National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for resulting fuel consumption

  1. ,"Total Fuel Oil Consumption

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

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

  2. ,"Total Fuel Oil Consumption

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

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

  3. ,"Fuel Oil Consumption",,,"Fuel Oil Expenditures"

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

    4. Fuel Oil Consumption and Expenditure Intensities for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003" ,"Fuel Oil Consumption",,,"Fuel Oil Expenditures" ,"per Building (gallons)","per Square Foot...

  4. ,"Fuel Oil Consumption",,,"Fuel Oil Expenditures"

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

    2. Fuel Oil Consumption and Expenditure Intensities, 1999" ,"Fuel Oil Consumption",,,"Fuel Oil Expenditures" ,"per Building (gallons)","per Square Foot (gallons)","per Worker...

  5. Fuel Oil",,,"Fuel Oil Consumption",,"Fuel Oil Expenditures"

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

    1. Total Fuel Oil Consumption and Expenditures, 1999" ,"All Buildings Using Fuel Oil",,,"Fuel Oil Consumption",,"Fuel Oil Expenditures" ,"Number of Buildings (thousand)","Floorspac...

  6. ,"Total Fuel Oil Consumption (trillion Btu)",,,,,"Fuel Oil Energy...

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

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

  7. The Impact of Using Derived Fuel Consumption Maps to Predict...

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

    The Impact of Using Derived Fuel Consumption Maps to Predict Fuel Consumption The Impact of Using Derived Fuel Consumption Maps to Predict Fuel Consumption Poster presented at the...

  8. Using Fuel Oil",,,"Fuel Oil Consumption",,"Fuel Oil Expenditures...

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

    . Total Fuel Oil Consumption and Expenditures for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003" ,"All Buildings* Using Fuel Oil",,,"Fuel Oil Consumption",,"Fuel Oil Expenditures" ,"Number of Buildings...

  9. Using Fuel Oil",,,"Fuel Oil Consumption",,"Fuel Oil Expenditures...

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

    A. Total Fuel Oil Consumption and Expenditures for All Buildings, 2003" ,"All Buildings Using Fuel Oil",,,"Fuel Oil Consumption",,"Fuel Oil Expenditures" ,"Number of Buildings...

  10. Chapter 4. Fuel Economy, Consumption and Expenditures

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

    national concerns about dependence on foreign oil and the deleterious effect on the environment of fossil fuel combustion, residential vehicle fleet fuel consumption was...

  11. ,"Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","930...

  12. ,"Hawaii Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Hawaii Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","930...

  13. ,"Washington Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Washington Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","930...

  14. ,"Texas Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","930...

  15. ,"Texas Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","930...

  16. ,"Texas Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","930...

  17. Consumption

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

    3. Fuel Oil Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Region, 1999" ,"Total Fuel Oil Consumption (million gallons)",,,,"Total Floorspace of Buildings Using Fuel Oil...

  18. Fact #706: December 19, 2011 Vocational Vehicle Fuel Consumption...

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

    6: December 19, 2011 Vocational Vehicle Fuel Consumption Standards Fact 706: December 19, 2011 Vocational Vehicle Fuel Consumption Standards The National Highway Traffic Safety...

  19. Complex System Method to Assess Commercial Vehicle Fuel Consumption...

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

    Complex System Method to Assess Commercial Vehicle Fuel Consumption Complex System Method to Assess Commercial Vehicle Fuel Consumption Two case studies for commercial vehicle ...

  20. Impact of Driving Behavior on PHEV Fuel Consumption for Different...

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

    Driving Behavior on PHEV Fuel Consumption for Different Powertrain, Component Sizes and Control Impact of Driving Behavior on PHEV Fuel Consumption for Different Powertrain, ...

  1. Canada's Fuel Consumption Guide Website | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    URI: cleanenergysolutions.orgcontentcanadas-fuel-consumption-guide-websit Language: English Policies: Regulations Regulations: Fuel Efficiency Standards This website...

  2. ,"Total Fuel Oil Consumption (trillion Btu)",,,,,"Fuel Oil Energy...

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

    in this table do not include enclosed malls and strip malls. In the 1999 CBECS, total fuel oil consumption in malls was not statistically significant. (*)Value rounds to zero...

  3. Consumption

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

    5. Fuel Oil Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Region for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Fuel Oil Consumption (million gallons)",,,,"Total Floorspace of...

  4. Consumption

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

    A. Fuel Oil Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Region for All Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Fuel Oil Consumption (million gallons)",,,,"Total Floorspace of Buildings...

  5. Table 3.1 Fuel Consumption, 2010;

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

    1 Fuel Consumption, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Physical Units or Btu. Coke Net Residual Distillate Natural Gas(d) LPG and Coal and Breeze NAICS Total Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(c) (billion NGL(e) (million (million Other(f) Code(a) Subsector and Industry (trillion Btu) (million kWh) (million bbl) (million bbl) cu ft) (million bbl) short tons) short tons) (trillion Btu) Total United States 311 Food 1,158 75,407 2 4 563 1 8 * 99

  6. Table 3.2 Fuel Consumption, 2010;

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

    2 Fuel Consumption, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Trillion Btu. NAICS Net Residual Distillate LPG and Coke Code(a) Subsector and Industry Total Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(c) Natural Gas(d) NGL(e) Coal and Breeze Other(f) Total United States 311 Food 1,158 257 12 22 579 6 182 2 99 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 350 56 * 1 121 * 126 0 45 311221 Wet Corn Milling 214 25 * * 53 * 110 0 25 31131 Sugar Manufacturing 107 4 1 1 15 * 49 2 36

  7. Table 3.3 Fuel Consumption, 2010;

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

    3 Fuel Consumption, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Trillion Btu. Economic Net Residual Distillate LPG and Coke and Characteristic(a) Total Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(c) Natural Gas(d) NGL(e) Coal Breeze Other(f) Total United States Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 1,148 314 6 53 446 14 25 Q 291 20-49 1,018 297 13 22 381 18 97 5 185 50-99 1,095 305 7 13 440 6 130 9 186 100-249

  8. Fuel Consumption and Cost Benefits of DOE Vehicle Technologies...

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

    Cost Benefits of DOE Vehicle Technologies Program Fuel Consumption and Cost Benefits of DOE Vehicle Technologies Program 2012 DOE Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program and Vehicle...

  9. Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal...

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

    Buildings Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal Buildings and Major Renovations of Federal Buildings Document details Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy...

  10. HEAVY-DUTY TRUCK EMISSIONS AND FUEL CONSUMPTION SIMULATING REAL...

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

    HEAVY-DUTY TRUCK EMISSIONS AND FUEL CONSUMPTION SIMULATING REAL-WORLD DRIVING IN LABORATORY CONDITIONS HEAVY-DUTY TRUCK EMISSIONS AND FUEL CONSUMPTION SIMULATING REAL-WORLD DRIVING ...

