North Dakota Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Barrels) Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) North Dakota Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 2 1980's 3 4 4 5 6 6 5 6 5 5 1990's 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 2000's 5 5 5 4 5 5 6 6 6 8 2010's 9 11 19 26 36 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date:

  16. Oklahoma Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Barrels) Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Oklahoma Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 59 1980's 62 65 67 70 75 77 76 76 79 73 1990's 75 76 77 77 76 70 74 71 69 70 2000's 69 66 61 59 64 65 67 69 74 77 2010's 82 88 96 99 117 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  17. West Virginia Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Barrels) Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) West Virginia Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 6 1980's 6 6 5 5 6 7 6 6 7 7 1990's 7 7 7 7 6 4 4 4 4 4 2000's 6 6 6 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 2010's 5 5 8 10 41 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date:

  18. Utah Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Utah Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 52 62 90 2010's 69 78 87 57 51 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Lease Condensate Proved Reserves as of

  19. Utah Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Utah Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 56 54 116 2010's 132 196 181 169 206 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Plant Liquids Proved

  20. West Virginia Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million

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

    Barrels) + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) West Virginia Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 20 2010's 21 51 57 94 185 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate Proved Reserves, as

  1. Wyoming Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Wyoming Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 211 234 272 2010's 256 259 226 232 184 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Lease Condensate Proved

  2. Wyoming Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million

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

    Barrels) Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Wyoming Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 822 887 1,010 2010's 1,001 1,122 1,064 894 881 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Plant Liquids

  3. Increased Oil Production and Reserves Utilizing Secondary/Terriary Recovery Techniques on Small Reservoirs in the Paradox Basin, Utah

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    David E. Eby; Thomas C. Chidsey, Jr.

    1998-04-08

    The primary objective of this project is to enhance domestic petroleum production by demonstration and technology transfer of an advanced oil recovery technology in the Paradox basin, southeastern Utah. If this project can demonstrate technical and economic feasibility, the technique can be applied to about 100 additional small fields in the Paradox basin alone, and result in increased recovery of 150 to 200 million barrels of oil. This project is designed to characterize five shallow-shelf carbonate reservoirs in the Pennsylvanian (Desmoinesian) Paradox Formation and choose the best candidate for a pilot demonstration project for either a waterflood or carbon dioxide-(CO -) 2 flood project. The field demonstration, monitoring of field performance, and associated validation activities will take place in the Paradox basin within the Navajo Nation. Two activities continued this quarter as part of the geological and reservoir characterization of productive carbonate buildups in the Paradox basin: (1) diagenetic characterization of project field reservoirs, and (2) technology transfer.

  4. U.S. Natural Gas Supplemental Gas - Biomass Gas (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Barrels) Acquisitions (Million Barrels) U.S. Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 37 2010's 140 273 84 138 408 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Lease Condensate Reserves Acquisitions (Million

  5. Increased oil production and reserves utilizing secondary/tertiary recovery techniques on small reservoirs in the Paradox basin, Utah. Annual report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chidsey, T.C. Jr.

    1997-02-01

    The Paradox basin of Utah, Colorado, and Arizona contains nearly 100 small oil fields producing from carbonate buildups or mounds within the Pennsylvanian (Desmoinesian) Paradox Formation. These fields typically have one to four wells with primary production ranging from 700,000 to 2,000,000 barrels of oil per field at a 15 to 20% recovery rate. At least 200 million barrels of oil is at risk of being unrecovered in these small fields because of inefficient recovery practices and undrained heterogeneous reservoirs. Five fields (Anasazi, mule, Blue Hogan, heron North, and Runway) within the Navajo Nation of southeastern utah are being evaluated for waterflood or carbon-dioxide-miscible flood projects based upon geological characterization and reservoir modeling. The results can be applied to other fields in the Paradox basin and the Rocky Mountain region, the Michigan and Illinois basins, and the Midcontinent. The reservoir engineering component of the work completed to date included analysis of production data and well tests, comprehensive laboratory programs, and preliminary mechanistic reservoir simulation studies. A comprehensive fluid property characterization program was completed. Mechanistic reservoir production performance simulation studies were also completed.

  6. Increased oil production and reserves utilizing secondary/tertiary recovery techniques on small reservoirs in the Paradox basin, Utah. Annual report, February 9, 1996--February 8, 1997

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chidsey, T.C. Jr.

    1997-08-01

    The Paradox basin of Utah, Colorado, and Arizona contains nearly 100 small oil fields producing from carbonate buildups or mounds within the Pennsylvanian (Desmoinesian) Paradox Formation. These fields typically have one to four wells with primary production ranging from 700,000 to 2,000,000 barrels of oil per field at a 15 to 20% recovery rate. At least 200 million barrels of oil is at risk of being unrecovered in these small fields because of inefficient recovery practices and undrained heterogeneous reservoirs. Five fields (Anasazi, Mule, Blue Hogan, Heron North, and Runway) within the Navajo Nation of southeastern Utah are being evaluated for waterflood or carbon-dioxide-miscible flood projects based upon geological characterization and reservoir modeling. The results can be applied to other fields in the Paradox basin and the Rocky Mountain region, the Michigan and Illinois basins, and the Midcontinent. The Anasazi field was selected for the initial geostatistical modeling and reservoir simulation. A compositional simulation approach is being used to model primary depletion, waterflood, and CO{sub 2}-flood processes. During this second year of the project, team members performed the following reservoir-engineering analysis of Anasazi field: (1) relative permeability measurements of the supra-mound and mound-core intervals, (2) completion of geologic model development of the Anasazi reservoir units for use in reservoir simulation studies including completion of a series of one-dimensional, carbon dioxide-displacement simulations to analyze the carbon dioxide-displacement mechanism that could operate in the Paradox basin system of reservoirs, and (3) completion of the first phase of the full-field, three-dimensional Anasazi reservoir simulation model, and the start of the history matching and reservoir performance prediction phase of the simulation study.

  7. Depositional sequence analysis and sedimentologic modeling for improved prediction of Pennsylvanian reservoirs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Watney, W.L.

    1994-12-01

    Reservoirs in the Lansing-Kansas City limestone result from complex interactions among paleotopography (deposition, concurrent structural deformation), sea level, and diagenesis. Analysis of reservoirs and surface and near-surface analogs has led to developing a {open_quotes}strandline grainstone model{close_quotes} in which relative sea-level stabilized during regressions, resulting in accumulation of multiple grainstone buildups along depositional strike. Resulting stratigraphy in these carbonate units are generally predictable correlating to inferred topographic elevation along the shelf. This model is a valuable predictive tool for (1) locating favorable reservoirs for exploration, and (2) anticipating internal properties of the reservoir for field development. Reservoirs in the Lansing-Kansas City limestones are developed in both oolitic and bioclastic grainstones, however, re-analysis of oomoldic reservoirs provides the greatest opportunity for developing bypassed oil. A new technique, the {open_quotes}Super{close_quotes} Pickett crossplot (formation resistivity vs. porosity) and its use in an integrated petrophysical characterization, has been developed to evaluate extractable oil remaining in these reservoirs. The manual method in combination with 3-D visualization and modeling can help to target production limiting heterogeneities in these complex reservoirs and moreover compute critical parameters for the field such as bulk volume water. Application of this technique indicates that from 6-9 million barrels of Lansing-Kansas City oil remain behind pipe in the Victory-Northeast Lemon Fields. Petroleum geologists are challenged to quantify inferred processes to aid in developing rationale geologically consistent models of sedimentation so that acceptable levels of prediction can be obtained.

  8. Lower 48 States Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Barrels) Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Lower 48 States Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 5,191 1980's 5,187 5,478 5,611 6,280 6,121 6,109 6,348 6,327 6,448 6,000 1990's 5,944 5,860 5,878 5,709 5,722 5,896 6,179 6,001 5,868 6,112 2000's 6,596 6,190 6,243 5,857 6,338 6,551 6,795 7,323 7,530 8,258 2010's 9,521 10,537 10,489 11,655 14,788 - = No Data

  9. Illinois Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Illinois Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 66 2010's 64 54 51 42 34 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate Proved Reserves, as of Dec. 31

  10. INCREASED OIL PRODUCTION AND RESERVES UTILIZING SECONDARY/TERTIARY RECOVERY TECHNIQUES ON SMALL RESERVOIRS IN THE PARADOX BASIN, UTAH

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thomas C. Chidsey, Jr.

    2002-11-01

    The Paradox Basin of Utah, Colorado, and Arizona contains nearly 100 small oil fields producing from shallow-shelf carbonate buildups or mounds within the Desert Creek zone of the Pennsylvanian (Desmoinesian) Paradox Formation. These fields typically have one to four wells with primary production ranging from 700,000 to 2,000,000 barrels (111,300-318,000 m{sup 3}) of oil per field at a 15 to 20 percent recovery rate. Five fields in southeastern Utah were evaluated for waterflood or carbon-dioxide (CO{sub 2})-miscible flood projects based upon geological characterization and reservoir modeling. Geological characterization on a local scale focused on reservoir heterogeneity, quality, and lateral continuity as well as possible compartmentalization within each of the five project fields. The Desert Creek zone includes three generalized facies belts: (1) open-marine, (2) shallow-shelf and shelf-margin, and (3) intra-shelf, salinity-restricted facies. These deposits have modern analogs near the coasts of the Bahamas, Florida, and Australia, respectively, and outcrop analogs along the San Juan River of southeastern Utah. The analogs display reservoir heterogeneity, flow barriers and baffles, and lithofacies geometry observed in the fields; thus, these properties were incorporated in the reservoir simulation models. Productive carbonate buildups consist of three types: (1) phylloid algal, (2) coralline algal, and (3) bryozoan. Phylloid-algal buildups have a mound-core interval and a supra-mound interval. Hydrocarbons are stratigraphically trapped in porous and permeable lithotypes within the mound-core intervals of the lower part of the buildups and the more heterogeneous supramound intervals. To adequately represent the observed spatial heterogeneities in reservoir properties, the phylloid-algal bafflestones of the mound-core interval and the dolomites of the overlying supra-mound interval were subdivided into ten architecturally distinct lithotypes, each of which exhibits a characteristic set of reservoir properties obtained from outcrop analogs, cores, and geophysical logs. The Anasazi and Runway fields were selected for geostatistical modeling and reservoir compositional simulations. Models and simulations incorporated variations in carbonate lithotypes, porosity, and permeability to accurately predict reservoir responses. History matches tied previous production and reservoir pressure histories so that future reservoir performances could be confidently predicted. The simulation studies showed that despite most of the production being from the mound-core intervals, there were no corresponding decreases in the oil in place in these intervals. This behavior indicates gravity drainage of oil from the supra-mound intervals into the lower mound-core intervals from which the producing wells' major share of production arises. The key to increasing ultimate recovery from these fields (and similar fields in the basin) is to design either waterflood or CO{sub 2}-miscible flood projects capable of forcing oil from high-storage-capacity but low-recovery supra-mound units into the high-recovery mound-core units. Simulation of Anasazi field shows that a CO{sub 2} flood is technically superior to a waterflood and economically feasible. For Anasazi field, an optimized CO{sub 2} flood is predicted to recover a total 4.21 million barrels (0.67 million m3) of oil representing in excess of 89 percent of the original oil in place. For Runway field, the best CO{sub 2} flood is predicted to recover a total of 2.4 million barrels (0.38 million m3) of oil representing 71 percent of the original oil in place. If the CO{sub 2} flood performed as predicted, it is a financially robust process for increasing the reserves in the many small fields in the Paradox Basin. The results can be applied to other fields in the Rocky Mountain region, the Michigan and Illinois Basins, and the Midcontinent.

  11. U.S. Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves New Field Discoveries (Million

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

    Barrels) New Field Discoveries (Million Barrels) U.S. Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves New Field Discoveries (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 141 2010's 124 481 55 191 164 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate New Field Discove

  12. U.S. Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Revision Decreases (Million

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

    Barrels) Decreases (Million Barrels) U.S. Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Revision Decreases (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 1,262 2010's 1,957 3,682 3,997 4,241 5,612 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate Revision Decreases, Wet

  13. U.S. Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Revision Increases (Million

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

    Barrels) Increases (Million Barrels) U.S. Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Revision Increases (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 3,270 2010's 3,900 5,096 4,909 4,786 6,028 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate Revision Increases

  14. U.S. Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves Sales (Million

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

    Barrels) Sales (Million Barrels) U.S. Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves Sales (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 37 2010's 78 216 85 209 318 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Lease Condensate Reserves Sales

  15. U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves New Field Discoveries (Million

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Barrels) New Field Discoveries (Million Barrels) U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves New Field Discoveries (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 94 1980's 90 131 112 70 55 44 34 39 41 83 1990's 39 25 20 24 54 52 65 114 66 51 2000's 92 138 48 35 26 32 16 30 65 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date:

  16. U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Revision Decreases (Million

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Barrels) Decreases (Million Barrels) U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Revision Decreases (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 726 1980's 639 643 832 781 724 744 807 656 715 1,020 1990's 606 695 545 640 676 691 669 910 1,094 1,321 2000's 724 1,089 951 1,043 1,135 947 1,010 765 1,435 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  17. Arkansas Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Barrels) Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Arkansas Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 1 1980's 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1990's 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016

  18. Florida Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Barrels) Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Florida Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 10 1980's 10 5 4 3 2 2 1 1 1 1990's 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2000's 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016

  19. Kentucky Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Barrels) Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Kentucky Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 3 1980's 3 2 3 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1990's 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 2000's 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 2010's 5 4 5 5 5 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016

  20. Montana Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Barrels) Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Montana Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 1 1980's 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1990's 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2010's 1 1 1 1 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016

  1. Reservoir Claddings

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2009-05-14

    This information sheet explains how to properly decouple reservoir claddings from water sensitive materials of the wall assembly.

  2. New York Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million

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

    Barrels) New York Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 0 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Lease Condensate Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 New York Lease Condensate Proved Reserves, Reserv

  3. Increased oil production and reserves utilizing secondary/tertiary recovery techniques on small reservoirs in the Paradox Basin, Utah. Annual report, February 9, 1997--February 8, 1998

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chidsey, T.C. Jr.

    1998-03-01

    The Paradox basin of Utah, Colorado, and Arizona contains nearly 100 small oil fields producing from carbonate buildups or mounds within the Pennsylvanian (Desmoinesian) Paradox Formation. These fields typically have one to four wells with primary production ranging from 700,000 to 2,000,000 barrels (111,300-318,000 m{sup 3}) of oil per field at a 15 to 20 percent recovery rate. At least 200 million barrels (31,800,000 m{sup 3}) of oil are at risk of being unrecovered in these small fields because of inefficient recovery practices and undrained heterogeneous reservoirs. Five fields (Anasazi, Mule, Blue Hogan, Heron North, and Runway) within the Navajo Nation of southeastern Utah are being evaluated for waterflood or carbon-dioxide (CO{sub 2})-miscible flood projects based upon geological characterization and reservoir modeling. The results can be applied to other fields in the Paradox basin and the Rocky Mountain region, the Michigan and Illinois basins, and the Midcontinent. Geological characterization on a local scale focused on reservoir heterogeneity, quality, and lateral continuity as well as possible compartmentalization within each of the five project fields. This study utilized representative core and modern geophysical logs to characterize and grade each of the five fields for suitability of enhanced recovery projects. The typical vertical sequence or cycle of lithofacies from each field, as determined from conventional core, was tied to its corresponding log response. The diagenetic fabrics and porosity types found in the various hydrocarbon-bearing rocks of each field can be an indicator of reservoir flow capacity, storage capacity, and potential for water- and/or CO{sub 2}-flooding. Diagenetic histories of the various Desert Creek reservoirs were determined from 50 representative samples selected from the conventional cores of each field. Thin sections were also made of each sample for petrographic description.

  4. Increased Oil Production and Reserves Utilizing Secondary/Tertiary Recovery Techniques on Small Reservoirs in the Paradox Basin, Utah

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chidsey Jr., Thomas C.

    2003-02-06

    The primary objective of this project was to enhance domestic petroleum production by field demonstration and technology transfer of an advanced-oil-recovery technology in the Paradox Basin, southeastern Utah. If this project can demonstrate technical and economic feasibility, the technique can be applied to approximately 100 additional small fields in the Paradox Basin alone, and result in increased recovery of 150 to 200 million barrels (23,850,000-31,800,000 m3) of oil. This project was designed to characterize five shallow-shelf carbonate reservoirs in the Pennsylvanian (Desmoinesian) Paradox Formation and choose the best candidate for a pilot demonstration project for either a waterflood or carbon-dioxide-(CO2-) miscible flood project. The field demonstration, monitoring of field performance, and associated validation activities will take place within the Navajo Nation, San Juan County, Utah.