  11. Fact #704: December 5, 2011 Fuel Consumption Standards for New...

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

    4: December 5, 2011 Fuel Consumption Standards for New Heavy Pickups and Vans Fact 704: December 5, 2011 Fuel Consumption Standards for New Heavy Pickups and Vans In September...

  12. Texas Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  13. Texas Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6...

  14. Texas Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  15. New York Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New York Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  16. New York Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million...

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New York Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6...

  17. Fuel Consumption and Cost Benefits of DOE Vehicle Technologies Program |

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

    Department of Energy Cost Benefits of DOE Vehicle Technologies Program Fuel Consumption and Cost Benefits of DOE Vehicle Technologies Program 2012 DOE Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program and Vehicle Technologies Program Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting PDF icon vss077_shidore_2012_o.pdf More Documents & Publications Well-to-Wheels Analysis of Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles Government Performance Result Act (GPRA) / Portfolio

  18. Table 3.3 Fuel Consumption, 2002

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

    3 Fuel Consumption, 2002;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Trillion Btu." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," " " "," ",," "," ",," "," ",," ","RSE"

  19. Consumption

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

    . Consumption and Gross Energy Intensity by Building Size for Sum of Major Fuels for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003" ,"Sum of Major Fuel Consumption (trillion Btu)",,,"Total Floorspace...

  20. Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal

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

    Buildings and Major Renovations of Federal Buildings | Department of Energy Buildings Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal Buildings and Major Renovations of Federal Buildings Document details Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal Buildings and Major Renovations of Federal Buildings in a Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. File fossilfuel.docx More Documents & Publications Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption

  1. Fact #706: December 19, 2011 Vocational Vehicle Fuel Consumption Standards

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

    | Department of Energy 6: December 19, 2011 Vocational Vehicle Fuel Consumption Standards Fact #706: December 19, 2011 Vocational Vehicle Fuel Consumption Standards The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration recently published final fuel consumption standards for heavy vehicles called "vocational" vehicles. A vocational vehicle is generally a single-unit work vehicle over 8,500 lbs gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) or a passenger vehicle over 10,000 lbs GVWR that is not a

  2. Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal...

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

    Buildings OIRA Comparison Document Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal Buildings and Major Renovations of Federal Buildings OIRA Comparison Document...

  3. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","930...

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

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","930...

  5. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (MMcf...

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",1998 ,"Release...

  6. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","930...

  7. Reducing Light Duty Vehicle Fuel Consumption and Greenhouse Gas...

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

    and Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The Combined Potential of Hybrid Technology and Behavioral Adaptation Title Reducing Light Duty Vehicle Fuel Consumption and Greenhouse Gas...

  8. Fact #705: December 12, 2011 Fuel Consumption Standards for Combinatio...

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

    mid, and high), gross vehicle weight rating (class 7 and 8), and types of tractor (day cab, sleeper cab). Combination Tractor Fuel Consumption Standards, Model Years (MY)...

  9. Reducing fuel consumption on the field, by continuously measuring...

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

    Impact of Real Field Diesel Quality Variability on Engine Emissions and Fuel Consumption Solutions for Onboard Optimisation On Board Fuel Quality Sensor BioDiesel Content On-board ...

  10. Table 4a. Total Fuel Oil Consumption per Effective Occupied Square...

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

    Table 4a. Total Fuel Oil Consumption per Effective Occupied Square Foot, 1992 Building Characteristics All Buildings Using Fuel Oil (thousand) Total Fuel Oil Consumption (trillion...

  11. Hydraulic HEV Fuel Consumption Potential | Department of Energy

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

    Hydraulic HEV Fuel Consumption Potential Hydraulic HEV Fuel Consumption Potential 2012 DOE Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program and Vehicle Technologies Program Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting PDF icon vss071_rousseau_2012_o.pdf More Documents & Publications Evaluation of Powertrain Options and Component Sizing for MD and HD Applications on Real World Drive Cycles Roadmap and Technical White Papers for 21st Century Truck Partnership Fuel Displacement & Cost Potential of CNG,

  12. Table 5.2 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2010;

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

    2 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2010; Level: National Data; Row: End Uses within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity; Unit: Trillion Btu. Distillate Fuel Oil Coal NAICS Net Residual and LPG and (excluding Coal Code(a) End Use Total Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(c) Natural Gas(d) NGL(e) Coke and Breeze) Other(f) Total United States 311 - 339 ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION 14,228 2,437 79 130 5,211 69 868 5,435 Indirect Uses-Boiler Fuel -- 27

  13. Table 5.4 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2010;

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

    4 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2010; Level: National Data; Row: End Uses within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Demand for Electricity; Unit: Trillion Btu. Distillate Fuel Oil Coal NAICS Net Demand Residual and LPG and (excluding Coal Code(a) End Use for Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(c) Natural Gas(d) NGL(e) Coke and Breeze) Total United States 311 - 339 ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION 2,886 79 130 5,211 69 868 Indirect Uses-Boiler Fuel 44 46 19

  14. Table 5.6 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2010;

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

    6 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: End Uses; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity; Unit: Trillion Btu. Distillate Fuel Oil Coal Net Residual and LPG and (excluding Coal End Use Total Electricity(a) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(b) Natural Gas(c) NGL(d) Coke and Breeze) Other(e) Total United States TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION 14,228 2,437 79 130 5,211 69 868 5,435 Indirect Uses-Boiler Fuel -- 27 46 19 2,134 10 572 -- Conventional Boiler Use -- 27 20 4 733

  15. Table 5.8 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2010;

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

    8 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: End Uses; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Demand for Electricity; Unit: Trillion Btu. Distillate Fuel Oil Coal Net Demand Residual and LPG and (excluding Coal End Use for Electricity(a) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(b) Natural Gas(c) NGL(d) Coke and Breeze) Total United States TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION 2,886 79 130 5,211 69 868 Indirect Uses-Boiler Fuel 44 46 19 2,134 10 572 Conventional Boiler Use 44 20 4 733 3 72 CHP

  16. South Dakota Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    South Dakota Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption South Dakota Natural Gas Consumption by End Use Plant Fuel Consumption of Natural Gas

  17. Fuel Consumption and NOx Trade-offs on a Port-Fuel-Injected SI...

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

    NOx Trade-offs on a Port-Fuel-Injected SI Gasoline Engine Equipped with a Lean-NOx Trap Fuel Consumption and NOx Trade-offs on a Port-Fuel-Injected SI Gasoline Engine Equipped with ...