  5. Increased Oil Production and Reserves Utilizing Secondary/Tertiary Recovery Techniques on Small Reservoirs in the Paradox Basin, Utah

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jr., Chidsey, Thomas C.; Allison, M. Lee

    1999-11-02

    The primary objective of this project is to enhance domestic petroleum production by field demonstration and technology transfer of an advanced- oil-recovery technology in the Paradox basin, southeastern Utah. If this project can demonstrate technical and economic feasibility, the technique can be applied to approximately 100 additional small fields in the Paradox basin alone, and result in increased recovery of 150 to 200 million barrels (23,850,000-31,800,000 m3) of oil. This project is designed to characterize five shallow-shelf carbonate reservoirs in the Pennsylvanian (Desmoinesian) Paradox Formation and choose the best candidate for a pilot demonstration project for either a waterflood or carbon-dioxide-(CO2-) miscible flood project. The field demonstration, monitoring of field performance, and associated validation activities will take place within the Navajo Nation, San Juan County, Utah.

  6. BARRELING THROUGH THE VACUUM OF SPACE at

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

    1663 October 2015 1663 October 2015 19 BARRELING THROUGH THE VACUUM OF SPACE at over 17,000 miles per hour, Earth's reflection glinting off its solar panels, the satellite is fiercely efficient and mission driven. It has hard edges and cold surfaces. It is brand new and state-of-the-art. It is an engineering masterpiece. And it's roughly the size of an electric pencil sharpener. Satellites are generally thought of as hulking beasts of instrumentation. They are billion-dollar machines capable of

  7. Increased oil production and reserves utilizing secondary/teritiary recovery techniques on small reservoirs in the Paradox Basin, Utah. Quarterly report, July 1 - September 30, 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Allison, M.L.

    1996-10-01

    The primary objective of this project is to enhance domestic petroleum production by demonstration and technology transfer of an advanced oil recovery technology in the Paradox basin, southeastern Utah. If this project can demonstrate technical and economic feasibility, the technique can be applied to approximately 100 additional small fields in the Paradox basin alone, and result in increased recovery of 150 to 200 million barrels of oil. This project is designed to characterize five shallow-shelf carbonate reservoirs in the Pennsylvanian (Desmoinesian) Paradox Formation and choose the best candidate for a pilot demonstration project for either a waterflood or carbon dioxide flood project. The field demonstration, monitoring of field performance, and associated validation activities will take place in the Paradox basin within the Navajo Nation. The results of this project will be transferred to industry and other researchers through a petroleum extension service, creation of digital databases for distribution, technical workshops and seminars, field trips, technical presentations at national and regional professional meeting, and publication in newsletters and various technical or trade journals. Four activities continued this quarter as part of the geological and reservoir characterization: (1) interpretation of outcrop analogues; (2) reservoir mapping, (3) reservoir engineering analysis of the five project fields; and (4) technology transfer.

  8. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    More coal and less natural gas will be used to generate electricity this summer compared to last year, while combined power generated by wind, sun, and other renewables will also ...

  9. U.S. Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels...

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

    Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 22,315 2010's 25,181 28,950 33,403 36,520 39,933 - No Data Reported; -- Not Applicable; NA Not Available; W ...

  10. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    Oil production in the Gulf of Mexico is also expected to rise this year and again in 2015, marking the first increase in offshore oil output in five years, according to EIA. The ...

  11. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    Robust production is also supporting increased natural gas exports to Mexico and reductions in natural gas imports from Canada. Several companies plan to build U.S. terminals to ...

  12. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    shut-ins The government's weather experts are predicting a relatively mild hurricane season, but U.S. oil and natural gas production in the Gulf of Mexico could still be disrupted. ...

  13. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    Midwest households expected to see a 33% drop in propane heating bills this winter Midwest households that paid record-high prices for propane last winter to stay warm are expected ...

  14. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    U.S. gasoline prices expected to fall over next few months U.S. drivers should see lower gasoline prices over the next few months. In its new forecast, the U.S. Energy Information ...

  15. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    residential summer power bills to be higher than last year The average household power bill this summer is expected to be 4.9 percent higher than last year. In its new monthly ...

  16. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    U.S. natural gas stocks at the end of the heating season expected to be lowest since 2003 In its new monthly forecast....the U.S. Energy Information Administration expects the ...

  17. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    U.S. natural gas inventories strong heading into winter heating season U.S. natural gas inventories have recovered from their big drawdown last winter and are expected to be at ...

  18. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    U.S. drivers expected to pay slightly lower average gasoline price this summer U.S. drivers pulling up to the pump this summer are expected to pay an average of 3.57 for a gallon ...

  19. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    More than 1 trillion cubic feet of natural gas has been injected into underground storage since mid-April...the shortest time for that much natural gas to be added to inventories ...

  20. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    summer gasoline price higher due to rising crude oil costs The price U.S. drivers pay for gasoline this summer is expected to average 3.61 per gallon....that's 3 cents more than ...

  1. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    EIA forecasts record 2.6 trillion cubic feet build in U.S. natural gas inventories With the winter heating season over, U.S. natural gas producers now turn to ramping up output to ...

  2. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    gasoline prices in december expected to be lowest in nearly 4 years Falling crude oil prices are expected to push U.S. retail gasoline prices in December to their lowest level in ...

  3. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    Households heating bills expected to be lower this winter U.S. households in all regions of the country can expect to see lower heating bills this winter....mainly because ...

  4. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    The amount of natural gas in underground storage was just under 1 trillion cubic feet in late April, about half the level typically seen for that time of year. The U.S. Energy ...

  5. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    Snow and cold cut into U.S. crude oil production this winter This winter's harsh weather conditions temporarily slowed U.S. crude oil production. In its new forecast....the U.S. ...

  6. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    World oil supply more than adequate to meet demand over next 2 years Rising U.S. crude oil production will help non-OPEC supply growth exceed global demand growth for the next two ...

  7. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    1.3 trillion cubic feet by the end of March, the lowest level of inventories for that time of year since 2008. Extreme cold during January caused a record monthly withdrawal of ...

  8. U.S. monthly oil production tops 8 million barrels per day for...

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

    4 Oil demand expected to rise in non-industrialized countries, led by strong growth in China Nonindustrialized countries are expected to account for all of the growth in global ...

  9. Beam test of the SDC barrel EM calorimeter test module

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Balka, L.; Guarino, V.; Hill, N.

    1994-05-01

    The SDC barrel electromagnetic calorimeter test module was exposed to beams of high energy pions and electrons in the MP9 test beam at Fermilab in the fall of 1991. Data were collected on resolution, light yield, signal timing and hermiticity. These data demonstrated that the design met the specifications for the barrel electromagnetic calorimeter of the Solenoidal Detector collaboration (SDC).

  10. Increased oil production and reserves utilizing secondary/tertiary recovery techniques on small reservoirs in the Paradox Basin, Utah, Class II

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chidsey, Thomas C.

    2000-07-28

    The primary objective of this project is to enhance domestic petroleum production by field demonstration and technology transfer of an advanced-oil-recovery technology in the Paradox basin, southeastern Utah. If this project can demonstrate technical and economic feasibility, the technique can be applied to approximately 100 additional small fields in the Paradox basin alone, and result in increased recovery of 150 to 200 million barrels (23,850,000-31,800,000 m{sup 3}) of oil. This project is designed to characterize five shallow-shelf carbonate reservoirs in the Pennsylvanian (Desmoinesian) Paradox Formation and choose the best candidate for a pilot demonstration project for either a waterflood or carbon-dioxide-miscible flood project. The field demonstration, monitoring of field performance, and associated validation activities will take place within the Navajo Nation, San Juan County, Utah.

  11. SMALL, GEOLOGICALLY COMPLEX RESERVOIRS CAN BENEFIT FROM RESERVOIR SIMULATION

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Richard E. Bennett

    2002-06-24

    The Cascade Sand zone of the Mission-Visco Lease in the Cascade Oil field of Los Angeles County, California, has been under water flood since 1970. Increasing water injection to increase oil production rates was being considered as an opportunity to improve oil recovery. However, a secondary gas cap had formed in the up-dip portion of the reservoir with very low gas cap pressures, creating concern that oil could be displaced into the gas cap resulting in the loss of recoverable oil. Therefore, injecting gas into the gas cap to keep the gas cap pressurized and restrict the influx of oil during water injection was also being considered. Further, it was recognized that the reservoir geology in the gas cap area is very complex with numerous folding and faulting and thus there are potential pressure barriers in several locations throughout the reservoir. With these conditions in mind, there were concerns regarding well to well continuity in the gas cap, which could interfere with the intended repressurization impact. Concerns about the pattern of gas flow from well to well, the possibilities of cycling gas without the desired increased pressure, and the possible loss of oil displaced into the gas cap resulted in the decision to conduct a gas tracer survey in an attempt to better define inter-well communication. Following the gas tracer survey, a reservoir model would be developed to integrate the findings of the gas tracer survey, known geologic and reservoir data, and historic production data. The reservoir model would be used to better define the reservoir characteristics and provide information that could help optimize the waterflood-gas injection project under consideration for efficient water and gas injection management to increase oil production. However, due to inadequate gas sampling procedures in the field and insufficiently developed laboratory analytical techniques, the laboratory was unable to detect the tracer in the gas samples taken. At that point, focus on, and an expansion of the scope of the reservoir simulation and modeling effort was initiated, using DOE's BOAST98 (a visual, dynamic, interactive update of BOAST3), 3D, black oil reservoir simulation package as the basis for developing the reservoir model. Reservoir characterization, modeling, and reservoir simulation resulted in a significant change in the depletion strategy. Information from the reservoir characterization and modeling effort indicate that in-fill drilling and relying on natural water influx from the aquifer could increase remaining reserves by 125,000 barrels of oil per well, and that up to 10 infill wells could be drilled in the field. Through this scenario, field production could be increased two to three times over the current 65 bopd. Based on the results of the study, permits have been applied for to drill a directional infill well to encounter the productive zone at a high angle in order to maximize the amount of pay and reservoirs encountered.

  12. Small arms mini-fire control system: fiber-optic barrel deflection sensor

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    (Conference) | SciTech Connect Conference: Small arms mini-fire control system: fiber-optic barrel deflection sensor Citation Details In-Document Search Title: Small arms mini-fire control system: fiber-optic barrel deflection sensor Traditionally the methods to increase firearms accuracy, particularly at distance, have concentrated on barrel isolation (free floating) and substantial barrel wall thickening to gain rigidity. This barrel stiffening technique did not completely eliminate barrel

  13. U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Revision Increases (Million

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Barrels) Increases (Million Barrels) U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Revision Increases (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 677 1980's 743 729 811 847 866 906 1,030 847 1,168 1,143 1990's 827 825 806 764 873 968 844 1,199 1,302 2,048 2000's 1,183 957 982 882 1,232 968 845 1,187 1,192 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

  14. Workbook Contents

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 9 Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs ...

  15. Workbook Contents

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 7B Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs ...

  16. Workbook Contents

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... 1","California (with State Offshore) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs ...

  17. Workbook Contents

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... 1","Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs ...

  18. Workbook Contents

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... ,"Data 1","Alaska (with Total Offshore) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs ...

  19. Workbook Contents

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... 1","Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs ...

  20. Workbook Contents

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 7C Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs ...

  1. Workbook Contents

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 6 Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs ...

  2. Workbook Contents

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... 1","Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs ...

  3. Workbook Contents

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... 1","Louisiana (with State Offshore) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs ...

  4. Workbook Contents

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... 1","Alabama (with State Offshore) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs ...

  5. Workbook Contents

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... ,"Data 1","Texas (with State Offshore) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs ...

  6. Workbook Contents

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 10 Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs ...

  7. Workbook Contents

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 5 Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs ...

  8. Workbook Contents

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... 1","Mississippi (with State Offshore) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs ...

  9. Workbook Contents

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 8 Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs ...

  10. Workbook Contents

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 1 Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs ...

  11. Workbook Contents

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana--North Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs ...

  12. Workbook Contents

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or ... for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 8A Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs ...

  13. Producing Light Oil from a Frozen Reservoir: Reservoir and Fluid Characterization of Umiat Field, National Petroleum Reserve, Alaska

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hanks, Catherine

    2012-12-31

    Umiat oil field is a light oil in a shallow, frozen reservoir in the Brooks Range foothills of northern Alaska with estimated oil-in-place of over 1 billion barrels. Umiat field was discovered in the 1940’s but was never considered viable because it is shallow, in the permafrost, and far from any transportation infrastructure. The advent of modern drilling and production techniques has made Umiat and similar fields in northern Alaska attractive exploration and production targets. Since 2008 UAF has been working with Renaissance Alaska Inc. and, more recently, Linc Energy, to develop a more robust reservoir model that can be combined with rock and fluid property data to simulate potential production techniques. This work will be used to by Linc Energy as they prepare to drill up to 5 horizontal wells during the 2012-2013 drilling season. This new work identified three potential reservoir horizons within the Cretaceous Nanushuk Formation: the Upper and Lower Grandstand sands, and the overlying Ninuluk sand, with the Lower Grandstand considered the primary target. Seals are provided by thick interlayered shales. Reserve estimates for the Lower Grandstand alone range from 739 million barrels to 2437 million barrels, with an average of 1527 million bbls. Reservoir simulations predict that cold gas injection from a wagon-wheel pattern of multilateral injectors and producers located on 5 drill sites on the crest of the structure will yield 12-15% recovery, with actual recovery depending upon the injection pressure used, the actual Kv/Kh encountered, and other geologic factors. Key to understanding the flow behavior of the Umiat reservoir is determining the permeability structure of the sands. Sandstones of the Cretaceous Nanushuk Formation consist of mixed shoreface and deltaic sandstones and mudstones. A core-based study of the sedimentary facies of these sands combined with outcrop observations identified six distinct facies associations with distinctive permeability trends. The Lower Grandstand sand consists of two coarsening-upward shoreface sands sequences while the Upper Grandstand consists of a single coarsening-upward shoreface sand. Each of the shoreface sands shows a distinctive permeability profile with high horizontal permeability at the top getting progressively poorer towards the base of the sand. In contrast, deltaic sandstones in the overlying Ninuluk are more permeable at the base of the sands, with decreasing permeability towards the sand top. These trends impart a strong permeability anisotropy to the reservoir and are being incorporated into the reservoir model. These observations also suggest that horizontal wells should target the upper part of the major sands. Natural fractures may superimpose another permeability pattern on the Umiat reservoir that need to be accounted for in both the simulation and in drilling. Examination of legacy core from Umiat field indicate that fractures are present in the subsurface, but don't provide information on their orientation and density. Nearby surface exposures of folds in similar stratigraphy indicate there are at least three possible fracture sets: an early, N/S striking set that may predate folding and two sets possibly related to folding: an EW striking set of extension fractures that are parallel to the fold axes and a set of conjugate shear fractures oriented NE and NW. Analysis of fracture spacing suggests that these natural fractures are fairly widely spaced (25-59 cm depending upon the fracture set), but could provide improved reservoir permeability in horizontal legs drilled perpendicular to the open fracture set. The phase behavior of the Umiat fluid needed to be well understood in order for the reservoir simulation to be accurate. However, only a small amount of Umiat oil was available; this oil was collected in the 1940’s and was severely weathered. The composition of this ‘dead’ Umiat fluid was characterized by gas chromatography. This analysis was then compared to theoretical Umiat composition derived using the Pedersen method with original Umiat fluid properties published in the original reports. This comparison allowed estimation of the ‘lost’ light hydrocarbon fractions. An Umiat 'dead' oil sample then could be physically created by adding the lost light ends to the weatherized Umiat dead oil sample. This recreated sample was recombined with solution gas to create a 'pseudo-live' Umiat oil sample which was then used for experimental PVT and phase behavior studies to determine fluid properties over the range of reservoir pressures and temperatures. The phase behavior of the ‘pseudo-live’ oil was also simulated using the Peng- Robinson equations of state (EOS). The EOS model was tuned with measured experimental data to accurately simulate the differential liberation tests in order to obtain the necessary data for reservoir simulation studies, including bubble point pressure and oil viscosity. The bubble point pressure of the reconstructed Umiat oil is 345 psi, suggesting that maintenance of reservoir pressures above that pressure will be important for the any proposed production technique. A major part of predicting how the Umiat reservoir will perform is determining the relative permeability of oil in the presence of ice. Early in the project, UAF work on samples of the Umiat reservoir indicated that there is a significant reduction in the relatively permeability of oil in the presence of ice. However, it was not clear as to why this reduction occurred or where the ice resided. To explore this further, additional experimental and theoretical work was conducted. Core flood experiments were performed on two clean Berea sandstone cores under permafrost conditions to determine the relative permeability to oil (kro) over a temperature range of 23ºC to - 10ºC and for a range of connate water salinities. Both cores showed maximum reduction in relative permeability to oil when saturated with deionized water and less reduction when saturated with saline water. This reduction in relative permeability can be explained by formation of ice crystals in the center of pores. Theoretically, the radius of ice formed in the center of the pore can be determined using the Kozeny–Carman Equation by assuming the pores and pore throats as a cube with ‘N’ identical parallel pipes embedded in it. Using the values of kro obtained from the experimental work as input to the Kozeny–Carman Equation at -10ºC, the radius of ice crystals dropped from 0.145 μm to 0.069 μm when flooding-water salinity is increased to 6467 ppm. This explains the reduction of relative permeability with decreasing salinity but does not take into consideration other effects such as variations in pore throat structure. In addition, fluids like deionized water, saline water, and antifreeze (a mixture of 60% ethylene or propylene glycol with 40% water) were tested to find the best flooding agent for frozen reservoirs. At 0ºC, 9% greater recovery was observed with antifreeze was used as a flooding agent as compared to using saline water. Antifreeze showed 48% recovery even at -10ºC, at which temperature the rest of the fluids failed to increase production. Preliminary evaluation of drilling fluids indicate that the brine-based muds caused significantly less swelling in the Umiat reservoir sands when compared to fresh-water based muds. However since freezing filtrate is another cause of formation damage, a simple water-based-mud may not a viable option. It is recommended that new fluids be tested, including different salts, brines, polymers and oil-based fluids. These fluids should be tested at low temperatures in order to determine the potential for formation damage, the fluid properties under these conditions and to ensure that the freezing point is below that of the reservoir. In order to reduce the surface footprint while accessing the maximum amount of the Lower Grandstand interval, simulations used development from 5 surface locations with a wagon-wheel pattern of multilateral injectors and producers. There is no active aquifer support due to small peizometric head in the area and no existing gas cap, so an alternative method of pressure support is needed. Cold gas injection was used in the simulations as it is considered the most viable means of providing pressure maintenance while maintaining wellbore stability and reducing impact on the permafrost. Saline water injection may be a viable alternative, though this may have a detrimental effect on permafrost. In the short term, the results of this work are being incorporated into Linc Energy’s drilling and development plan. This project has also provided valuable information on the rock and fluid properties of low temperature reservoirs as well as the efficacy of potential production techniques for Umiat or similar shallow frozen reservoirs in the circum-Arctic.