  18. RECENT TRENDS IN EMERGING TRANSPORTATION FUELS AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    (Conference) | SciTech Connect RECENT TRENDS IN EMERGING TRANSPORTATION FUELS AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION Citation Details In-Document Search Title: RECENT TRENDS IN EMERGING TRANSPORTATION FUELS AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION Abundance of energy can be improved both by developing new sources of fuel and by improving efficiency of energy utilization, although we really need to pursue both paths to improve energy accessibility in the future. Currently, 2.7 billion people or 38% of the world s population

  19. Demonstrating Fuel Consumption and Emissions Reductions with Next

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

    Generation Model-Based Diesel Engine Control | Department of Energy Fuel Consumption and Emissions Reductions with Next Generation Model-Based Diesel Engine Control Demonstrating Fuel Consumption and Emissions Reductions with Next Generation Model-Based Diesel Engine Control Presents a next generation model-based engine controller that incorporates real-time fuel efficiency optimization and tested under fully transient engine and vehicle operating conditions. PDF icon deer11_atkinson.pdf

  20. Table 5.5 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2010;

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

    5 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: End Uses; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity; Unit: Physical Units or Btu. Distillate Coal Fuel Oil (excluding Coal Net Residual and Natural Gas(c) LPG and Coke and Breeze) Total Electricity(a) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(b) (billion NGL(d) (million Other(e) End Use (trillion Btu) (million kWh) (million bbl) (million bbl) cu ft) (million bbl) short tons) (trillion Btu) Total United States TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION

  1. Table 5.7 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2010;

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

    7 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: End Uses; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Demand for Electricity; Unit: Physical Units or Btu. Distillate Coal Fuel Oil (excluding Coal Net Demand Residual and Natural Gas(c) LPG and Coke and Breeze) for Electricity(a) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(b) (billion NGL(d) (million End Use (million kWh) (million bbl) (million bbl) cu ft) (million bbl) short tons) Total United States TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION 845,727 13 22 5,064 18

  2. Missouri Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption

  3. Nevada Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 0 0 1990's 0 53 30 21 16 13 11 9 9 8 2000's 7 7 6 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 2010's 4 3 4 3 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption

  4. Tennessee Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 6 3 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 148 145 150 142 128 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption

  5. Maryland Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Maryland Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1990's 1 0 0 1 1 1 3 3 1 1 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption

  6. RECENT TRENDS IN EMERGING TRANSPORTATION FUELS AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bunting, Bruce G

    2012-01-01

    Abundance of energy can be improved both by developing new sources of fuel and by improving efficiency of energy utilization, although we really need to pursue both paths to improve energy accessibility in the future. Currently, 2.7 billion people or 38% of the world s population do not have access to modern cooking fuel and depend on wood or dung and 1.4 billion people or 20% do not have access to electricity. It is estimated that correcting these deficiencies will require an investment of $36 billion dollars annually through 2030. In growing economies, energy use and economic growth are strongly linked, but energy use generally grows at a lower rate due to increased access to modern fuels and adaptation of modern, more efficient technology. Reducing environmental impacts of increased energy consumption such as global warming or regional emissions will require improved technology, renewable fuels, and CO2 reuse or sequestration. The increase in energy utilization will probably result in increased transportation fuel diversity as fuels are shaped by availability of local resources, world trade, and governmental, environmental, and economic policies. The purpose of this paper is to outline some of the recently emerging trends, but not to suggest winners. This paper will focus on liquid transportation fuels, which provide the highest energy density and best match with existing vehicles and infrastructure. Data is taken from a variety of US, European, and other sources without an attempt to normalize or combine the various data sources. Liquid transportation fuels can be derived from conventional hydrocarbon resources (crude oil), unconventional hydrocarbon resources (oil sands or oil shale), and biological feedstocks through a variety of biochemical or thermo chemical processes, or by converting natural gas or coal to liquids.

  7. Table 6.2 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2002

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

    2 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2002;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios;" " Unit: Varies." ,,,"Consumption" " ",,"Consumption","per Dollar"," " " ","Consumption","per Dollar","of Value","RSE" "Economic","per Employee","of Value

  8. Table E7.1. Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 1998

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

    1. Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 1998;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios;" " Unit: Varies." ,,,"Consumption" " ",,"Consumption","per Dollar"," " " ","Consumption","per Dollar","of Value","RSE" "Economic","per Employee","of Value

  9. Impact of Driving Behavior on PHEV Fuel Consumption for Different

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

    Powertrain, Component Sizes and Control | Department of Energy Driving Behavior on PHEV Fuel Consumption for Different Powertrain, Component Sizes and Control Impact of Driving Behavior on PHEV Fuel Consumption for Different Powertrain, Component Sizes and Control 2010 DOE Vehicle Technologies and Hydrogen Programs Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting, June 7-11, 2010 -- Washington D.C. PDF icon vss011_rousseau_2010_o.pdf More Documents & Publications PHEV Control Strategy

  10. Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal

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

    Buildings and Major Renovations of Federal Buildings OIRA Comparison Document | Department of Energy Buildings OIRA Comparison Document Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal Buildings and Major Renovations of Federal Buildings OIRA Comparison Document Document details the Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal Buildings and Major Renovations of Federal Buildings in an OIRA Comparison Document. File fossilfuel_compare2014.docx More

  11. Complex System Method to Assess Commercial Vehicle Fuel Consumption |

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

    Department of Energy Complex System Method to Assess Commercial Vehicle Fuel Consumption Complex System Method to Assess Commercial Vehicle Fuel Consumption Two case studies for commercial vehicle applications compare a baseline, contemporary vehicle with advanced, future options. PDF icon p-08_kasab.pdf More Documents & Publications Particle Number & Particulate Mass Emissions Measurements on a 'Euro VI' Heavy-duty Engine using the PMP Methodologies A High Temperature Direct Vehicle

  12. Tradeoff between Fuel Consumption and Emissions for PHEV's | Department of

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

    Energy between Fuel Consumption and Emissions for PHEV's Tradeoff between Fuel Consumption and Emissions for PHEV's 2010 DOE Vehicle Technologies and Hydrogen Programs Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting, June 7-11, 2010 -- Washington D.C. PDF icon vss012_shidore_2010_o.pdf More Documents & Publications PHEV Engine Control and Energy Management Strategy PHEV Engine Control and Energy Management Strategy Evaluation of Ethanol Blends for PHEVs using Simulation and

  13. Radio Frequency Diesel Particulate Filter Sensor Reduces Fuel Consumption,

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

    Wins R&D 100 Award | Department of Energy Radio Frequency Diesel Particulate Filter Sensor Reduces Fuel Consumption, Wins R&D 100 Award Radio Frequency Diesel Particulate Filter Sensor Reduces Fuel Consumption, Wins R&D 100 Award October 15, 2014 - 4:51pm Addthis Developed jointly by Corning, the FEV Group, Maguffin Microwave, Detroit Diesel, and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) in cooperation with the New York City Department of Sanitation, the Radio Frequency Diesel

  14. Demonstrating Fuel Consumption and Emissions Reductions with...

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

    Presents a next generation model-based engine controller that incorporates real-time fuel efficiency optimization and tested under fully transient engine and vehicle operating ...

  15. Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0 100 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 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: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered to Vehicle Fuel Consumers Maine Natural

  16. Vermont Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Vermont Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0 0 0 2000's 0 1 1 1 1 0 W 1 1 2010's 1 3 3 3 3 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered to Vehicle Fuel Consumers Vermont

  17. Nebraska Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 34 35 30 19 31 21 13 1990's 0 14 9 0 3 2 3 7 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: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Plant Fuel

  18. Vermont Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Vermont Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0 0 0 2000's 0 1 1 1 1 0 W 1 1 2010's 1 3 3 3 3 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered to Vehicle Fuel Consumers Vermont

  19. Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0 100 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 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: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered to Vehicle Fuel Consumers Maine Natural

  20. Fuel consumption of freight trains hauled by diesel electric locomotives

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Radford, R.W.

    1983-05-01

    The cost of railway diesel fuel has become an increasingly high proportion of railway operating expenses. The paper analyzes the generation and utilization of rail horsepower in freight train operations. The effects on fuel consumption of variations in several parameters including train consist, car weight, gradient, average speed, meet strategy, throttle control, locomotive axle arrangement, and train marshalling are examined. Estimates are made of the value, in terms of fuel cost, of weight reduction of freight cars and of selective train marshalling.

  1. Table 4b. Relative Standard Errors for Total Fuel Oil Consumption...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4b. Relative Standard Errors for Total Fuel Oil Consumption per Effective Occupied Square Foot, 1992 Building Characteristics All Buildings Using Fuel Oil (thousand) Total Fuel Oil...

  2. Table 5.1 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2010;

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

    5.1 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2010; Level: National Data; Row: End Uses within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity; Unit: Physical Units or Btu. Distillate Coal Fuel Oil (excluding Coal Net Residual and Natural Gas(d) LPG and Coke and Breeze) NAICS Total Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(c) (billion NGL(e) (million Other(f) Code(a) End Use (trillion Btu) (million kWh) (million bbl) (million bbl) cu ft) (million bbl) short tons) (trillion Btu) Total United States

  3. Table 5.3 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2010;

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

    3 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2010; Level: National Data; Row: End Uses within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Demand for Electricity; Unit: Physical Units or Btu. Distillate Coal Fuel Oil (excluding Coal Net Demand Residual and Natural Gas(d) LPG and Coke and Breeze) NAICS for Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(c) (billion NGL(e) (million Code(a) End Use (million kWh) (million bbl) (million bbl) cu ft) (million bbl) short tons) Total United States 311 - 339 ALL

  4. South Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) South Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (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 0 0 1990's 0 2 5 7 5 4 4 10 8 10 2000's 10 13 13 16 18 0 W 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: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered

  5. Montana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (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 0 0 1990's 0 2 2 4 6 8 13 40 31 38 2000's 43 53 54 66 74 4 2 1 1 1 2010's 1 0 1 1 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered to

  6. North Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) North Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (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 0 0 1990's 0 1 3 8 8 12 15 41 40 49 2000's 54 67 68 83 93 3 1 1 1 2010's 1 1 1 0 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered

  7. Arizona Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Arizona Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 7 7 6 5 6 5 35 1990's 71 45 41 49 61 57 58 51 46 35 2000's 36 40 58 18 25 23 23 20 20 17 2010's 19 17 12 4 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas

  8. Arkansas Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 982 966 7,077 4,709 6,270 6,646 7,646 1990's 637 188 268 352 467 468 451 508 405 405 2000's 441 653 890 504 490 433 509 404 470 489 2010's 529 423 622 797 871 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  9. Delaware Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (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 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 21 27 33 2000's 37 46 46 56 63 9 6 5 4 1 2010's 1 1 1 1 1 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered to

  10. Illinois Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 29 47 39 54 47 38 35 1990's 22 10 9 10 10 7 7 6 5 4 2000's 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 39 41 62 2010's 50 101 122 122 70 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  11. Montana Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 439 457 542 437 449 474 519 1990's 557 518 423 295 206 168 168 188 208 235 2000's 218 396 249 512 606 697 820 816 788 771 2010's 800 604 612 645 657 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  12. Montana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (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 0 0 1990's 0 2 2 4 6 8 13 40 31 38 2000's 43 53 54 66 74 4 2 1 1 1 2010's 1 0 1 1 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered to

  13. Nebraska Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 60 70 57 40 43 26 21 1990's 26 17 31 56 86 58 43 38 37 29 2000's 31 29 295 286 302 236 176 182 395 359 2010's 331 287 194 194 62 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  14. North Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) North Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (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 0 0 1990's 0 1 3 8 8 12 15 41 40 49 2000's 54 67 68 83 93 3 1 1 1 2010's 1 1 1 0 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered

  15. Ohio Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 50 63 71 69 96 88 87 1990's 14 14 16 20 36 32 37 39 40 42 2000's 43 40 37 17 18 12 8 5 0 0 2010's 0 0 127 202 468 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural

  16. Oregon Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Oregon Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 0 0 120 131 130 115 59 1990's 93 60 68 118 95 66 40 0 0 0 2000's 49 42 40 43 27 21 24 23 26 26 2010's 31 39 44 44 25 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  17. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 158 171 148 171 205 191 218 1990's 156 159 341 235 116 181 217 253 222 274 2000's 208 272 251 343 395 483 549 495 575 599 2010's 881 963 2,529 9,200 11,602 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  18. South Dakota Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) South Dakota Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 61 76 93 70 125 123 112 1990's 158 393 451 452 437 404 424 911 848 864 2000's 1,003 538 495 553 562 545 508 573 545 568 2010's 562 594 866 916 827 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  19. South Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) South Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (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 0 0 1990's 0 2 5 7 5 4 4 10 8 10 2000's 10 13 13 16 18 0 W 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: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered

  20. Tennessee Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 113 153 138 98 93 60 45 1990's 68 41 39 49 44 47 37 45 31 26 2000's 29 48 80 47 46 68 66 109 161 235 2010's 214 231 335 335 142 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  1. Washington Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Washington Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 440 326 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural

  2. Delaware Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (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 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 21 27 33 2000's 37 46 46 56 63 9 6 5 4 1 2010's 1 1 1 1 1 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered to

  3. Indiana Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 4 12 11 10 7 12 10 1990's 13 5 5 6 2 5 8 12 13 18 2000's 23 26 51 38 74 97 108 101 161 211 2010's 283 433 506 506 177 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  4. Kentucky Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kentucky Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 7,025 7,165 6,940 4,056 852 830 627 1990's 657 702 707 689 611 702 682 641 548 641 2000's 419 475 535 536 617 698 653 691 587 391 2010's 772 278 641 280 278 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  5. Nonresidential buildings energy consumption survey: 1979 consumption and expenditures. Part 2. Steam, fuel oil, LPG, and all fuels

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Patinkin, L.