  14. Biomass 2011: Replace the Whole Barrel, Supply the Whole Market |

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

    Department of Energy 1: Replace the Whole Barrel, Supply the Whole Market Biomass 2011: Replace the Whole Barrel, Supply the Whole Market The New Horizons of Bioenergy Biomass 2011 July 26-27, 2011 Gaylord National Resort and Convention Center 201 Waterfront Street National Harbor, MD 20745 Thank you to everyone who attended and participated to help make Biomass 2011 a remarkable success. More than 600 speakers, moderators, sponsors, exhibitors, and attendees were able to listen to

  15. Increased oil production and reserves utilizing secondary/tertiary recovery techniques on small reservoirs in the Paradox basin, Utah. Final technical progress report, October 1--December 31, 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Allison, M.L.

    1996-01-15

    The primary objective of this project is to enhance domestic petroleum production by demonstration and technology transfer of an advanced oil recovery technology in the Paradox basin, southeastern Utah. If this project can demonstrate technical and economic feasibility, the technique can be applied to approximately 100 additional small fields in the Paradox basin alone, and result in increased recovery of 150 to 200 million barrels of oil. This project is designed to characterize five shallow-shelf carbonate reservoirs in the Pennsylvanian (Desmoinesian) Paradox Formation and choose the best candidate for a pilot demonstration project for either a waterflood or carbon dioxide-(CO{sub 2}) flood project. The field demonstration, monitoring of field performance, and associated validation activities will take place in the Paradox basin within the Navajo Nation. The results of this project will be transferred to industry and other researchers through a petroleum extension service, creation of digital databases for distribution, technical workshops and seminars, field trips, technical presentations at national and regional professional meeting, and publication in newsletters and various technical or trade journals. Five activities continued this quarter as part of the geological and reservoir characterization of carbonate mound buildups in the Paradox basin: (1) regional facies evaluation, (2) evaluation of outcrop analogues, (3) field-scale geologic analysis, (4) reservoir analysis, and (5) technology transfer.

  16. Increased oil production and reserves utilizing secondary/tertiary recovery techniques on small reservoirs in the Paradox basin, Utah. Technical progress report, July 1--September 30, 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Allison, M.L.

    1995-12-01

    The primary objective of this project is to enhance domestic petroleum production by demonstration and technology transfer of an advanced oil recovery technology in the Paradox basin, southeastern Utah. If this project can demonstrate technical and economic feasibility, the technique can be applied to approximately 100 additional small fields in the Paradox basin alone, and result in increased recovery of 150 to 200 million barrels of oil. This project is designed to characterize five shallow-shelf carbonate reservoirs in the Pennsylvanian (Desmoinesian) Paradox Formation and choose the best candidate for a pilot demonstration project for either a waterflood or carbon dioxide-(CO{sub 2}-) flood project. The field demonstration, monitoring of field performance, and associated validation activities will take place in the Paradox basin within the Navajo Nation. The results of this project will be transferred to industry and other researchers through a petroleum extension service, creation of digital databases for distribution, technical workshops and seminars, field trips, technical presentations at national and regional professional meetings, and publication in newsletters and various technical or trade journals. Four activities continued this quarter as part of the geological and reservoir characterization of carbonate mound buildups in the Paradox basin: (1) field studies, (2) development well completion operations, (3) reservoir analysis and modeling, and (4) technology transfer. This paper reviews the status.

  17. Increased oil production and reserves utilizing secondary/tertiary recovery techniques on small reservoirs in the Paradox basin, Utah. Quarterly report, October 1--December 31, 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Allison, M.L.

    1997-02-01

    The primary objective of this project is to enhance domestic petroleum production by demonstration and technology transfer of an advanced oil recovery technology in the Paradox basin, southeastern Utah. If this project can demonstrate technical and economic feasibility, the technique can be applied to approximately 100 additional small fields in the Paradox basin alone, and result in increased recovery of 150 to 200 million barrels of oil. This project is designed to characterize five shallow-shelf carbonate reservoirs in the Pennsylvanian (Desmoinesian) Paradox Formation and choose the best candidate for a pilot demonstration project for either a waterflood or carbon dioxide-(CO{sub 2}) flood project. The field demonstration, monitoring of field performance, and associated validation activities will take place in the Paradox basin within the Navajo Nation. The results of this project will be transferred to industry and other researchers through a petroleum extension service, creation of digital databases for distribution, technical workshops and seminars, field trips, technical presentations at national and regional professional meetings, and publication in newsletters and various technical or trade journals. Three activities continued this quarter as part of the geological and reservoir characterization of productive carbonate buidups in the Paradox basin: (1) interpretation of new seismic data in the Mule field area, (2) reservoir engineering analysis of the Anasazi field, and (3) technology transfer.

  18. Reservoir Characterization of Bridgeport and Cypress Sandstones in Lawrence Field Illinois to Improve Petroleum Recovery by Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer Flood

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Seyler, Beverly; Grube, John; Huff, Bryan; Webb, Nathan; Damico, James; Blakley, Curt; Madhavan, Vineeth; Johanek, Philip; Frailey, Scott

    2012-12-21

    Within the Illinois Basin, most of the oilfields are mature and have been extensively waterflooded with water cuts that range up to 99% in many of the larger fields. In order to maximize production of significant remaining mobile oil from these fields, new recovery techniques need to be researched and applied. The purpose of this project was to conduct reservoir characterization studies supporting Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer Floods in two distinct sandstone reservoirs in Lawrence Field, Lawrence County, Illinois. A project using alkaline-surfactantpolymer (ASP) has been established in the century old Lawrence Field in southeastern Illinois where original oil in place (OOIP) is estimated at over a billion barrels and 400 million barrels have been recovered leaving more than 600 million barrels as an EOR target. Radial core flood analysis using core from the field demonstrated recoveries greater than 20% of OOIP. While the lab results are likely optimistic to actual field performance, the ASP tests indicate that substantial reserves could be recovered even if the field results are 5 to 10% of OOIP. Reservoir characterization is a key factor in the success of any EOR application. Reservoirs within the Illinois Basin are frequently characterized as being highly compartmentalized resulting in multiple flow unit configurations. The research conducted on Lawrence Field focused on characteristics that define reservoir compartmentalization in order to delineate preferred target areas so that the chemical flood can be designed and implemented for the greatest recovery potential. Along with traditional facies mapping, core analyses and petrographic analyses, conceptual geological models were constructed and used to develop 3D geocellular models, a valuable tool for visualizing reservoir architecture and also a prerequisite for reservoir simulation modeling. Cores were described and potential permeability barriers were correlated using geophysical logs. Petrographic analyses were used to better understand porosity and permeability trends in the region and to characterize barriers and define flow units. Diagenetic alterations that impact porosity and permeability include development of quartz overgrowths, sutured quartz grains, dissolution of feldspar grains, formation of clay mineral coatings on grains, and calcite cementation. Many of these alterations are controlled by facies. Mapping efforts identified distinct flow units in the northern part of the field showing that the Pennsylvanian Bridgeport consists of a series of thick incised channel fill sequences. The sandstones are about 75-150 feet thick and typically consist of medium grained and poorly sorted fluvial to distributary channel fill deposits at the base. The sandstones become indistinctly bedded distributary channel deposits in the main part of the reservoir before fining upwards and becoming more tidally influenced near their top. These channel deposits have core permeabilities ranging from 20 md to well over 1000 md. The tidally influenced deposits are more compartmentalized compared to the thicker and more continuous basal fluvial deposits. Fine grained sandstones that are laterally equivalent to the thicker channel type deposits have permeabilities rarely reaching above 250 md. Most of the unrecovered oil in Lawrence Field is contained in Pennsylvanian Age Bridgeport sandstones and Mississippian Age Cypress sandstones. These reservoirs are highly complex and compartmentalized. Detailed reservoir characterization including the development of 3-D geologic and geocellular models of target areas in the field were completed to identify areas with the best potential to recover remaining reserves including unswept and by-passed oil. This project consisted of tasks designed to compile, interpret, and analyze the data required to conduct reservoir characterization for the Bridgeport and Cypress sandstones in pilot areas in anticipation of expanded implementation of ASP flooding in Lawrence Field. Geologic and geocellular modeling needed for reservoir characterization and reservoir simulation were completed as prerequisites for design of efficient ASP flood patterns. Characterizing the complex reservoir geology that identifies the geologic conditions that will optimize oil recoveries for expansion of the ASP pilots in the Bridgeport and Cypress sandstones to other areas of Lawrence Field is the primary objective of this project. It will permit evaluation of efficiency of oil recovery from Bridgeport and Cypress sandstone reservoirs using ASP technology. Additionally evaluation of similar Pennsylvanian and Chesterian reservoirs shows that it is likely that ASP flood technology can be successfully applied to similar reservoirs in the Illinois Basin as well as to other U.S. reservoirs. Chemical flooding was introduced in stages with the first flood initiated in 2010 and a second offset pilot project initiated during 2011. Rex Energy Corporation is reporting a positive response on its ASP Middagh pilot project in the Pennsylvanian Bridgeport B reservoir, Lawrence Field. Oil response in the 15 acre flood has continued to show an increase in oil cut from 1% to 12%. Total pattern production increased from 16 BOPD and stabilized at a range of 65-75 BOPD in the last three months of 2011. Peak production rose to 100 + BOPD. Oil cut in the pilot increased for 1.0% to ~ 12.0% with an individual well showing oil cuts greater than 20%. A second, 58 acre pilot (Perkins-Smith) adjacent to and likely in communication with the Middagh pilot has been initiated. Preliminary brine injection has been implemented and ASP injection was initiated in mid-2012. Response is expected by mid-2013 with peak recovery expected by late 2013. Rex Energy is projecting full scale expansion with the next step of development being a 351 acre project scheduled to begin in mid-2013. Preliminary development has been initiated in this Delta Unit area located in the south half of section 32, T4N, R12W.

  19. Virginia Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million...

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

    of individual company data. Release Date: 11192015 Next Release Date: 12312016 Referring Pages: Proved Nonproducing Reserves of Crude Oil Virginia Proved Nonproducing Reserves...

  20. Light yield of Kuraray SCSF-78MJ scintillating fibers for the Gluex barrel calorimeter

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Beattie, T.D.; Fischer, A.P.; Krueger, S.T.; Lolos, G.J.; Papandreou, Z.; Plummer, E.L.; Semenov, A.Yu.; Semenova, I.A.; Sichello, L.M.; Teigro, L.A.; Smith, E S

    2014-09-01

    Over three quarters of a million 1-mm-diameter 4-m-long Kuraray double-clad SCSF-78MJ (blue-green) scintillating fibers have been used in the construction of the GlueX electromagnetic barrel calorimeter for the Hall D experimental program at Jefferson Lab. The quality of a random sample of 4,750 of these fibers was evaluated by exciting the fibers at their mid point using a 90Sr source in order to determine the light yield using a calibrated vacuum photomultiplier as the photosensor. A novel methodology was developed to extract the number of photoelectrons detected for measurements where individual photoelectron peaks are not discernible. The average number of photoelectrons from this sample of fibers was 9.17±0.6 at a source distance of 200 cm from the PMT.

  1. Research needs for strandplain/barrier island reservoirs in the United States

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cole, E.L.; Fowler, M.L.; Salamy, S.P.; Sarathi, P.S.; Young, M.A.

    1994-12-01

    This report identifies reservoir characterization and reservoir management research needs and IOR process and related research needs for the fourth geologic class, strandplain/barrier island reservoirs. The 330 Class 4 reservoirs in the DOE Tertiary OH Recovery Information System (TORIS) database contain about 30.8 billion barrels of oil or about 9% of the total original oil-in-place (OOIP) in all United States reservoirs. The current projection of Class 4 ultimate recovery with current operations is only 38% of the OOIP, leaving 19 billion barrels as the target for future IOR projects. Using the TORIS database and its predictive and economic models, the recovery potential which could result from future application of IOR technologies to Class 4 reservoirs was estimated to be between 1.0 and 4.3 billion barrels, depending on oil price and the level of technology advancement. The analysis indicated that this potential could be realized through (1) infill drilling alone and in combination with polymer flooding and profile modification, (2) chemical flooding (surfactant), and (3) thermal processes. Most of this future potential is in Texas, Oklahoma, California, and the Rocky Mountain region. Approximately two-thirds of the potentially recoverable resource is at risk of abandonment by the year 2000, which emphasizes the urgent need for the development and demonstration of cost-effective recovery technologies.

  2. U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Barrels) Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) U.S. Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 5,204 1980's 5,198 5,488 5,620 6,288 6,121 6,491 6,729 6,745 6,849 6,380 1990's 6,284 6,220 6,225 6,030 6,023 6,202 6,516 6,632 6,188 6,503 2000's 6,873 6,595 6,648 6,244 6,707 6,903 7,133 7,648 7,842 8,557 2010's 9,809 10,825 10,777 11,943 15,029 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  3. U.S. Natural Gas Total Liquids Extracted (Thousand Barrels)

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

    Total Liquids Extracted (Thousand Barrels) U.S. Natural Gas Total Liquids Extracted (Thousand Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 569,968 599,518 584,160 571,256 587,502 594,306 569,913 1990's 573,054 602,734 626,320 634,481 635,983 649,149 689,314 690,999 668,011 686,862 2000's 721,895 682,873 681,646 622,291 657,032 619,884 637,635 658,291 673,677 720,612 2010's 749,095 792,481 873,563 937,591 1,124,416 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  4. Status of Norris Reservoir

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-09-01

    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.

  5. Increased Oil Production and Reserves Utilizing Secondary/Tertiary Recovery Techniques on Small Reservoirs in the Paradox Basin, Utah.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chidsey, T.C. Jr.; Lorenz, D.M.; Culham, W.E.

    1997-10-15

    The primary objective of this project is to enhance domestic petroleum production by demonstration and technology transfer of an advanced oil recovery technology in the Paradox basin, southeastern Utah. If this project can demonstrate technical and economic feasibility, the technique can be applied to approximately 100 additional small fields in the Paradox basin alone, and result in increased recovery of 150 to 200 million barrels of oil. This project is designed to characterize five shallow-shelf carbonate reservoirs in the Pennsylvanian (Desmoinesian) Paradox Formation and choose the best candidate for a pilot demonstration project for either a waterflood or carbon dioxide- (CO{sub 2}-) flood project. The field demonstration, monitoring of field performance, and associated validation activities will take place in the Paradox basin within the Navajo Nation. The results of this project will be transferred to industry and other researchers through a petroleum extension service, creation of digital databases for distribution, technical workshops and seminars, field trips, technical presentations at national and regional professional meetings, and publication in newsletters and various technical or trade journals.

  6. Status of Cherokee Reservoir

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-08-01

    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.

  7. Status of Wheeler Reservoir

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-09-01

    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.

  8. Master plate production for the tile calorimeter extended barrel modules.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Guarino, V.J.; Hill, N.; Petereit, E.; Price, L.E.; Proudfoot, J.; Wood, K.

    1999-03-10

    Approximately 41,000 master plates (Fig. 1) are required for the Extended Barrel Hadronic Calorimeter for the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. Early in the R&D program associated with the detector, it was recognized that the fabrication of these steel laminations was a significant issue, both in terms of the cost to produce these high precision formed plates, as well as the length of time required to produce all plates for the calorimeter. Two approaches were given serious consideration: laser cutting and die stamping. The Argonne group was a strong supporter of the latter approach and in late 1995 initiated an R&D program to demonstrate the feasibility and cost effectiveness of die stamping these plates by constructing a die and stamping approximately 2000 plates for use in construction of three full size prototype modules. This was extremely successful and die stamping was selected by the group for production of these plates. When the prototype die was constructed it was matched to the calorimeter envelope at that time. This subsequently changed. However with some minor adjustments in the design envelope and a small compromise in terms of instrumented volume, it became possible to use this same die for the production of all master plates for the Tile Calorimeter. Following an extensive series of discussions and an evaluation of the performance of the stamping presses available to our collaborators in Europe, it was decided to ship the US die to CERN for use in stamping master plates for the barrel section of the calorimeter. This was done under the supervision of CERN and JINR, Dubna, and carried out at the TATRA truck plant at Koprivinice, Czech Republic. It was a great success. Approximately 41,000 plates were stamped and fully met specification. Moreover, the production time was significantly reduced by avoiding the need of constructing and then qualifying a second die for use in Europe. This also precluded small geometrical differences between the barrel and extended barrel plates (and therefore submodules) being an issue, with the result that standard submodules are fully exchangeable between the two types of module.

  9. Texas (with State Offshore) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing...

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Texas (with State ... Referring Pages: Proved Nonproducing Reserves of Crude Oil Texas Proved Nonproducing ...

  10. Workbook Contents

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kansas Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014...

  11. Application of Cutting-Edge 3D Seismic Attribute Technology to the Assessment of Geological Reservoirs for CO2 Sequestration

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Christopher Liner; Jianjun Zeng; Po Geng Heather King Jintan Li; Jennifer Califf; John Seales

    2010-03-31

    The goals of this project were to develop innovative 3D seismic attribute technologies and workflows to assess the structural integrity and heterogeneity of subsurface reservoirs with potential for CO{sub 2} sequestration. Our specific objectives were to apply advanced seismic attributes to aide in quantifying reservoir properies and lateral continuity of CO{sub 2} sequestration targets. Our study area is the Dickman field in Ness County, Kansas, a type locality for the geology that will be encountered for CO{sub 2} sequestration projects from northern Oklahoma across the U.S. midcontent to Indiana and beyond. Since its discovery in 1962, the Dickman Field has produced about 1.7 million barrels of oil from porous Mississippian carbonates with a small structural closure at about 4400 ft drilling depth. Project data includes 3.3 square miles of 3D seismic data, 142 wells, with log, some core, and oil/water production data available. Only two wells penetrate the deep saline aquifer. Geological and seismic data were integrated to create a geological property model and a flow simulation grid. We systematically tested over a dozen seismic attributes, finding that curvature, SPICE, and ANT were particularly useful for mapping discontinuities in the data that likely indicated fracture trends. Our simulation results in the deep saline aquifer indicate two effective ways of reducing free CO{sub 2}: (a) injecting CO{sub 2} with brine water, and (b) horizontal well injection. A tuned combination of these methods can reduce the amount of free CO{sub 2} in the aquifer from over 50% to less than 10%.

  12. MillionSolarStrong_signs-SunShot

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

    MILLION S LAR STRONG #SunShot #SunShot #MILLION S LAR STRONG I AM #MILLION S LAR STRONG MY HOUSE IS #SunShot #SunShot I #MILLION S LAR STRONG I'M ARE YOU? #SunShot #MILLION S LAR STRONG #SELFIE #SunShot #MILLION S LAR STRONG #MILLION S LAR STRONG WE ARE #SunShot

  13. Replacing the Whole BarrelTo Reduce U.S. Dependence on Oil | Department of

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

    Energy Replacing the Whole BarrelTo Reduce U.S. Dependence on Oil Replacing the Whole BarrelTo Reduce U.S. Dependence on Oil Converting domestic biomass into affordable fuels, products, and power supports our national strategy to diversify energy resources and reduce dependence on imported oil. PDF icon replacing_barrel_overview.pdf More Documents & Publications Thermochemical Conversion: Using Heat and Catalysis to Make Biofuels and Bioproducts Bioenergy Technologies Office Conversion

  14. US production of natural gas from tight reservoirs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-10-18

    For the purposes of this report, tight gas reservoirs are defined as those that meet the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission`s (FERC) definition of tight. They are generally characterized by an average reservoir rock permeability to gas of 0.1 millidarcy or less and, absent artificial stimulation of production, by production rates that do not exceed 5 barrels of oil per day and certain specified daily volumes of gas which increase with the depth of the reservoir. All of the statistics presented in this report pertain to wells that have been classified, from 1978 through 1991, as tight according to the FERC; i.e., they are ``legally tight`` reservoirs. Additional production from ``geologically tight`` reservoirs that have not been classified tight according to the FERC rules has been excluded. This category includes all producing wells drilled into legally designated tight gas reservoirs prior to 1978 and all producing wells drilled into physically tight gas reservoirs that have not been designated legally tight. Therefore, all gas production referenced herein is eligible for the Section 29 tax credit. Although the qualification period for the credit expired at the end of 1992, wells that were spudded (began to be drilled) between 1978 and May 1988, and from November 5, 1990, through year end 1992, are eligible for the tax credit for a subsequent period of 10 years. This report updates the EIA`s tight gas production information through 1991 and considers further the history and effect on tight gas production of the Federal Government`s regulatory and tax policy actions. It also provides some high points of the geologic background needed to understand the nature and location of low-permeability reservoirs.

  15. The How's and Why's of Replacing the Whole Barrel | Department of Energy

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

    The How's and Why's of Replacing the Whole Barrel The How's and Why's of Replacing the Whole Barrel October 19, 2011 - 4:09pm Addthis A 42-U.S. gallon barrel of crude oil yields about 45 gallons of petroleum products. Source: Energy Information Administration, “Oil: Crude Oil and Petroleum Products Explained” and Annual Energy Outlook 2009 (Updated February 2010). A 42-U.S. gallon barrel of crude oil yields about 45 gallons of petroleum products. Source: Energy Information

  16. Energy Department Announces Up to $31 Million for Initial Phases...

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

    ... such as reservoir characterization, reservoir creation, and reservoir sustainability. ... development, demonstration, and analysis projects funded by the Department, and ...

  17. Modeling of gun barrel surface erosion: Historic perspective

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Buckingham, A.C.

    1996-08-01

    Results and interpretations of numerical simulations of some dominant processes influencing gun barrel propellant combustion and flow-induced erosion are presented. Results include modeled influences of erosion reduction techniques such as solid additives, vapor phase chemical modifications, and alteration of surface solid composition through use of thin coatings. Precedents and historical perspective are provided with predictions from traditional interior ballistics compared to computer simulations. Accelerating reactive combustion flow, multiphase and multicomponent transport, flow-to-surface thermal/momentum/phase change/gas-surface chemical exchanges, surface and micro-depth subsurface heating/stress/composition evolution and their roles in inducing surface cracking, spall, ablation, melting, and vaporization are considered. Recognition is given to cyclic effects of previous firing history on material preconditioning. Current perspective and outlook for future are based on results of a US Army-LLNL erosion research program covering 7 y in late 1970s. This is supplemented by more recent research on hypervelocity electromagnetic projectile launchers.

  18. Blackfoot Reservoir Geothermal Area | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Resource Estimate Mean Reservoir Temp: Estimated Reservoir Volume: Mean Capacity: USGS Mean Reservoir Temp: USGS Estimated Reservoir Volume: USGS Mean Capacity: Click "Edit With...

  19. Blackfoot Reservoir Geothermal Area | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    GEA Development Phase: Resource Estimate Mean Reservoir Temp: Estimated Reservoir Volume: Mean Capacity: USGS Mean Reservoir Temp: USGS Estimated Reservoir Volume: USGS Mean...

  20. Tapered laser rods as a means of minimizing the path length of trapped barrel mode rays

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Beach, Raymond J.; Honea, Eric C.; Payne, Stephen A.; Mercer, Ian; Perry, Michael D.

    2005-08-30

    By tapering the diameter of a flanged barrel laser rod over its length, the maximum trapped path length of a barrel mode can be dramatically reduced, thereby reducing the ability of the trapped spontaneous emission to negatively impact laser performance through amplified spontaneous emission (ASE). Laser rods with polished barrels and flanged end caps have found increasing application in diode array end-pumped laser systems. The polished barrel of the rod serves to confine diode array pump light within the rod. In systems utilizing an end-pumping geometry and such polished barrel laser rods, the pump light that is introduced into one or both ends of the laser rod, is ducted down the length of the rod via the total internal reflections (TIRs) that occur when the light strikes the rod's barrel. A disadvantage of using polished barrel laser rods is that such rods are very susceptible to barrel mode paths that can trap spontaneous emission over long path lengths. This trapped spontaneous emission can then be amplified through stimulated emission resulting in a situation where the stored energy available to the desired lasing mode is effectively depleted, which then negatively impacts the laser's performance, a result that is effectively reduced by introducing a taper onto the laser rod.

  1. Depositional and diagenetic controls on porosity permeability and oil production in McFarland/Magutex (Queen) reservoirs, Andrews County, west Texas

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Holtz, M.H. )

    1991-03-01

    The McFarland/Magutex Queen reservoir complex lies along the northeastern edge of the Central basin platform in the west Texas Permian basin and produces oil from the Permian Queen Formation. Current production from this complex totals 42 million stock-tank barrels (MMSTB) of an estimated 219 MMSTB of original oil in place, with an estimated 90 MMSTB of remaining mobile oil (RMO). The gross pay interval contains two parasequences consisting of progradational, 30-ft-thick, upward-shoaling facies packages. Facies include shoreface, mixed tidal channel and intertidal flat, and supratidal. Elongate shoreface facies are characterized by poorly consolidated, massive to thinly laminated sandstones. The supratidal facies, which act as permeability barriers, are characterized by algal-laminated dolostone and nodular, laminated, and massive anhydrite containing halite and gypsum pseudomorphs. Highest production and the largest amount of the 90 MMSTB of RMO is associated with the shoreface and tidal-channel facies. Bulk pore volume storage capacity and permeability are also highest within these two facies. Sandstones are arkosic, containing anhydrite and dolomite cements. Accessory minerals are clays, authigenic feldspar, and dolomite. Three main pore types are recognized: interparticle, moldic and intraconstituent, and micropores. Moldic and intraconstituent porosity is associated with leached feldspars and anhydrite cement dissolution. Microporosity is associated with syndepositional, grain-coating corrensite, dissolution-enhanced feldspar cleavage planes, and authigenic multifaceted dolomite. Microporosity derived from clays and dolomite is formed preferentially in tidal-channel and intertidal flat facies.

  2. Increased oil production and reserves utilizing secondary/tertiary recovery techniques on small reservoirs in the Paradox basin, Utah. Technical progress report, April 1, 1995--June 30, 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Allison, M.L.

    1995-07-14

    The primary objective of this project is to enhance domestic petroleum production by demonstration and technology transfer of an advanced oil recovery technology in the Paradox basin, southeastern Utah. If this project can demonstrate technical and economic feasibility, the technique can be applied to approximately 100 additional small fields in the Paradox basin alone, and result in increased recovery of 150 to 200 million barrels of oil. This project is designed to characterize five shallow-shelf carbonate reservoirs in the Pennsylvanian (Desmoinesian) Paradox Formation and choose the best candidate for a pilot demonstration project for either a waterflood or carbon dioxide-flood project. The field demonstration, monitoring of field performance, and associated validation activities will take place in the Paradox basin within the Navajo Nation. The results of this project will be transferred to industry and other researchers through a petroleum extension service, creation of digital databases for distribution, technical workshops and seminars, field trips, technical presentations at national and regional professional meetings, and publication in newsletters and various technical or trade journals.

  3. Increased oil production and reserves utilizing secondary/tertiary recovery techniques on small reservoirs in the Paradox Basin, Utah. Technical progress report, January 1--March 31, 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Allison, M.L.

    1996-04-30

    The primary objective of this project is to enhance domestic petroleum production by demonstration and technology transfer of an advanced oil recovery technology in the Paradox basin, southeastern Utah. If this project can demonstrate technical and economic feasibility, the technique can be applied to approximately 100 additional small fields in the Paradox basin alone, and result in increased recovery of 150 to 200 million barrels of oil. This project is designed to characterize five shallow-shelf carbonate reservoirs in the Pennsylvanian (Desmoinesian) Paradox Formation and choose the best candidate for a pilot demonstration project for either a waterflood or carbon dioxide-(CO{sub 2}-)flood project. The field demonstration, monitoring of field performance, and associated validation activities will take place in the Paradox basin within the Navajo Nation. The results of this project will be transferred to industry and other researchers through a petroleum extension service, creation of digital databases for distribution, technical workshops and seminars, field trips, technical presentations at national and regional professional meetings, and publication in newsletters and various technical or trade journals.

  4. Increased oil production and reserves utilizing secondary/tertiary recovery techniques on small reservoirs in the Paradox basin, Utah. Technical progress report, January 1, 1995--March 31, 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Allison, M.L.

    1995-05-30

    The primary objective of this project is to enhance domestic petroleum production by demonstration and technology transfer of an advanced oil recovery technology in the Paradox basin, southeastern Utah. If this project can demonstrate technical and economic feasibility, the technique can be applied to approximately 100 additional small fields in the Paradox basin alone, and result in increased recovery of 150 to 200 million barrels of oil. This project is designed to characterize five shallow-shelf carbonate reservoirs in the Pennsylvanian Paradox Formation and choose the best candidate for a pilot demonstration project for either a waterflood or carbon dioxide-flood project. The field demonstration, monitoring of field performance, and associated validation activities will take place in the Paradox basin within the Navajo Nation. The results of this project will be transferred to industry and other researchers through a petroleum extension service, creation of digital databases for distribution, technical workshops and seminars, field trips, technical presentations at national and regional professional meetings, and publication in newsletters and various technical or trade journals.

  5. Reservoir Temperature Estimator

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2014-12-08

    The Reservoir Temperature Estimator (RTEst) is a program that can be used to estimate deep geothermal reservoir temperature and chemical parameters such as CO2 fugacity based on the water chemistry of shallower, cooler reservoir fluids. This code uses the plugin features provided in The Geochemist’s Workbench (Bethke and Yeakel, 2011) and interfaces with the model-independent parameter estimation code Pest (Doherty, 2005) to provide for optimization of the estimated parameters based on the minimization of themore » weighted sum of squares of a set of saturation indexes from a user-provided mineral assemblage.« less

  6. Simulation and testing of pyramid and barrel vault skylights

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McGowan, A.G.; Desjarlais, A.O.; Wright, J.L.

    1998-10-01

    The thermal performance of fenestration in commercial buildings can have a significant effect on building loads--yet there is little information on the performance of these products. With this in mind, ASHRAE TC 4.5, Fenestration, commissioned a research project involving test and simulation of commercial fenestration systems. The objectives of ASHRAE Research Project 877 were: to evaluate the thermal performance (U-factors) of commonly used commercial glazed roof and wall assemblies; to obtain a better fundamental understanding of the heat transfer processes that occur in these specialty fenestration products; to develop correlations for natural-convection heat transfer in complex glazing cavities; to develop a methodology for evaluating complex fenestration products, suitable for inclusion in ASHRAE Standard 142P (ASHRAE 1996); and to generate U-factors for common commercial fenestration products, suitable for inclusion in the ASHRAE Handbook--Fundamentals. This paper describes testing and simulation of pyramid and barrel vault skylight specimens and provides guidelines for modeling these systems based on the validated results.