    1983-12-01

    This report presents data on square footage and on total energy consumption and expenditures for commercial buildings in the contiguous United States. Also included are detailed consumption and expenditures tables for fuel oil or kerosene, liquid petroleum gas (LPG), and purchased steam. Commercial buildings include all nonresidential buildings with the exception of those where industrial activities occupy more of the total square footage than any other type of activity. 7 figures, 23 tables.

  6. Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2012...

  7. Table 4.1 Offsite-Produced Fuel Consumption, 2010;

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

    1 Offsite-Produced Fuel Consumption, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Physical Units or Btu. Coke Residual Distillate Natural Gas(d) LPG and Coal and Breeze NAICS Total Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(c) (billion NGL(e) (million (million Other(f) Code(a) Subsector and Industry (trillion Btu) (million kWh) (million bbl) (million bbl) cu ft) (million bbl) short tons) short tons) (trillion Btu) Total United States 311 Food 1,113 75,673 2 4

  8. Table 4.2 Offsite-Produced Fuel Consumption, 2010

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

    4.2 Offsite-Produced Fuel Consumption, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Trillion Btu. NAICS Residual Distillate LPG and Coke Code(a) Subsector and Industry Total Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(c) Natural Gas(d) NGL(e) Coal and Breeze Other(f) Total United States 311 Food 1,113 258 12 22 579 5 182 2 54 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 346 57 * 1 121 * 126 0 41 311221 Wet Corn Milling 214 26 * * 53 * 110 0 25 31131 Sugar Manufacturing 72 4 1

  9. Table 4.3 Offsite-Produced Fuel Consumption, 2010;

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

    3 Offsite-Produced Fuel Consumption, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Trillion Btu. Economic Residual Distillate Natural LPG and Coke and Characteristic(a) Total Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(c) Gas(d) NGL(e) Coal Breeze Other(f) Total United States Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 1,038 314 6 53 445 14 25 Q 181 20-49 918 296 11 19 381 10 97 5 97 50-99 1,018 308 7 13 440 5 130 6 110

  10. Reduction of Heavy-Duty Fuel Consumption and CO2 Generation ...

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

    Heavy-Duty Fuel Consumption and CO2 Generation -- What the Industry Does and What the Government Can Do Reduction of Heavy-Duty Fuel Consumption and CO2 Generation -- What the ...

  11. Alabama Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 3,600 4,154 4,227 4,139 5,314 5,021 4,277 1990's 6,171 4,907 8,391 8,912 9,381 10,468 10,492 7,020 7,650 9,954 2000's 10,410 9,593 9,521 11,470 11,809 11,291 12,045 11,345 11,136 10,460 2010's 10,163 10,367 12,389 12,456 10,055 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid

  12. Alabama Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 1,129 1,178 1,249 1,303 1,564 1,634 1,875 1990's 3,710 3,720 4,477 4,453 3,747 3,806 2,827 2,468 2,391 5,336 2000's 5,377 3,491 4,148 3,293 3,914 3,740 6,028 6,269 6,858 6,470 2010's 6,441 6,939 6,616 6,804 6,462 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  13. Alaska Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 96,603 109,333 62,341 71,104 112,404 151,280 189,702 1990's 166,155 187,106 197,975 202,199 200,809 253,695 255,500 230,578 242,271 224,355 2000's 226,659 229,206 241,469 255,701 237,530 259,829 218,153 227,374 211,878 219,161 2010's 211,918 208,531 214,335 219,190 219,451 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  14. Alaska Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 1,225 1,736 1,807 1,582 4,278 2,390 2,537 1990's 27,720 36,088 36,741 35,503 37,347 39,116 40,334 40,706 39,601 41,149 2000's 42,519 42,243 44,008 44,762 44,016 43,386 38,938 41,197 40,286 39,447 2010's 37,316 35,339 37,397 36,638 36,707 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld

  15. Arkansas Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 4,402 4,956 5,362 4,353 5,720 5,469 3,940 1990's 6,464 1,218 5,570 6,053 4,283 5,083 5,124 6,349 7,980 1,822 2000's 1,468 849 536 615 1,364 1,288 1,351 1,502 2,521 4,091 2010's 5,340 6,173 6,599 6,605 6,452 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  16. Illinois Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 4,844 4,379 4,198 3,944 3,378 24 17 1990's 109 132 98 106 101 90 75 80 84 83 2000's 73 60 66 58 63 56 45 45 48 41 2010's 4,559 4,917 4,896 4,917 288 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  17. Michigan Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Michigan Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 4,135 4,574 4,053 3,778 5,251 4,354 3,862 1990's 5,882 6,252 4,178 4,889 6,399 6,198 5,478 9,386 6,160 5,954 2000's 7,689 6,799 10,925 6,309 5,755 8,276 7,932 7,588 5,447 6,841 2010's 6,626 5,857 7,428 7,248 5,948 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  18. Michigan Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Michigan Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 3,995 4,136 4,142 3,831 4,365 3,896 4,141 1990's 3,212 3,343 3,096 3,282 3,367 3,337 3,011 2,674 3,073 2,912 2000's 2,455 2,587 2,445 2,798 2,419 2,318 2,363 2,076 1,982 1,686 2010's 1,684 1,303 1,174 1,071 1,152 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  19. Mississippi Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Mississippi Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 5,777 6,372 5,655 5,971 7,706 6,802 4,741 1990's 6,636 3,877 4,372 4,291 3,169 3,108 3,202 3,280 3,347 3,283 2000's 2,962 3,304 3,818 4,243 4,559 4,718 5,473 7,068 8,976 9,090 2010's 10,388 2,107 3,667 2,663 1,487 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure

  20. Mississippi Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Mississippi Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 8,582 9,158 8,521 1970's 7,893 5,840 9,153 6,152 5,357 7,894 4,836 4,979 5,421 8,645 1980's 4,428 4,028 7,236 6,632 7,202 6,296 6,562 8,091 7,100 5,021 1990's 7,257 4,585 4,945 4,829 3,632 3,507 3,584 3,652 3,710 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  1. Mississippi Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Mississippi Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 855 830 641 591 385 298 280 1990's 621 708 573 538 463 399 382 372 363 638 2000's 786 722 758 251 895 1,018 1,138 1,196 1,140 1,150 2010's 1,155 1,042 1,111 1,103 1,310 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  2. Montana Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 1,531 1,612 1,596 1,371 1,639 1,520 1,247 1990's 1,705 1,162 1,448 2,084 2,037 2,070 2,233 2,089 1,792 798 2000's 2,360 2,644 3,113 3,543 3,933 4,502 4,864 4,327 4,067 3,371 2010's 3,265 2,613 3,845 3,845 1,793 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  3. New Mexico Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 26,231 29,787 27,294 20,497 28,958 23,288 20,828 1990's 32,573 11,826 14,805 12,832 18,476 16,134 17,901 18,476 17,728 16,738 2000's 38,944 37,094 34,686 36,339 40,977 41,815 44,880 47,525 49,753 49,655 2010's 49,070 47,556 47,696 47,018 49,406 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  4. New Mexico Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 21,399 20,875 19,415 15,118 19,180 18,418 21,396 1990's 33,316 32,940 38,892 36,826 36,310 36,455 63,850 45,982 41,926 39,345 2000's 41,863 39,501 38,973 37,620 42,601 35,508 33,435 35,600 36,571 36,827 2010's 35,289 38,331 37,195 33,121 35,269 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  5. North Dakota Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) North Dakota Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 2,014 2,398 2,494 2,017 2,457 1,902 1,383 1990's 2,104 6,806 3,709 3,522 6,247 6,800 7,320 4,152 3,838 4,153 2000's 4,724 4,528 4,786 4,889 3,237 2,488 2,644 2,699 3,472 2,986 2010's 3,753 3,200 4,595 6,486 8,683 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure

  6. North Dakota Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) North Dakota Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 2,086 2,165 2,216 1,957 2,737 2,112 2,005 1990's 4,835 4,777 4,753 4,734 5,059 4,542 4,283 4,420 4,471 4,553 2000's 4,738 3,874 5,141 4,548 4,602 4,816 4,364 4,323 4,283 4,521 2010's 4,294 5,473 5,887 6,707 5,736 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure

  7. Ohio Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 4,327 5,678 5,371 5,174 5,706 4,781 3,789 1990's 5,115 1,462 1,434 1,346 1,296 1,251 1,193 1,162 1,085 1,035 2000's 986 983 972 936 894 833 855 872 840 879 2010's 773 781 836 1,079 4,247 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.

  8. Oklahoma Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 49,480 60,470 57,064 54,495 68,664 60,418 51,833 1990's 72,318 46,200 53,278 60,658 55,607 45,946 37,803 51,042 35,509 32,868 2000's 41,032 38,916 30,281 40,292 35,875 35,989 36,396 38,229 42,250 40,164 2010's 39,489 40,819 43,727 45,581 50,621 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  9. Oklahoma Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 29,750 31,237 31,121 29,705 35,751 40,508 38,392 1990's 39,249 42,166 39,700 39,211 35,432 34,900 35,236 30,370 26,034 25,055 2000's 25,934 28,266 25,525 26,276 27,818 27,380 28,435 28,213 27,161 24,089 2010's 23,238 24,938 27,809 32,119 36,231 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  10. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 3,385 5,065 4,427 4,544 5,594 4,792 4,549 1990's 5,875 3,343 3,040 3,910 3,136 2,888 3,082 2,022 1,484 3,675 2000's 5,111 5,469 6,154 4,156 4,277 4,341 5,855 5,112 6,801 11,753 2010's 19,805 46,784 79,783 115,630 112,847 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid

  11. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 2,270 1,530 1,924 1970's 2,251 2,419 2,847 2,725 1,649 1,760 3,043 3,210 2,134 2,889 1980's 1,320 1,580 3,278 3,543 5,236 4,575 4,715 5,799 4,983 4,767 1990's 6,031 3,502 3,381 4,145 3,252 3,069 3,299 2,275 1,706 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  12. Utah Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Utah Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 1,806 5,621 6,286 6,775 8,970 7,970 6,596 1990's 10,573 4,597 3,866 3,241 3,322 18,520 18,570 16,478 19,481 15,930 2000's 16,394 14,578 17,163 16,398 15,802 17,216 20,221 21,715 18,169 20,222 2010's 22,022 23,209 28,165 28,165 25,336 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to

  13. Utah Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Utah Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 2,732 2,754 2,715 6,514 8,701 8,919 9,615 1990's 9,146 9,141 8,745 9,285 9,951 8,492 8,549 8,141 7,985 7,880 2000's 8,276 5,436 4,534 4,481 3,370 3,914 3,739 2,779 2,206 1,573 2010's 1,616 3,063 3,031 5,996 4,782 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  14. Virginia Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 124 272 443 438 669 536 425 1990's 489 327 653 1,120 1,102 1,296 1,183 1,330 1,243 1,519 2000's 1,820 1,641 3,000 2,108 3,307 2,749 3,809 3,143 4,406 6,040 2010's 6,121 7,206 8,408 8,408 7,252 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  15. California Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) California Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 14,569 17,498 17,575 15,868 18,066 14,370 11,065 1990's 14,754 96,442 84,220 80,210 63,251 62,160 63,297 69,386 68,370 61,810 2000's 60,757 49,766 41,878 39,452 37,337 37,865 57,234 56,936 64,689 63,127 2010's 64,931 44,379 51,154 49,846 54,288 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  16. California Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) California Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 100,497 93,074 82,996 1970's 92,119 75,241 68,738 72,574 71,686 84,843 78,967 79,425 69,624 65,787 1980's 62,824 53,655 22,275 22,231 25,213 25,274 22,973 26,846 22,778 19,586 1990's 22,712 104,251 92,228 87,306 69,639 66,447 67,817 74,182 72,881 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  17. California Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) California Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 7,662 7,715 7,699 7,105 8,780 8,408 8,521 1990's 7,958 7,809 8,008 7,096 6,388 4,287 4,520 4,796 4,511 4,212 2000's 3,572 2,893 2,781 2,568 2,760 2,875 2,475 2,540 2,318 2,611 2010's 2,370 2,253 2,417 2,834 2,361 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  18. Colorado Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 4,943 5,500 5,586 4,991 6,380 6,081 5,630 1990's 8,888 14,802 8,936 12,969 11,865 11,570 12,598 17,150 18,874 23,695 2000's 23,790 26,907 27,708 32,886 34,178 35,866 38,088 39,347 44,231 64,873 2010's 66,083 78,800 76,462 71,105 74,402 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld

  19. Colorado Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 5,057 5,060 5,243 4,406 5,715 5,541 6,591 1990's 8,455 9,081 12,233 11,863 12,482 13,560 14,894 12,435 12,200 12,863 2000's 13,064 13,871 15,904 15,927 17,093 15,641 16,347 16,218 18,613 21,288 2010's 25,090 28,265 29,383 25,806 30,873 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld

  20. Florida Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 668 422 392 278 313 241 208 1990's 250 2,413 3,819 476 653 620 2,049 2,321 2,200 2,240 2000's 2,307 2,154 1,262 1,133 1,178 987 896 654 897 94 2010's 4,512 4,896 6,080 5,609 6,551 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

  1. Florida Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 7,852 7,425 6,782 5,878 7,250 7,034 8,734 1990's 1,466 1,338 1,315 1,241 167 145 125 113 129 147 2000's 157 127 124 112 102 286 796 671 83 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 272 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  2. Kansas Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 12,471 14,232 15,160 13,269 15,701 16,571 13,965 1990's 18,415 13,814 17,424 20,363 15,623 18,772 18,752 20,641 13,068 11,611 2000's 13,338 11,598 17,693 10,861 8,589 11,734 13,681 10,232 12,803 15,169 2010's 13,461 12,781 17,017 17,110 14,851 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  3. Kansas Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 25,430 25,873 27,297 25,616 28,804 29,357 29,665 1990's 22,499 30,800 26,312 36,294 28,988 28,510 30,444 26,205 20,921 19,321 2000's 16,664 10,928 11,723 9,706 6,460 8,100 7,541 5,439 2,331 2,126 2010's 2,102 2,246 2,268 2,189 1,983 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to

  4. Kentucky Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kentucky Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 1,336 1,873 2,155 2,279 2,402 2,112 1,718 1990's 2,492 1,730 2,105 2,573 2,162 1,945 1,744 1,816 1,777 1,615 2000's 2,075 1,980 3,442 2,278 2,044 2,879 3,524 2,676 3,914 4,862 2010's 5,626 5,925 6,095 6,095 4,388 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  5. Louisiana Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 153,850 179,291 153,777 141,098 178,271 150,519 121,991 1990's 175,439 111,793 134,088 147,888 140,571 133,825 144,486 156,387 131,595 111,203 2000's 130,550 37,811 34,285 51,254 48,308 45,543 49,124 61,368 52,941 56,656 2010's 59,336 80,983 54,463 57,549 58,034 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA =

  6. Louisiana Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 121,848 123,993 104,292 102,185 123,008 121,936 134,132 1990's 82,828 83,733 86,623 74,925 66,600 75,845 69,235 71,155 63,368 68,393 2000's 69,174 63,137 63,031 56,018 55,970 45,837 46,205 51,499 42,957 39,002 2010's 40,814 42,633 42,123 34,179 30,527 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not

  7. West Virginia Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) West Virginia Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 3,720 4,377 4,270 3,849 5,480 5,017 4,203 1990's 6,427 4,353 4,807 3,749 4,815 4,846 4,292 4,500 4,549 3,705 2000's 6,720 6,384 7,420 4,881 4,277 6,729 8,339 6,483 8,423 11,348 2010's 11,348 15,571 21,569 28,682 27,853 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid

  8. West Virginia Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) West Virginia Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 2,106 2,855 2,920 2,809 3,355 3,326 3,679 1990's 3,204 3,391 3,290 3,316 3,272 3,199 2,262 2,710 2,344 2,209 2000's 2,505 2,342 2,186 1,361 723 281 315 309 283 698 2010's 810 1,153 1,812 3,429 6,776 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  9. Wyoming Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 15,438 18,274 17,619 16,966 25,122 23,252 20,541 1990's 29,233 20,988 27,382 7,592 4,676 4,570 4,252 4,099 3,477 3,125 2000's 3,236 4,032 4,369 4,590 4,823 5,010 5,279 33,309 35,569 36,290 2010's 34,459 39,114 33,826 32,004 21,811 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to

  10. Wyoming Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 12,572 16,185 17,090 13,633 16,249 17,446 19,820 1990's 12,182 14,154 13,217 13,051 13,939 14,896 15,409 15,597 16,524 19,272 2000's 20,602 20,991 25,767 28,829 24,053 24,408 23,868 25,276 23,574 25,282 2010's 27,104 28,582 29,157 27,935 25,782 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  11. Fact #635: August 9, 2010 Fuel Consumption from Lawn and Garden Equipment |

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

    Department of Energy 5: August 9, 2010 Fuel Consumption from Lawn and Garden Equipment Fact #635: August 9, 2010 Fuel Consumption from Lawn and Garden Equipment Most lawn and garden equipment uses gasoline instead of diesel fuel. Mowing equipment consumes nearly half of all the fuel used by lawn and garden equipment. The fuel used in this equipment accounts for only 1.8% of total gasoline use. Fuel Consumption from Lawn and Garden Equipment, 2008 Bar graph showing the fuel consumption

  12. Estimate of Fuel Consumption and GHG Emission Impact on an Automated Mobility District: Preprint

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chen, Yuche; Young, Stanley; Gonder, Jeff; Qi, Xuewei

    2015-12-11

    This study estimates the range of fuel and emissions impact of an automated-vehicle (AV) based transit system that services campus-based developments, termed an automated mobility district (AMD). The study develops a framework to quantify the fuel consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emission impacts of a transit system comprised of AVs, taking into consideration average vehicle fleet composition, fuel consumption/GHG emission of vehicles within specific speed bins, and the average occupancy of passenger vehicles and transit vehicles. The framework is exercised using a previous mobility analysis of a personal rapid transit (PRT) system, a system which shares many attributes with envisioned AV-based transit systems. Total fuel consumption and GHG emissions with and without an AMD are estimated, providing a range of potential system impacts on sustainability. The results of a previous case study based of a proposed implementation of PRT on the Kansas State University (KSU) campus in Manhattan, Kansas, serves as the basis to estimate personal miles traveled supplanted by an AMD at varying levels of service. The results show that an AMD has the potential to reduce total system fuel consumption and GHG emissions, but the amount is largely dependent on operating and ridership assumptions. The study points to the need to better understand ride-sharing scenarios and calls for future research on sustainability benefits of an AMD system at both vehicle and system levels.