  7. DOE to Sell 35,000 Barrels of Oil from the Northeast Home Heating Oil

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

    Reserve | Department of Energy Sell 35,000 Barrels of Oil from the Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve DOE to Sell 35,000 Barrels of Oil from the Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve May 24, 2007 - 4:16pm Addthis WASHINGTON, DC - The U.S. Department of Energy announced today that it will sell approximately 35,000 barrels of home heating oil from the Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve (NEHHOR). The Reserve's current 5-year storage contracts expire on September 30, 2007 and market conditions have

  8. Geological and production characteristics of strandplain/barrier island reservoirs in the United States

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cole, E.L.; Fowler, M.; Jackson, S.; Madden, M.P.; Reeves, T.K.; Salamy, S.P.; Young, M.A.

    1994-12-01

    The Department of Energy`s (DOE`s) primary mission in the oil research program is to maximize the economically and environmentally sound recovery of oil from domestic reservoirs and to preserve access to this resource. The Oil Recovery Field Demonstration Program supports DOE`s mission through cost-shared demonstrations of improved Oil Recovery (IOR) processes and reservoir characterization methods. In the past 3 years, the DOE has issued Program Opportunity Notices (PONs) seeking cost-shared proposals for the three highest priority, geologically defined reservoir classes. The classes have been prioritized based on resource size and risk of abandonment. This document defines the geologic, reservoir, and production characteristics of the fourth reservoir class, strandplain/barrier islands. Knowledge of the geological factors and processes that control formation and preservation of reservoir deposits, external and internal reservoir heterogeneities, reservoir characterization methodology, and IOR process application can be used to increase production of the remaining oil-in-place (IOR) in Class 4 reservoirs. Knowledge of heterogeneities that inhibit or block fluid flow is particularly critical. Using the TORIS database of 330 of the largest strandplain/barrier island reservoirs and its predictive and economic models, the recovery potential which could result from future application of IOR technologies to Class 4 reservoirs was estimated to be between 1.0 and 4.3 billion barrels, depending on oil price and the level of technology advancement. The analysis indicated that this potential could be realized through (1) infill drilling alone and in combination with polymer flooding and profile modification, (2) chemical flooding (sufactant), and (3) thermal processes. Most of this future potential is in Texas, Oklahoma, and the Rocky Mountain region. Approximately two-thirds of the potentially recoverable resource is at risk of abandonment by the year 2000.

  9. Seismicity and Reservoir Fracture Characterization

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Below are the project presentations and respective peer review results for Seismicity and Reservoir Fracture Characterization.

  10. Reservoir Modeling Working Group Meeting

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Reservoir Modeling working group meeting presentation on May 10, 2012 at the 2012 Peer Review Meeting.

  11. Energy Department Announces $10 Million to Speed Enhanced Geothermal Systems into the Market

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    In support President Obama’s all-of-the-above energy strategy, the Energy Department today announced $10 million to improve subsurface characterization for enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) by developing state-of-the-art methods that quantify critical underground reservoir properties as they change over time.

  12. ,"Virginia Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Virginia Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic ... 2:51:54 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Virginia Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic ...

  13. President Obama Announces $400 Million Conditional Commitment...

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

    400 Million Conditional Commitment Offer to Support Solar Panel Manufacturing President Obama Announces 400 Million Conditional Commitment Offer to Support Solar Panel ...

  14. Replacing the Whole BarrelTo Reduce U.S. Dependence on Oil

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

    Replacing the Whole Barrel To Reduce U.S. Dependence on Oil July 2013 Biofuels are ... We've got to develop every source of American energy-not just oil and gas, but wind power ...

  15. Small arms mini-fire control system: fiber-optic barrel deflection...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Conference: Small arms mini-fire control system: fiber-optic barrel deflection sensor Citation Details In-Document Search Title: Small arms mini-fire control system: fiber-optic ...

  16. Reinjection into geothermal reservoirs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bodvarsson, G.S.; Stefansson, V.

    1987-08-01

    Reinjection of geothermal wastewater is practiced as a means of disposal and for reservoir pressure support. Various aspects of reinjection are discussed, both in terms of theoretical studies as well as specific field examples. The discussion focuses on the major effects of reinjection, including pressure maintenance and chemical and thermal effects. (ACR)

  17. Increased oil production and reserves utilizing secondary/tertiary recovery techniques on small reservoirs in the Paradox basin, Utah. Quarterly technical progress report, April 1, 1996--June 30, 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Allison, M.L.

    1996-08-01

    The primary objective of this project is to enhance domestic petroleum production by demonstration and technology transfer of an advanced oil recovery technology in the Paradox basin, southeastern Utah. If this project can demonstrate technical and economic feasibility, the technique can be applied to approximately 100 additional small fields in the Paradox basin alone, and result in increased recovery of 150 to 200 million barrels of oil. This project is designed to characterize five shallow-shelf carbonate reservoirs in the Pennsylvanian (Desmoinesian) Paradox Formation and choose the best candidate for a pilot demonstration project for either a waterflood or carbon dioxide (CO{sub 2}-)flood project. The field demonstration, monitoring of field performance, and associated validation activities will take place in the Paradox basin within the Navajo Nation. The results of this project will be transferred to industry and other researchers through a petroleum extension service, creation of digital databases for distribution, technical workshops and seminars, field trips, technical presentations at national and regional professional meetings, and publication in newsletters and various technical or trade journals.

  18. Silurian "Clinton" Sandstone Reservoir Characterization for Evaluation of CO2-EOR Potential in the East Canton Oil Field, Ohio

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ronald Riley; John Wicks; Christopher Perry

    2009-12-30

    The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of using CO2-enhanced oil recovery (EOR) in the East Canton oil field (ECOF). Discovered in 1947, the ECOF in northeastern Ohio has produced approximately 95 million barrels (MMbbl) of oil from the Silurian 'Clinton' sandstone. The original oil-in-place (OOIP) for this field was approximately 1.5 billion bbl and this study estimates by modeling known reservoir parameters, that between 76 and 279 MMbbl of additional oil could be produced through secondary recovery in this field, depending on the fluid and formation response to CO2 injection. A CO2 cyclic test ('Huff-n-Puff') was conducted on a well in Stark County to test the injectivity in a 'Clinton'-producing oil well in the ECOF and estimate the dispersion or potential breakthrough of the CO2 to surrounding wells. Eighty-one tons of CO2 (1.39 MMCF) were injected over a 20-hour period, after which the well was shut in for a 32-day 'soak' period before production was resumed. Results demonstrated injection rates of 1.67 MMCF of gas per day, which was much higher than anticipated and no CO2 was detected in gas samples taken from eight immediately offsetting observation wells. All data collected during this test was analyzed, interpreted, and incorporated into the reservoir characterization study and used to develop the geologic model. The geologic model was used as input into a reservoir simulation performed by Fekete Associates, Inc., to estimate the behavior of reservoir fluids when large quantities of CO2 are injected into the 'Clinton' sandstone. Results strongly suggest that the majority of the injected CO2 entered the matrix porosity of the reservoir pay zones, where it diffused into the oil. Evidence includes: (A) the volume of injected CO2 greatly exceeded the estimated capacity of the hydraulic fracture and natural fractures; (B) there was a gradual injection and pressure rate build-up during the test; (C) there was a subsequent, gradual flashout of the CO2 within the reservoir during the ensuing monitored production period; and (D) a large amount of CO2 continually off-gassed from wellhead oil samples collected as late as 3 1/2 months after injection. After the test well was returned to production, it produced 174 bbl of oil during a 60-day period (September 22 to November 21, 2008), which represents an estimated 58 percent increase in incremental oil production over preinjection estimates of production under normal, conditions. The geologic model was used in a reservoir simulation model for a 700-acre model area and to design a pilot to test the model. The model was designed to achieve a 1-year response time and a five-year simulation period. The reservoir simulation modeling indicated that the injection wells could enhance oil production and lead to an additional 20 percent recovery in the pilot area over a five-year period. The base case estimated that by injecting 500 MCF per day of CO2 into each of the four corner wells, 26,000 STBO would be produced by the central producer over the five-year period. This would compare to 3,000 STBO if a new well were drilled without the benefit of CO2 injection. This study has added significant knowledge to the reservoir characterization of the 'Clinton' in the ECOF and succeeded in identifying a range on CO2-EOR potential. However, additional data on fluid properties (PVT and swelling test), fractures (oriented core and microseis), and reservoir characteristics (relative permeability, capillary pressure, and wet ability) are needed to further narrow the uncertainties and refine the reservoir model and simulation. After collection of this data and refinement of the model and simulation, it is recommended that a larger scale cyclic-CO2 injection test be conducted to better determine the efficacy of CO2-EOR in the 'Clinton' reservoir in the ECOF.

  19. Silurian "Clinton" Sandstone Reservoir Characterization for Evaluation of CO2-EOR Potential in the East Canton Oil Field, Ohio

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Riley, Ronald; Wicks, John; Perry, Christopher

    2009-12-30

    The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of using CO2-enhanced oil recovery (EOR) in the East Canton oil field (ECOF). Discovered in 1947, the ECOF in northeastern Ohio has produced approximately 95 million barrels (MMbbl) of oil from the Silurian Clinton sandstone. The original oil-in-place (OOIP) for this field was approximately 1.5 billion bbl and this study estimates by modeling known reservoir parameters, that between 76 and 279 MMbbl of additional oil could be produced through secondary recovery in this field, depending on the fluid and formation response to CO2 injection. A CO2 cyclic test (Huff-n-Puff) was conducted on a well in Stark County to test the injectivity in a Clinton-producing oil well in the ECOF and estimate the dispersion or potential breakthrough of the CO2 to surrounding wells. Eighty-one tons of CO2 (1.39 MMCF) were injected over a 20-hour period, after which the well was shut in for a 32-day soak period before production was resumed. Results demonstrated injection rates of 1.67 MMCF of gas per day, which was much higher than anticipated and no CO2 was detected in gas samples taken from eight immediately offsetting observation wells. All data collected during this test was analyzed, interpreted, and incorporated into the reservoir characterization study and used to develop the geologic model. The geologic model was used as input into a reservoir simulation performed by Fekete Associates, Inc., to estimate the behavior of reservoir fluids when large quantities of CO2 are injected into the Clinton sandstone. Results strongly suggest that the majority of the injected CO2 entered the matrix porosity of the reservoir pay zones, where it diffused into the oil. Evidence includes: (A) the volume of injected CO2 greatly exceeded the estimated capacity of the hydraulic fracture and natural fractures; (B) there was a gradual injection and pressure rate build-up during the test; (C) there was a subsequent, gradual flashout of the CO2 within the reservoir during the ensuing monitored production period; and (D) a large amount of CO2 continually off-gassed from wellhead oil samples collected as late as 3 months after injection. After the test well was returned to production, it produced 174 bbl of oil during a 60-day period (September 22 to November 21, 2008), which represents an estimated 58 percent increase in incremental oil production over preinjection estimates of production under normal, conditions. The geologic model was used in a reservoir simulation model for a 700-acre model area and to design a pilot to test the model. The model was designed to achieve a 1-year response time and a five-year simulation period. The reservoir simulation modeling indicated that the injection wells could enhance oil production and lead to an additional 20 percent recovery in the pilot area over a five-year period. The base case estimated that by injecting 500 MCF per day of CO2 into each of the four corner wells, 26,000 STBO would be produced by the central producer over the five-year period. This would compare to 3,000 STBO if a new well were drilled without the benefit of CO2 injection. This study has added significant knowledge to the reservoir characterization of the Clinton in the ECOF and succeeded in identifying a range on CO2-EOR potential. However, additional data on fluid properties (PVT and swelling test), fractures (oriented core and microseis), and reservoir characteristics (relative permeability, capillary pressure, and wet ability) are needed to further narrow the uncertainties and refine the reservoir model and simulation. After collection of this data and refinement of the model and simulation, it is recommended that a larger scale cyclic- CO2 injection test be conducted to better determine the efficacy of CO2-EOR in the Clinton reservoir in the ECOF.

  20. Methodologies for Reservoir Characterization Using Fluid Inclusion...

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

    Methodologies for Reservoir Characterization Using Fluid Inclusion Gas Chemistry Methodologies for Reservoir Characterization Using Fluid Inclusion Gas Chemistry Methodologies for ...

  1. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    8 Minnesota - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet ... Summary statistics for natural gas - Minnesota, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 ...

  2. Arizona Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Arizona Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 103...

  3. Quantitative/Statistical Approach to Bullet-to-Firearm Identification with Consecutively Manufactured Barrels

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Peter Striupaitis; R.E. Gaensslen

    2005-01-30

    Efforts to use objective image comparison and bullet scanning technologies to distinguish bullets from consecutively manufactured handgun barrels from two manufacturers gave mixed results. The ability of a technology to reliably distinguish between matching and non-matching bullets, where the non-matching bullets were as close in pattern to the matching ones as is probably possible, would provide evidence that the distinctions could be made ''objectively'', and independently of human eyes. That evidence is identical or very close to what seems to be needed to satisfy Daubert standards. It is fair to say that the FTI IBIS image comparison technology correctly distinguished between all the Springfield barrel bullets, and between most but not all of the HiPoint barrel bullets. In the HiPoint cases that were not distinguished 100% of the time, they would he distinguished correctly at least 83% of the time. These results, although obviously limited to the materials used in the comparisons, provide strong evidence that barrel-to-bullet matching is objectively reliable. The results with SciClops were less compelling. The results do not mean that bullet-to-barrel matching is not objectively reliable--rather, they mean that this version of the particular technology could not quite distinguish between these extremely similar yet different bullets as well as the image comparison technology did. In a number of cases, the numerical results made the correct distinctions, although they were close to one another. It is hard to say from this data that this technology differs in its ability to make distinctions between the manufacturers, because the results are very similar with both. The human examiner results were as expected. We did not expect any misidentifications, and there were not any. It would have been preferable to have a higher return rate, and thus more comparisons in the overall sample. As noted, the ''consecutively manufactured barrel exercise'' has been done before, with the same outcome.

  4. Video: SuperTruck Barreling Down the Road of Sustainability | Department of

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

    Energy SuperTruck Barreling Down the Road of Sustainability Video: SuperTruck Barreling Down the Road of Sustainability May 14, 2015 - 4:30pm Addthis New Energy 101 video shows how the Energy Department's SuperTruck initiative is making Class 8 trucks more fuel efficient and less expensive to operate. | Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy video. Paul Lester Paul Lester Digital Content Specialist, Office of Public Affairs KEY FACTS SuperTruck initiative helping make Class 8

  5. The Potosi Reservoir Model 2013

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Adushita, Yasmin; Smith, Valerie; Leetaru, Hannes

    2014-09-30

    As a part of a larger project co-funded by the United States Department of Energy (US DOE) to evaluate the potential of formations within the Cambro-Ordovician strata above the Mt. Simon as potential targets for carbon sequestration in the Illinois and Michigan Basins, the Illinois Clean Coal Institute (ICCI) requested Schlumberger to evaluate the potential injectivity and carbon dioxide (CO2) plume size of the Cambrian Potosi Formation. The evaluation of this formation was accomplished using wireline data, core data, pressure data, and seismic data from the US DOE-funded Illinois Basin–Decatur Project (IBDP) being conducted by the Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium in Macon County, Illinois. In 2010, technical performance evaluations on the Cambrian Potosi Formation were performed through reservoir modeling. The data included formation tops from mud logs, well logs from the VW1 and the CCS1 wells, structural and stratigraphic formation from three dimensional (3D) seismic data, and field data from several waste water injection wells for Potosi Formation. Intention was for two million tons per annum (MTPA) of CO2 to be injected for 20 years. In the preceding, the 2010 Potosi heterogeneous model (referred to as the "Potosi Dynamic Model 2010" in this topical report) was re-run using a new injection scenario; 3.2 MTPA for 30 years. The extent of the Potosi Dynamic Model 2010, however, appeared too small for the new injection target. It was not sufficiently large enough to accommodate the evolution of the plume. The new model, Potosi Dynamic Model 2013a, was built by extending the Potosi Dynamic Model 2010 grid to 30 miles x 30 miles (48.3km x48.3km), while preserving all property modeling workflows and layering. This model was retained as the base case of Potosi Dynamic Model 2013a. The Potosi reservoir model was updated to take into account the new data from the verification well VW2 which was drilled in 2012. The new porosity and permeability modeling was performed to take into account the log data from the new well. Revisions of the 2010 modeling assumptions were also done on relative permeability, capillary pressures, formation water salinity, and the maximum allowable well bottomhole pressure. Dynamic simulations were run using the injection target of 3.2 MTPA for 30 years. This new dynamic model was named Potosi Dynamic Model 2013b. Due to the major uncertainties on the vugs permeability, two models were built; the Pessimistic and Optimistic Cases. The Optimistic Case assumes vugs permeability of 9,000 mD, which is analog to the vugs permeability identified in the pressure fall off test of a waste water injector in the Tuscola site, approx. 40 miles (64.4km) away from the IBDP area. The Pessimistic Case assumes that the vugs permeability is equal to the log data, which does not take into account the permeability from secondary porosity. The probability of such case is deemed low and could be treated as the worst case scenario, since the contribution of secondary porosity to the permeability is neglected and the loss circulation events might correspond to a much higher permeability. It is considered important, however, to identify the range of possible reservoir performance since there are no rigorous data available for the vugs permeability. The Optimistic Case gives an average CO2 injection rate of 0.8 MTPA and cumulative injection of 26 MT in 30 years, which corresponds to 27% of the injection target. The injection rate is approx. 3.2 MTPA in the first year as the well is injecting into the surrounding vugs, and declines rapidly to 0.8 MTPA in year 4 once the surrounding vugs are full and the CO2 start to reach the matrix. This implies that according to this preliminary model, a minimum of four (4) wells could be required to achieve the injection target. This result is lower than the injectivity estimated in the Potosi Dynamic Model 2013a (43 MT in 30 years), since the permeability model applied in the Potosi Dynamic Model 2013b is more conservative. This revision was deemed necessary to treat the uncertainty in a more appropriate manner. As the CO2 follows the paths where vugs interconnection exists, a reasonably large and irregular plume extent was created. For the Optimistic Case, the plume extends 17 miles (27.4km) in E-W and 14 miles (22.5km) in N-S directions after 30 years. After injection is completed, the plume continues to migrate laterally, mainly driven by the remaining pressure gradient. After 100 years post injection, the plume extends 20 miles (32.2km) in E-W and 15.5 miles (24.9km) in N-S directions. Should the targeted cumulative injection of 96 MT be achieved; a much larger plume extent could be expected. For the Optimistic Case, the increase of reservoir pressure at the end of injection is approximately 1200 psia (8,274 kPa) around the injector and gradually decreases away from the well. The reservoir pressure increase is less than 30 psia (206.8 kPa) beyond 14 miles (22.5km) away from injector. Should the targeted cumulative injection of 96 MT be achieved; a much larger areal pressure increase could be expected. The initial reservoir pressure is nearly restored after approximately 100 years post injection. The presence of matrix slows down the pressure dissipations. The Pessimistic Case gives an average CO2 injection rate of 0.2 MTPA and cumulative injection of 7 MT in 30 years, which corresponds to 7% of the injection target. This implies that in the worst case scenario, a minimum of sixteen (16) wells could be required to achieve the injection target. The present evaluation is mainly associated with uncertainty on the vugs permeability, distribution, and interconnectivity. The different results indicated by the Optimistic and Pessimistic Cases signify the importance of vugs permeability characterization. Therefore, injection test and pressure interference test among the wells could be considered to evaluate the local vugs permeability, extent, and interconnectivity. Porosity mapping derived from the seismic inversion could also be used in the succeeding task to characterize the lateral porosity distribution within the reservoir. With or without seismic inversion porosity mapping, it is worth exploring whether increased lateral heterogeneity plays a significant role in Potosi injectivity. Investigations on vugular, dolomitic outcrops suggest that there may be significantly greater lateral heterogeneity than what has been modeled here. Facies modeling within the Potosi has yet to be thoroughly addressed. The carbonates during the time of deposition are believed to be regionally extensive. However, it may be worth delineating the reservoir with other regional wells or modern day analogues to understand the extent of the Potosi. More specifically, the model could incorporate lateral changes or trends if deemed necessary to represent facies transition. Data acquisitions to characterize the fracture pressure gradient, the formation water properties, the relative permeability, and the capillary pressure could also be considered in order to allow a more rigorous evaluation of the Potosi storage performance. A simulation using several injectors could also be considered to determine the required number of wells to achieve the injection target while taking into account the pressure interference.

  6. RESERVOIR CHARACTERIZATION OF UPPER DEVONIAN GORDON SANDSTONE, JACKSONBURG STRINGTOWN OIL FIELD, NORTHWESTERN WEST VIRGINIA

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    S. Ameri; K. Aminian; K.L. Avary; H.I. Bilgesu; M.E. Hohn; R.R. McDowell; D.L. Matchen

    2001-07-01

    The Jacksonburg-Stringtown oil field contained an estimated 88,500,000 barrels of oil in place, of which approximately 20,000,000 barrels were produced during primary recovery operations. A gas injection project, initiated in 1934, and a pilot waterflood, begun in 1981, yielded additional production from limited portions of the field. The pilot was successful enough to warrant development of a full-scale waterflood in 1990, involving approximately 8,900 acres in three units, with a target of 1,500 barrels of oil per acre recovery. Historical patterns of drilling and development within the field suggests that the Gordon reservoir is heterogeneous, and that detailed reservoir characterization is necessary for understanding well performance and addressing problems observed by the operators. The purpose of this work is to establish relationships among permeability, geophysical and other data by integrating geologic, geophysical and engineering data into an interdisciplinary quantification of reservoir heterogeneity as it relates to production. Conventional stratigraphic correlation and core description shows that the Gordon sandstone is composed of three parasequences, formed along the Late Devonian shoreline of the Appalachian Basin. The parasequences comprise five lithofacies, of which one includes reservoir sandstones. Pay sandstones were found to have permeabilities in core ranging from 10 to 200 mD, whereas non-pay sandstones have permeabilities ranging from below the level of instrumental detection to 5 mD; Conglomeratic zones could take on the permeability characteristics of enclosing materials, or could exhibit extremely low values in pay sandstone and high values in non-pay or low permeability pay sandstone. Four electrofacies based on a linear combination of density and scaled gamma ray best matched correlations made independently based on visual comparison of geophysical logs. Electrofacies 4 with relatively high permeability (mean value > 45 mD) was determined to be equivalent to the pay sandstone within the Gordon reservoir. Three-dimensional models of the electrofacies in the pilot waterflood showed that electrofacies 4 is present throughout this area, and the other electrofacies are more disconnected. A three-layer, back-propagation artificial neural network with three slabs in the middle layer can be used to predict permeability and porosity from gamma ray and bulk density logs, the first and the second derivatives of the log data with respect to depth, well location, and log baselines. Two flow units were defined based on the stratigraphic model and geophysical logs. A three-dimensional reservoir model including the flow units, values of permeability calculated through the artificial neural network and injection pressure-rate information were then used as inputs for a reservoir simulator to predict oil production performance for the center producers in the pilot area. This description of the reservoir provided significantly better simulation results than earlier results obtained using simple reservoir models. Bulk density and gamma ray logs were used to identify flow units throughout the field. As predicted by the stratigraphic analysis, one of the flow units crosses stratigraphic units in the reservoir. A neural network was used to predict permeability values for each flow unit in producer and injection wells. The reservoir simulator was utilized to predict the performance of two flood patterns located to the north of the pilot area. Considering the simple model utilized for simulation, the results are in very good agreement with the field history.

  7. Maquoketa paleotopography key to reservoirs in western Illinois

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Whitaker, S.T.; Ledbetter, J.C.

    1996-08-12

    Shallow Silurian reservoirs in western Illinois have been a primary target for exploration since the late 1950s. It was not until the discovery and development of Buckhorn Consolidated field in the early 1980s, however, that significant drilling efforts for Silurian reservoirs were focused on western Illinois. At Buckhorn, 1.7 million bbl of oil have been produced from a basal Silurian dolomite at about 650 ft. Drawn by inexpensive drilling and available acreage, hundreds of operators flocked to western Illinois to try their luck. By the late 1980s, however, exploration efforts in western Illinois were curtailed due to the failure to locate additional significant reservoirs. Much of this failure was due to the lack of a suitable geologic model that could be used to explain the reason for reservoir development and thereby guide exploration efforts. An article by Whitaker and Howard in 1995 presented a geologic model explaining Silurian reservoir development and stratigraphic entrapment of oil at Buckhorn Consolidated field were formed as Silurian dolomite in-filled a shallow paleovalley cut into the underlying Ordovician Maquoketa shale. Some companies have recently initiated new exploration efforts in the area using this model. This paper discusses the efforts and results of several of these new areas.

  8. Encapsulated microsensors for reservoir interrogation

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Scott, Eddie Elmer; Aines, Roger D.; Spadaccini, Christopher M.

    2016-03-08

    In one general embodiment, a system includes at least one microsensor configured to detect one or more conditions of a fluidic medium of a reservoir; and a receptacle, wherein the receptacle encapsulates the at least one microsensor. In another general embodiment, a method include injecting the encapsulated at least one microsensor as recited above into a fluidic medium of a reservoir; and detecting one or more conditions of the fluidic medium of the reservoir.

  9. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

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

  10. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

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

  11. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

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

  12. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

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

  13. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

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

  14. One million curies of radioactive material recovered

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

    Radioactive material recovered One million curies of radioactive material recovered The accomplishment represents a major milestone in protecting our nation and the world from...

  15. Million Solar Strong Signs | Department of Energy

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

    Million Solar Strong Signs Million Solar Strong Signs The solar community celebrates the millionth solar installation with the Million Solar Strong event. In addition to some in-person events in Washington, D.C. and elsewhere, there will a big social media push on Tuesday, May 3rd. Download these printable signs, and use them to take photos and videos over the next several days. Then make sure to upload them to social media with the hashtag #MillionSolarStrong, so that they can be collected in a

  16. One Million Electric Vehicles By 2015

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2011-02-01

    February 2011 status report on the steps needed to achieve President Obama's goal of putting one million electric vehicles on the road by 2015.

  17. ,"Texas Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","930...

  18. U.S. Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Reserves in Nonproducing

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

    Reservoirs (Million Barrels) in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) U.S. Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 530 418 2000's 498 562 489 399 409 430 504 559 593 511 2010's 694 880 1,429 1,380 1,716 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next

  19. Louisiana (with State Offshore) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing

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

    Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Louisiana (with State Offshore) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 198 226 2000's 204 227 185 190 150 193 198 193 144 149 2010's 183 152 157 180 221 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

  20. Mississippi (with State Offshore) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing

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

    Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Mississippi (with State Offshore) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 49 68 2000's 38 71 42 68 79 87 79 35 126 117 2010's 94 90 82 73 85 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015

  1. Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing

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

    Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 53 56 2000's 68 97 122 117 63 112 149 98 31 29 2010's 66 69 55 60 45 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  2. Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing

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

    Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 740 321 2000's 234 233 111 110 158 238 228 168 117 146 2010's 210 163 226 214 216 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

  3. California (with State Offshore) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing

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

    Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) California (with State Offshore) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 937 511 2000's 464 508 336 313 267 455 496 335 197 272 2010's 522 542 627 606 588 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

  4. Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore - Texas Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing

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

    Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore - Texas Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 215 207 2000's 222 180 154 147 72 64 68 53 56 125 2010's 102 52 34 33 84 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  5. Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate,

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 53 56 2000's 68 97 122 117 63 112 149 98 31 29 2010's 66 69 55 60 45 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  6. Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate,

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 740 321 2000's 234 233 111 110 158 238 228 168 117 146 2010's 210 163 226 214 216 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

  7. Water resources review: Ocoee reservoirs, 1990

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cox, J.P.

    1990-08-01

    Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) is preparing a series of reports to make technical information on individual TVA reservoirs readily accessible. These reports provide a summary of reservoir purpose and operation; physical characteristics of the reservoir and watershed; water quality conditions; aquatic biological conditions; and designated, actual and potential uses of the reservoir and impairments of those use. This reservoir status report addressed the three Ocoee Reservoirs in Polk County, Tennessee.

  8. Collapsible sheath fluid reservoirs for flow cytometers

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Mark, Graham A. (Los Alamos, NM)

    2000-01-01

    The present invention is a container in the form of a single housing for holding fluid, including a first collapsible reservoir having a first valve. The first reservoir initially contains a volume of fluid. The container also includes a second reservoir, initially empty (or substantially empty), expandable to a second volume. The second reservoir has a second valve. As the volume of said first reservoir decreases, the volume of the second reservoir proportionally increases.

  9. Altering Reservoir Wettability to Improve Production from Single Wells

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    W. W. Weiss

    2006-09-30

    Many carbonate reservoirs are naturally fractured and typically produce less than 10% original oil in place during primary recovery. Spontaneous imbibition has proven an important mechanism for oil recovery from fractured reservoirs, which are usually weak waterflood candidates. In some situations, chemical stimulation can promote imbibition of water to alter the reservoir wettability toward water-wetness such that oil is produced at an economic rate from the rock matrix into fractures. In this project, cores and fluids from five reservoirs were used in laboratory tests: the San Andres formation (Fuhrman Masho and Eagle Creek fields) in the Permian Basin of Texas and New Mexico; and the Interlake, Stony Mountain, and Red River formations from the Cedar Creek Anticline in Montana and South Dakota. Solutions of nonionic, anionic, and amphoteric surfactants with formation water were used to promote waterwetness. Some Fuhrman Masho cores soaked in surfactant solution had improved oil recovery up to 38%. Most Eagle Creek cores did not respond to any of the tested surfactants. Some Cedar Creek anticline cores had good response to two anionic surfactants (CD 128 and A246L). The results indicate that cores with higher permeability responded better to the surfactants. The increased recovery is mainly ascribed to increased water-wetness. It is suspected that rock mineralogy is also an important factor. The laboratory work generated three field tests of the surfactant soak process in the West Fuhrman Masho San Andres Unit. The flawlessly designed tests included mechanical well clean out, installation of new pumps, and daily well tests before and after the treatments. Treatments were designed using artificial intelligence (AI) correlations developed from 23 previous surfactant soak treatments. The treatments were conducted during the last quarter of 2006. One of the wells produced a marginal volume of incremental oil through October. It is interesting to note that the field tests were conducted in an area of the field that has not met production expectations. The dataset on the 23 Phosphoria well surfactant soaks was updated. An analysis of the oil decline curves indicted that 4.5 lb of chemical produced a barrel of incremental oil. The AI analysis supports the adage 'good wells are the best candidates.' The generally better performance of surfactant in the high permeability core laboratory tests supports this observation. AI correlations were developed to predict the response to water-frac stimulations in a tight San Andres reservoir. The correlations maybe useful in the design of Cedar Creek Anticline surfactant soak treatments planned for next year. Nuclear Magnetic Resonance scans of dolomite cores to measure porosity and saturation during the high temperature laboratory work were acquired. The scans could not be correlated with physical measurement using either conventional or AI methods.

  10. Analysis of real-time reservoir monitoring : reservoirs, strategies, & modeling.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mani, Seethambal S.; van Bloemen Waanders, Bart Gustaaf; Cooper, Scott Patrick; Jakaboski, Blake Elaine; Normann, Randy Allen; Jennings, Jim; Gilbert, Bob; Lake, Larry W.; Weiss, Chester Joseph; Lorenz, John Clay; Elbring, Gregory Jay; Wheeler, Mary Fanett; Thomas, Sunil G.; Rightley, Michael J.; Rodriguez, Adolfo; Klie, Hector; Banchs, Rafael; Nunez, Emilio J.; Jablonowski, Chris

    2006-11-01

    The project objective was to detail better ways to assess and exploit intelligent oil and gas field information through improved modeling, sensor technology, and process control to increase ultimate recovery of domestic hydrocarbons. To meet this objective we investigated the use of permanent downhole sensors systems (Smart Wells) whose data is fed real-time into computational reservoir models that are integrated with optimized production control systems. The project utilized a three-pronged approach (1) a value of information analysis to address the economic advantages, (2) reservoir simulation modeling and control optimization to prove the capability, and (3) evaluation of new generation sensor packaging to survive the borehole environment for long periods of time. The Value of Information (VOI) decision tree method was developed and used to assess the economic advantage of using the proposed technology; the VOI demonstrated the increased subsurface resolution through additional sensor data. Our findings show that the VOI studies are a practical means of ascertaining the value associated with a technology, in this case application of sensors to production. The procedure acknowledges the uncertainty in predictions but nevertheless assigns monetary value to the predictions. The best aspect of the procedure is that it builds consensus within interdisciplinary teams The reservoir simulation and modeling aspect of the project was developed to show the capability of exploiting sensor information both for reservoir characterization and to optimize control of the production system. Our findings indicate history matching is improved as more information is added to the objective function, clearly indicating that sensor information can help in reducing the uncertainty associated with reservoir characterization. Additional findings and approaches used are described in detail within the report. The next generation sensors aspect of the project evaluated sensors and packaging survivability issues. Our findings indicate that packaging represents the most significant technical challenge associated with application of sensors in the downhole environment for long periods (5+ years) of time. These issues are described in detail within the report. The impact of successful reservoir monitoring programs and coincident improved reservoir management is measured by the production of additional oil and gas volumes from existing reservoirs, revitalization of nearly depleted reservoirs, possible re-establishment of already abandoned reservoirs, and improved economics for all cases. Smart Well monitoring provides the means to understand how a reservoir process is developing and to provide active reservoir management. At the same time it also provides data for developing high-fidelity simulation models. This work has been a joint effort with Sandia National Laboratories and UT-Austin's Bureau of Economic Geology, Department of Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering, and the Institute of Computational and Engineering Mathematics.

  11. Predicting interwell heterogeneity in fluvial-deltaic reservoirs: Outcrop observations and applications of progressive facies variation through a depositional cycle

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Knox, P.R.; Barton, M.D.

    1997-08-01

    Nearly 11 billion barrels of mobile oil remain in known domestic fluvial-deltaic reservoirs despite their mature status. A large percentage of this strategic resource is in danger of permanent loss through premature abandonment. Detailed reservoir characterization studies that integrate advanced technologies in geology, geophysics, and engineering are needed to identify remaining resources that can be targeted by near-term recovery methods, resulting in increased production and the postponement of abandonment. The first and most critical step of advanced characterization studies is the identification of reservoir architecture. However, existing subsurface information, primarily well logs, provides insufficient lateral resolution to identify low-permeability boundaries that exist between wells and compartmentalize the reservoir. Methods to predict lateral variability in fluvial-deltaic reservoirs have been developed on the basis of outcrop studies and incorporate identification of depositional setting and position within a depositional cycle. The position of a reservoir within the framework of a depositional cycle is critical. Outcrop studies of the Cretaceous Ferron Sandstone of Utah have demonstrated that the architecture and internal heterogeneity of sandstones deposited within a given depositional setting (for example, delta front) vary greatly depending upon whether they were deposited in the early, progradational part of a cycle or the late, retrogradational part of a cycle. The application of techniques similar to those used by this study in other fluvial-deltaic reservoirs will help to estimate the amount and style of remaining potential in mature reservoirs through a quicklook evaluation, allowing operators to focus characterization efforts on reservoirs that have the greatest potential to yield additional resources.

  12. Potosi Reservoir Modeling; History and Recommendations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Smith, Valerie; Leetaru, Hannes

    2014-09-30

    As a part of a larger project co-funded by the United States Department of Energy (US DOE) to evaluate the potential of formations within the Cambro-Ordovician strata above the Mt. Simon as potential targets for carbon sequestration in the Illinois and Michigan Basins, the Illinois Clean Coal Institute (ICCI) requested Schlumberger to evaluate the potential injectivity and carbon dioxide (CO₂) plume size of the Cambrian Potosi Formation. The evaluation of this formation was accomplished using wireline data, core data, pressure data, and seismic data from two projects: the US DOE-funded Illinois Basin–Decatur Project being conducted by the Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium in Macon County, Illinois, as well as data from the Illinois – Industrial Carbon Capture and Sequestration (IL-ICCS) project funded through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. In 2010, technical performance evaluations on the Cambrian Potosi Formation were performed through reservoir modeling. The data included formation tops from mud logs, well logs from the Verification Well 1 (VW1) and the Injection Well (CCS1), structural and stratigraphic formation from three dimensional (3D) seismic data, and field data from several waste water injection wells for the Potosi Formation. The intention was for two million tonnes per annum (MTPA) of CO₂ to be injected for 20 years into the Potosi Formation. In 2013, updated reservoir models for the Cambrian Potosi Formation were evaluated. The data included formation tops from mud logs, well logs from the CCS1, VW1, and Verification Well 2 (VW2) wells, structural and stratigraphic formation from a larger 3D seismic survey, and field data from several waste water injection wells for Potosi Formation. The objective is to simulate the injection of CO₂ at a rate 3.5 million tons per annum (3.2 million tonnes per annum [MTPA]) for 30 years 106 million tons (96 MT total) into the Potosi Formation. The Potosi geomodeling efforts have evolved from using data from a single well in 2010 to the inclusion of data from three wells in 2013 which largely leverage the porosity and permeability logs plus knowledge of lost circulation zones. The first Potosi model (Potosi Geobody Model 2010) attempted to use the available seismic inversion data to inform the geomodel and predict vugular zones in advance of drilling VW1. Lost circulation zones in VW1 came in as the geologists predicted. The model was not implemented in subsequent simulation work. To date, reservoir models used for flow simulation work have relied predominately on Gaussian distributed properties (porosity and permeability) and have employed a single injection well. Potosi Model 2013b incorporated the new VW2 logs, and exhibited an extra level of sophistication by delineating the vugular intervals. This method added further realism that likely represents the best reservoir approximation to date. Where the 2010 reservoir models were 10 by 10 mi (16 by 16 km) in area, the 2013 models were expanded in size to 30 by 30 mi (48 by 48 km). The latest reservoir simulations show that a minimum of four injectors might be required to meet target injection rates. Still, there is data that requires further scrutiny and modeling methodologies that require testing for the Potosi Formation. This work is currently ongoing, and the next phase of the reservoir modeling intends to implement valuable data like porosity derived from seismic inversion, seismically derived geobodies, or a combination of both to further define vugular zones and the porosity distribution within the Potosi Formation. Understanding the dual porosity, dual permeability character of the Potosi remains the greatest challenge in representing this formation. Further analysis of the FMI* fullbore formation microimager data may aid in assessing this uncertainty. The Potosi Formation is indeed an interesting formation, and recommendations to further characterize it are included in the following list: - Data acquisition to identify the vugs permeability, distribution, and interconnectivity could be considered to perform a more rigorous evaluation of the Potosi Formation injectivity and capacity. This could be achieved by performing an injection test on a vugular interval to determine the vugs permeability, and an interference test between wells to evaluate the local vugs extent and interconnectivity. - A thorough study of the available FMI data may reveal specifics on estimating the vug to matrix ratio. This estimate could be used to further condition the porosity distribution. Porosity logs alone might underestimate the formation’s porosity associated with vugs. Porosity mapping derived from the seismic inversion could also be used in the succeeding task to characterize the lateral porosity distribution within the reservoir. This could involve the geobody methodology previously attempted in 2010. With or without seismic inversion porosity mapping, it is worth exploring whether increased lateral heterogeneity plays a significant role in Potosi injectivity. Investigations on vugular, dolomitic outcrops suggest that there may be significantly greater lateral heterogeneity than what has been modeled here. - The FMI data also reveals the presence of and helps describe open fractures. The presence of fractures will further enhance the formation’s permeability. The task of leveraging this data in the geomodeling effort still remains. Under the best of circumstances, this data describing open fractures may be combined with seismic attributes to delineate fracture corridors. Fracture modeling would certainly add another layer of sophistication to the model. Its contribution and applicability remain to be explored. - Facies modeling within the Potosi has yet to be thoroughly addressed. The carbonates during the time of deposition are believed to be regionally extensive. However, it may be worth delineating the reservoir with other regional wells or modern day analogues to understand the extent of the Potosi. More specifically, the model could incorporate lateral changes or trends if deemed necessary to represent facies transition. - Currently there is no fracture gradient data available for the Potosi in the Decatur project area. The acquisition of the fracture pressure data could be considered to determine an appropriate maximum allowable bottomhole injection pressure. This would allow the evaluation of injectivity and the required number of wells in a more precise manner. - Special core analysis (SCAL) to determine the relative permeability and capillary pressure of the vugs and matrix could be considered to have a better estimation of the reservoir injectivity and plume extent. - Formation water sampling and analysis could be considered for the Potosi to estimate the water salinity and properties. A vertical flow performance evaluation could be considered for the succeeding task to determine the appropriate tubing size, the required injection tubing head pressure, and to investigate whether the corresponding well injection rate falls within the tubing erosional velocity limit. - A simulation using several injectors could also be considered to determine the required number of wells to achieve the injection target while taking into account the pressure interference.

  13. Reservoir-Stimulation Optimization with Operational Monitoring...

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

    Reservoir-Stimulation Optimization with Operational Monitoring for Creation of Enhanced Geothermal Systems Reservoir-Stimulation Optimization with Operational Monitoring for ...

  14. Supercritical Carbon Dioxide / Reservoir Rock Chemical Interactions...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Reservoir Rock Chemical Interactions Jump to: navigation, search Geothermal Lab Call Projects for Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Reservoir Rock...

  15. Improved oil recovery in fluvial dominated deltaic reservoirs of Kansas - Near-term, Class I

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Green, D.W.; Willhite, G.P.; Reynolds, Rodney R.; McCune, A. Dwayne; Michnick, Michael J.; Walton, Anthony W.; Watney, W. Lynn

    2000-06-08

    This project involved two demonstration projects, one in a Marrow reservoir located in the southwestern part of the state and the second in the Cherokee Group in eastern Kansas. Morrow reservoirs of western Kansas are still actively being explored and constitute an important resource in Kansas. Cumulative oil production from the Morrow in Kansas is over 400,000,000 bbls. Much of the production from the Morrow is still in the primary stage and has not reached the mature declining state of that in the Cherokee. The Cherokee Group has produced about 1 billion bbls of oil since the first commercial production began over a century ago. It is a billion-barrel plus resource that is distributed over a large number of fields and small production units. Many of the reservoirs are operated close to the economic limit, although the small units and low production per well are offset by low costs associated with the shallow nature of the reservoirs (less than 1000 ft. deep).

  16. Geothermal Reservoir Dynamics - TOUGHREACT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pruess, Karsten; Xu, Tianfu; Shan, Chao; Zhang, Yingqi; Wu,Yu-Shu; Sonnenthal, Eric; Spycher, Nicolas; Rutqvist, Jonny; Zhang,Guoxiang; Kennedy, Mack

    2005-03-15

    This project has been active for several years and has focused on developing, enhancing and applying mathematical modeling capabilities for fractured geothermal systems. The emphasis of our work has recently shifted towards enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) and hot dry rock (HDR), and FY05 is the first year that the DOE-AOP actually lists this project under Enhanced Geothermal Systems. Our overall purpose is to develop new engineering tools and a better understanding of the coupling between fluid flow, heat transfer, chemical reactions, and rock-mechanical deformation, to demonstrate new EGS technology through field applications, and to make technical information and computer programs available for field applications. The objectives of this project are to: (1) Improve fundamental understanding and engineering methods for geothermal systems, primarily focusing on EGS and HDR systems and on critical issues in geothermal systems that are difficult to produce. (2) Improve techniques for characterizing reservoir conditions and processes through new modeling and monitoring techniques based on ''active'' tracers and coupled processes. (3) Improve techniques for targeting injection towards specific engineering objectives, including maintaining and controlling injectivity, controlling non-condensable and corrosive gases, avoiding scale formation, and optimizing energy recovery. Seek opportunities for field testing and applying new technologies, and work with industrial partners and other research organizations.

  17. Fact #676: May 23, 2011 U.S. Refiners Produce about 19 Gallons of Gasoline from a Barrel of Oil

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    A standard U.S. barrel contains 42 gallons of crude oil which yields about 44 gallons of petroleum products. The additional 2 gallons of petroleum products come from refiner gains which result in...

  18. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    0 Alabama - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S1. Summary statistics for natural gas - Alabama, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 7,026 7,063 6,327 R 6,165 6,118 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  19. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    0 Colorado - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S6. Summary statistics for natural gas - Colorado, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 28,813 30,101 32,000 R 32,468 38,346 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  20. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    8 Florida - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S10. Summary statistics for natural gas - Florida, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 17,182 16,459 19,742

  1. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    4 Hawaii - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S13. Summary statistics for natural gas - Hawaii, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0

  2. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    6 Idaho - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S14. Summary statistics for natural gas - Idaho, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0

  3. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    4 Kansas - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S18. Summary statistics for natural gas - Kansas, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 22,145 25,758 24,697 R 23,792 24,354 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  4. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    8 Louisiana - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S20. Summary statistics for natural gas - Louisiana, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 19,137 21,235 19,792 R 19,528 19,251 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  5. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    4 New Mexico - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S33. Summary statistics for natural gas - New Mexico, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 44,748 32,302 28,206 R 27,073 27,957 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From

  6. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    6 Oregon - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S39. Summary statistics for natural gas - Oregon, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 26 24 27 R 26 28 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 1,407 1,344 770 770

  7. Chickamauga reservoir embayment study - 1990

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Meinert, D.L.; Butkus, S.R.; McDonough, T.A.

    1992-12-01

    The objectives of this report are three-fold: (1) assess physical, chemical, and biological conditions in the major embayments of Chickamauga Reservoir; (2) compare water quality and biological conditions of embayments with main river locations; and (3) identify any water quality concerns in the study embayments that may warrant further investigation and/or management actions. Embayments are important areas of reservoirs to be considered when assessments are made to support water quality management plans. In general, embayments, because of their smaller size (water surface areas usually less than 1000 acres), shallower morphometry (average depth usually less than 10 feet), and longer detention times (frequently a month or more), exhibit more extreme responses to pollutant loadings and changes in land use than the main river region of the reservoir. Consequently, embayments are often at greater risk of water quality impairments (e.g. nutrient enrichment, filling and siltation, excessive growths of aquatic plants, algal blooms, low dissolved oxygen concentrations, bacteriological contamination, etc.). Much of the secondary beneficial use of reservoirs occurs in embayments (viz. marinas, recreation areas, parks and beaches, residential development, etc.). Typically embayments comprise less than 20 percent of the surface area of a reservoir, but they often receive 50 percent or more of the water-oriented recreational use of the reservoir. This intensive recreational use creates a potential for adverse use impacts if poor water quality and aquatic conditions exist in an embayment.

  8. Reservoir characterization of Pennsylvanian Sandstone Reservoirs. Annual report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kelkar, M.

    1992-09-01

    This annual report describes the progress during the second year of a project on Reservoir Characterization of Pennsylvanian Sandstone Reservoirs. The report is divided into three sections: (i) reservoir description and scale-up procedures; (ii) outcrop investigation; (iii) in-fill drilling potential. The first section describes the methods by which a reservoir can be characterized, can be described in three dimensions, and can be scaled up with respect to its properties, appropriate for simulation purposes. The second section describes the progress on investigation of an outcrop. The outcrop is an analog of Bartlesville Sandstone. We have drilled ten wells behind the outcrop and collected extensive log and core data. The cores have been slabbed, photographed and the several plugs have been taken. In addition, minipermeameter is used to measure permeabilities on the core surface at six inch intervals. The plugs have been analyzed for the permeability and porosity values. The variations in property values will be tied to the geological descriptions as well as the subsurface data collected from the Glen Pool field. The third section discusses the application of geostatistical techniques to infer in-fill well locations. The geostatistical technique used is the simulated annealing technique because of its flexibility. One of the important reservoir data is the production data. Use of production data will allow us to define the reservoir continuities, which may in turn, determine the in-fill well locations. The proposed technique allows us to incorporate some of the production data as constraints in the reservoir descriptions. The technique has been validated by comparing the results with numerical simulations.

  9. DOT Awards University Transportation Centers $63 Million

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The U.S. Department of Transportation's (DOT) announced approximately $63 million in grants to 33 University Transportation Centers to advance research and education programs that address critical transportation challenges.

  10. Indiana Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 191 102 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 4/29/2016 Next Release Date: 5/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed

  11. Million U.S. Housing Units Total............................................................................

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

    Attached 2 to 4 Units Table HC2.12 Home Electronics Usage Indicators by Type of Housing Unit, 2005 5 or More Units Mobile Homes Type of Housing Unit Housing Units (millions) Single-Family Units Apartments in Buildings With-- Home Electronics Usage Indicators Detached Energy Information Administration: 2005 Residential Energy Consumption Survey: Preliminary Housing Characteristics Tables Million U.S. Housing Units Attached 2 to 4 Units Table HC2.12 Home Electronics Usage Indicators by Type of

  12. Lab contractor awards LANL Foundation $3 million

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

    Contractor awards LANL Foundation $3 million Lab contractor awards LANL Foundation $3 million To provide educational enrichment and educational outreach funding for a wide variety of education programs in the seven Northern New Mexico counties. October 29, 2008 Los Alamos National Laboratory sits on top of a once-remote mesa in northern New Mexico with the Jemez mountains as a backdrop to research and innovation covering multi-disciplines from bioscience, sustainable energy sources, to plasma

  13. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    2 Appliances in U.S. Homes, by Owner/Renter Status, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,,,"Housing Unit Type" ,,,,"Single-Family Units",,,,"Apartments in Buildings With" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,,"Detached",,"Attached",,"2 to 4 Units",,"5 or More Units",,"Mobile Homes"

  14. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    8 Home Appliances in Homes in Northeast Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"Northeast Census Region" ,,,"New England Census Division",,,"Middle Atlantic Census Division" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,"Total New England",,,"Total Middle Atlantic" ,,"Total Northeast",,,"CT, ME, NH, RI, VT" "Home

  15. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    2 Televisions in U.S. Homes, by Owner/Renter Status, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,,,"Housing Unit Type" ,,,,"Single-Family Units",,,,"Apartments in Buildings With" ,,,,"Detached",,"Attached",,"2 to 4 Units",,"5 or More Units",,"Mobile Homes" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)"

  16. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    2 Space Heating in U.S. Homes, by Owner/Renter Status, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,,,"Housing Unit Type" ,,,,"Single-Family Units",,,,"Apartments in Buildings With" ,,,,"Detached",,"Attached",,"2 to 4 Units",,"5 or More Units",,"Mobile Homes" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)"

  17. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    2 Water Heating in U.S. Homes, by Owner/Renter Status, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,,,"Housing Unit Type" ,,,,"Single-Family Units",,,,"Apartments in Buildings With" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,,"Detached",,"Attached",,"2 to 4 Units",,"5 or More Units",,"Mobile Homes"

  18. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    2 Household Demographics of U.S. Homes, by Owner/Renter Status, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,,,"Housing Unit Type" ,,,,"Single-Family Units",,,,"Apartments in Buildings With" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,,"Detached",,"Attached",,"2 to 4 Units",,"5 or More Units",,"Mobile Homes" "Household

  19. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    8 Household Demographics of Homes in Northeast Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"Northeast Census Region" ,,,"New England Census Division",,,"Middle Atlantic Census Division" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,"Total New England",,,"Total Middle Atlantic" ,,"Total Northeast",,,"CT, ME, NH, RI, VT" "Household

  20. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    8 Televisions in Homes in Northeast Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"Northeast Census Region" ,,,"New England Census Division",,,"Middle Atlantic Census Division" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,"Total New England",,,"Total Middle Atlantic" ,,"Total Northeast",,,"CT, ME, NH, RI, VT"

  1. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    2 Computers and Other Electronics in U.S. Homes, by Owner/Renter Status, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,,,"Housing Unit Type" ,,,,"Single-Family Units",,,,"Apartments in Buildings With" ,,,,"Detached",,"Attached",,"2 to 4 Units",,"5 or More Units",,"Mobile Homes" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)"

  2. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    2 Air Conditioning in U.S. Homes, by Owner/Renter Status, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,,,"Housing Unit Type" ,,,,"Single-Family Units",,,,"Apartments in Buildings With" ,,,,"Detached",,"Attached",,"2 to 4 Units",,"5 or More Units",,"Mobile Homes" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)" "Air

  3. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    8 Air Conditioning in Homes in Northeast Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"Northeast Census Region" ,,,"New England Census Division",,,"Middle Atlantic Census Division" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,"Total New England",,,"Total Middle Atlantic" ,,"Total Northeast",,,"CT, ME, NH, RI, VT" "Air

  4. Precise mapping of the magnetic field in the CMS barrel yoke using cosmic rays

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chatrchyan, S.; et al.,

    2010-03-01

    The CMS detector is designed around a large 4 T superconducting solenoid, enclosed in a 12000-tonne steel return yoke. A detailed map of the magnetic field is required for the accurate simulation and reconstruction of physics events in the CMS detector, not only in the inner tracking region inside the solenoid but also in the large and complex structure of the steel yoke, which is instrumented with muon chambers. Using a large sample of cosmic muon events collected by CMS in 2008, the field in the steel of the barrel yoke has been determined with a precision of 3 to 8% depending on the location.

  5. Application of Integrated Reservoir Management and Reservoir Characterization to Optimize Infill Drilling

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-01-01

    Infill drilling if wells on a uniform spacing without regard to reservoir performance and characterization foes not optimize reservoir development because it fails to account for the complex nature of reservoir heterogeneities present in many low permeability reservoirs, and carbonate reservoirs in particular. New and emerging technologies, such as geostatistical modeling, rigorous decline curve analysis, reservoir rock typing, and special core analysis can be used to develop a 3-D simulation model for prediction of infill locations.

  6. Tennessee Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 11 1990's 19 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 6,146 6,200 6,304 5,721 5,000 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 4/29/2016 Next Release Date: 5/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Tennessee Natural Gas Plant Processing Natural Gas

  7. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    Air Conditioning in U.S. Homes, by Housing Unit Type, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"Housing Unit Type" ,,"Single-Family Units",,"Apartments in Buildings With" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)" ,," Detached"," Attached"," 2 to 4 Units","5 or More Units","Mobile Homes" "Air Conditioning" "Total Homes",113.6,71.8,6.7,9,19.1,6.9 "Air Conditioning Equipment"

  8. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    HC.1.11 Fuels Used and End Uses in Homes in West Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"West Census Region" ,,,"Mountain Census Division",,,,,,,"Pacific Census Division" ,,,,"Mountain North Sub-Division",,,"Mountain South Sub-Division" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,,"Total Mountain North",,,"Total Mountain South" ,,"Total West","Total

  9. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    1 Space Heating in U.S. Homes in West Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"West Census Region" ,,,"Mountain Census Division",,,,,,,"Pacific Census Division" ,,,,"Mountain North Sub-Division",,,"Mountain South Sub-Division" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,,"Total Mountain North",,,"Total Mountain South" ,,"Total West","Total Mountain",,,"ID, MT, UT,

  10. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    1 Household Demographics of Homes in West Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"West Census Region" ,,,"Mountain Census Division",,,,,,,"Pacific Census Division" ,,,,"Mountain North Sub-Division",,,"Mountain South Sub-Division" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,,"Total Mountain North",,,"Total Mountain South" ,,"Total West","Total Mountain",,,"ID, MT,

  11. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    0 Fuels Used and End Uses in Homes in South Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"South Census Region" ,,,"South Atlantic Census Division",,,,,,"East South Central Census Division",,,"West South Central Census Division" ,,,,,,,,,"Total East South Central",,,"Total West South Central" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,"Total South Atlantic" ,,"Total

  12. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    0 Structural and Geographic Characteristics of Homes in South Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"South Census Region" ,,,"South Atlantic Census Division",,,,,,"East South Central Census Division",,,"West South Central Census Division" ,,,,,,,,,"Total East South Central",,,"Total West South Central" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,"Total South Atlantic" "Structural

  13. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    1 Structural and Geographic Characteristics of Homes in West Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"West Census Region" ,,,"Mountain Census Division",,,,,,,"Pacific Census Division" ,,,,"Mountain North Sub-Division",,,"Mountain South Sub-Division" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,,"Total Mountain North",,,"Total Mountain South" "Structural and Geographic

  14. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    1 Appliances in Homes in West Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"West Census Region" ,,,"Mountain Census Division",,,,,,,"Pacific Census Division" ,,,,"Mountain North Sub-Division",,,"Mountain South Sub-Division" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,,"Total Mountain North",,,"Total Mountain South" ,,"Total West","Total Mountain",,,"ID, MT, UT,

  15. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    0 Televisions in Homes in South Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"South Census Region" ,,,"South Atlantic Census Division",,,,,,"East South Central Census Division",,,"West South Central Census Division" ,,,,,,,,,"Total East South Central",,,"Total West South Central" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,"Total South Atlantic" ,,"Total South",,,,,"DC, DE, MD,

  16. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    1 Televisions in Homes in West Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"West Census Region" ,,,"Mountain Census Division",,,,,,,"Pacific Census Division" ,,,,"Mountain North Sub-Division",,,"Mountain South Sub-Division" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,,"Total Mountain North",,,"Total Mountain South" ,,"Total West","Total Mountain",,,"ID, MT, UT,

  17. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    0 Computers and Other Electronics in Homes in South Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"South Census Region" ,,,"South Atlantic Census Division",,,,,,"East South Central Census Division",,,"West South Central Census Division" ,,,,,,,,,"Total East South Central",,,"Total West South Central" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,"Total South Atlantic" ,,"Total

  18. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    1 Computers and Other Electronics in Homes in West Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"West Census Region" ,,,"Mountain Census Division",,,,,,,"Pacific Census Division" ,,,,"Mountain North Sub-Division",,,"Mountain South Sub-Division" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,,"Total Mountain North",,,"Total Mountain South" ,,"Total West","Total

  19. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    0 Space Heating in U.S. Homes in South Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"South Census Region" ,,,"South Atlantic Census Division",,,,,,"East South Central Census Division",,,"West South Central Census Division" ,,,,,,,,,"Total East South Central",,,"Total West South Central" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,"Total South Atlantic" ,,"Total South",,,,,"DC,

  20. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    1 Air Conditioning in Homes in West Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"West Census Region" ,,,"Mountain Census Division",,,,,,,"Pacific Census Division" ,,,,"Mountain North Sub-Division",,,"Mountain South Sub-Division" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,,"Total Mountain North",,,"Total Mountain South" ,,"Total West","Total Mountain",,,"ID, MT, UT,

  1. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    0 Water Heating in U.S. Homes in South Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"South Census Region" ,,,"South Atlantic Census Division",,,,,,"East South Central Census Division",,,"West South Central Census Division" ,,,,,,,,,"Total East South Central",,,"Total West South Central" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,"Total South Atlantic" ,,"Total South",,,,,"DC,

  2. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    11 Water Heating in U.S. Homes in West Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"West Census Region" ,,,"Mountain Census Division",,,,,,,"Pacific Census Division" ,,,,"Mountain North Sub-Division",,,"Mountain South Sub-Division" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,,"Total Mountain North",,,"Total Mountain South" ,,"Total West","Total Mountain",,,"ID, MT,

  3. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    0 Household Demographics of Homes in South Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"South Census Region" ,,,"South Atlantic Census Division",,,,,,"East South Central Census Division",,,"West South Central Census Division" ,,,,,,,,,"Total East South Central",,,"Total West South Central" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,"Total South Atlantic" ,,"Total

  4. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    0 Appliances in Homes in South Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"South Census Region" ,,,"South Atlantic Census Division",,,,,,"East South Central Census Division",,,"West South Central Census Division" ,,,,,,,,,"Total East South Central",,,"Total West South Central" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,"Total South Atlantic" ,,"Total South",,,,,"DC, DE, MD,

  5. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    0 Air Conditioning in Homes in South Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"South Census Region" ,,,"South Atlantic Census Division",,,,,,"East South Central Census Division",,,"West South Central Census Division" ,,,,,,,,,"Total East South Central",,,"Total West South Central" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,"Total South Atlantic" ,,"Total South",,,,,"DC, DE,

  6. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    6 Fuels Used and End Uses in U.S. Homes, by Climate Region, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"Climate Region2" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)" ,,"Very Cold/","Mixed- Humid","Mixed-Dry/" "Fuels Used and End Uses",,"Cold",,"Hot-Dry","Hot-Humid","Marine" "Total Homes",113.6,38.8,35.4,14.1,19.1,6.3 "Fuels Used for Any Use"

  7. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    8 Fuels Used and End Uses in Homes in Northeast Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"Northeast Census Region" ,,,"New England Census Division",,,"Middle Atlantic Census Division" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,"Total New England",,,"Total Middle Atlantic" ,,"Total Northeast",,,"CT, ME, NH, RI, VT" "Fuels Used and End

  8. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    2 Structural and Geographic Characteristics of U.S. Homes, by Owner/Renter Status, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,,,"Housing Unit Type" ,,,,"Single-Family Units",,,,"Apartments in Buildings With" ,,,,"Detached",,"Attached",,"2 to 4 Units",,"5 or More Units",,"Mobile Homes" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)" "Structural and Geographic

  9. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    4 Structural and Geographic Characteristics of U.S. Homes, by Number of Household Members, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"Number of Household Members" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)" "Structural and Geographic Characteristics",,,,,,"5 or More Members" ,,"1 Member","2 Members","3 Members","4 Members" "Total Homes",113.6,31.3,35.8,18.1,15.7,12.7 "Census Region and Division"

  10. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    8 Structural and Geographic Characteristics of Homes in Northeast Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"Northeast Census Region" ,,,"New England Census Division",,,"Middle Atlantic Census Division" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,"Total New England",,,"Total Middle Atlantic" "Structural and Geographic Characteristics",,"Total Northeast",,,"CT, ME, NH, RI, VT"

  11. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    9 Structural and Geographic Characteristics of Homes in Midwest Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"Midwest Census Region" ,,,"East North Central Census Division",,,,,"West North Central Census Division" ,,,"Total East North Central",,,,,"Total West North Central" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)" "Structural and Geographic Characteristics",,"Total Midwest",,,,," IN,

  12. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    Appliances in U.S. Homes, by Housing Unit Type, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"Housing Unit Type" ,,"Single-Family Units",,"Apartments in Buildings With" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)" ,,,,,"5 or More Units","Mobile Homes" "Appliances",,"Detached","Attached","2 to 4 Units" "Total Homes",113.6,71.8,6.7,9,19.1,6.9 "Cooking Appliances" "Stoves (Units With

  13. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    9 Appliances in Homes in Midwest Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"Midwest Census Region" ,,,"East North Central Census Division",,,,,"West North Central Census Division" ,,,"Total East North Central",,,,,"Total West North Central" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)" ,,"Total Midwest",,,,," IN, OH",,,"IA, MN, ND, SD"

  14. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    6 Televisions in U.S. Homes, by Climate Region, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"Climate Region2" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)" ,,"Very Cold/","Mixed- Humid","Mixed-Dry/" "Televisions",,"Cold",,"Hot-Dry","Hot-Humid","Marine" "Total Homes",113.6,38.8,35.4,14.1,19.1,6.3 "Televisions" "Number of Televisions" 0,1.5,0.6,0.4,0.2,0.2,0.2

  15. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    HC4.9 Televisions in Homes in Midwest Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"Midwest Census Region" ,,,"East North Central Census Division",,,,,"West North Central Census Division" ,,,"Total East North Central",,,,,"Total West North Central" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)" ,,"Total Midwest",,,,," IN, OH",,,"IA, MN, ND, SD"

  16. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    4 Computers and Other Electronics in U.S. Homes, by Number of Household Members, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"Number of Household Members" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)" ,,,,,,"5 or More Members" "Computers and Other Electronics",,"1 Member","2 Members","3 Members","4 Members" "Total Homes",113.6,31.3,35.8,18.1,15.7,12.7 "Computers" "Number of Computers"

  17. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    8 Computers and Other Electronics in Homes in Northeast Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"Northeast Census Region" ,,,"New England Census Division",,,"Middle Atlantic Census Division" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,"Total New England",,,"Total Middle Atlantic" ,,"Total Northeast",,,"CT, ME, NH, RI, VT" "Computers and Other

  18. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    9 Computers and Other Electronics in Homes in Midwest Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"Midwest Census Region" ,,,"East North Central Census Division",,,,,"West North Central Census Division" ,,,"Total East North Central",,,,,"Total West North Central" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)" ,,"Total Midwest",,,,," IN, OH",,,"IA, MN, ND, SD" "Computers and Other

  19. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    Space Heating in U.S. Homes, by Housing Unit Type, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"Housing Unit Type" ,,"Single-Family Units",,"Apartments in Buildings With" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)" ,," Detached"," Attached"," 2 to 4 Units","5 or More Units","Mobile Homes" "Space Heating" "Total Homes",113.6,71.8,6.7,9,19.1,6.9 "Space Heating Equipment" "Use

  20. " Million Housing Units, Final"

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

    8 Space Heating in U.S. Homes in Northeast Region, Divisions, and States, 2009" " Million Housing Units, Final" ,,"Northeast Census Region" ,,,"New England Census Division",,,"Middle Atlantic Census Division" ,"Total U.S.1 (millions)",,"Total New England",,,"Total Middle Atlantic" ,,"Total Northeast",,,"CT, ME, NH, RI, VT" "Space