  13. Fuel Consumption and NOx Trade-offs on a Port-Fuel-Injected SI Gasoline

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

    Engine Equipped with a Lean-NOx Trap | Department of Energy NOx Trade-offs on a Port-Fuel-Injected SI Gasoline Engine Equipped with a Lean-NOx Trap Fuel Consumption and NOx Trade-offs on a Port-Fuel-Injected SI Gasoline Engine Equipped with a Lean-NOx Trap Lean-burn improves PFI fuel economy by ~3% relative to best stoichiometric VCT/EGR conditions, when used in combination with VCT & EGR. PDF icon deer09_lymburner.pdf More Documents & Publications Vehicle Technologies Office Merit

  14. Table 3.5 Selected Byproducts in Fuel Consumption, 2002

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

    5 Selected Byproducts in Fuel Consumption, 2002;" " Level: National Data and Regional Totals; " " Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Trillion Btu." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," ","Waste"," ",," " " "," "," ","Blast"," "," ","Pulping Liquor","

  15. Table 3.5 Selected Byproducts in Fuel Consumption, 2010;

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

    5 Selected Byproducts in Fuel Consumption, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Trillion Btu. Blast Pulping Liquor NAICS Furnace/Coke Petroleum or Wood Chips, Code(a) Subsector and Industry Total Oven Gases Waste Gas Coke Black Liquor Bark Total United States 311 Food 11 0 7 0 0 1 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 5 0 2 0 0 * 311221 Wet Corn Milling * 0 * 0 0 0 31131 Sugar Manufacturing * 0 * 0 0 * 3114 Fruit and Vegetable Preserving and Specialty

  16. Table 4.3 Offsite-Produced Fuel Consumption, 2002

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

    3 Offsite-Produced Fuel Consumption, 2002;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Trillion Btu." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," " " "," ",," "," ",," "," ",," ","RSE"

  17. Table E3.1. Fuel Consumption, 1998

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

    E3.1. Fuel Consumption, 1998;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Trillion Btu." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," " " "," ",," "," ",," "," ",," ","RSE"

  18. FUEL CONSUMPTION AND COST SAVINGS OF CLASS 8 HEAVY-DUTY TRUCKS POWERED BY NATURAL GAS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gao, Zhiming; LaClair, Tim J; Daw, C Stuart; Smith, David E

    2013-01-01

    We compare the fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions of natural gas and diesel heavy-duty (HD) class 8 trucks under consistent simulated drive cycle conditions. Our study included both conventional and hybrid HD trucks operating with either natural gas or diesel engines, and we compare the resulting simulated fuel efficiencies, fuel costs, and payback periods. While trucks powered by natural gas engines have lower fuel economy, their CO2 emissions and costs are lower than comparable diesel trucks. Both diesel and natural gas powered hybrid trucks have significantly improved fuel economy, reasonable cost savings and payback time, and lower CO2 emissions under city driving conditions. However, under freeway-dominant driving conditions, the overall benefits of hybridization are considerably less. Based on payback period alone, non-hybrid natural gas trucks appear to be the most economic option for both urban and freeway driving environments.

  19. Effect Of Platooning on Fuel Consumption of Class 8 Vehicles Over a Range of Speeds, Following Distances, and Mass

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lammert, M. P.; Duran, A.; Diez, J.; Burton, K.; Nicholson, A.

    2014-10-01

    This research project evaluates fuel consumption results of two Class 8 tractor-trailer combinations platooned together compared to their standalone fuel consumption. A series of ten modified SAE Type II J1321 fuel consumption track tests were performed to document fuel consumption of two platooned vehicles and a control vehicle at varying steady-state speeds, following distances, and gross vehicle weights (GVWs). The steady-state speeds ranged from 55 mph to 70 mph, the following distances ranged from a 20-ft following distance to a 75-ft following distance, and the GVWs were 65K lbs and 80K lbs. All tractors involved had U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) SmartWay-compliant aerodynamics packages installed, and the trailers were equipped with side skirts. Effects of vehicle speed, following distance, and GVW on fuel consumption were observed and analyzed. The platooning demonstration system used in this study consisted of radar systems, Dedicated Short-Range Communication (DSRC) vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communications, vehicle braking and torque control interface, cameras and driver displays. The lead tractor consistently demonstrated an improvement in average fuel consumption reduction as following distance decreased, with results showing 2.7% to 5.3% fuel savings at a GVW of 65k. The trailing vehicle achieved fuel consumption savings ranging from 2.8% to 9.7%; tests during which the engine cooling fan did not operate achieved savings of 8.4% to 9.7%. 'Team' fuel savings, considering the platooned vehicles as one, ranged from 3.7% to 6.4%, with the best combined result being for 55 mph, 30-ft following distance, and 65k GVW.

  20. Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2012 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2015 0 0 0 0 0 0 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: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas

  1. Montana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Montana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2012 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2015 0 0 0 0 0 0 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: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas

  2. Delaware Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Delaware Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2012 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2015 0 0 0 0 0 0 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: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas

  3. North Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2012 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2015 0 0 0 0 0 0 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: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered to Vehicle

  4. South Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2012 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2015 0 0 0 0 0 0 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: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered to Vehicle

  5. Vermont Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vermont Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2012 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2015 0 0 0 0 0 0 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: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas

  6. "Table A10. Total Consumption of LPG, Distillate Fuel Oil, and Residual Fuel"

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

    0. Total Consumption of LPG, Distillate Fuel Oil, and Residual Fuel" " Oil for Selected Purposes by Census Region and Economic Characteristics of the" " Establishment, 1991" " (Estimates in Barrels per Day)" ,,,," Inputs for Heat",,," Primary Consumption" " "," Primary Consumption for all Purposes",,," Power, and Generation of Electricity",,," for Nonfuel Purposes",,,"RSE" ,"

  7. "Table A2. Total Consumption of LPG, Distillate Fuel Oil, and Residual Fuel"

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

    . Total Consumption of LPG, Distillate Fuel Oil, and Residual Fuel" " Oil for Selected Purposes by Census Region, Industry Group, and Selected" " Industries, 1991" " (Estimates in Barrels per Day) " ,,,,," Input for Heat,",,," Primary" " ",," Consumption for All Purposes",,,"Power, and Generation of Electricity",,," Consumption for Nonfuel Purposes ",,,"RSE" "SIC",,"

  8. Federal Offshore--Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Consumption by End Use Plant Fuel Consumption of Natural Gas

  9. Enabling Clean Consumption of Low Btu and Reactive Fuels in Gas Turbines

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

    Fuel-Flexible, Low-Emissions Catalytic Combustor for Opportunity Fuels ADVANCED MANUFACTURING OFFICE Enabling Clean Combustion of Low-Btu and Reactive Fuels in Gas Turbines By enabling ultralow-emission, lean premixed combustion of a wide range of gaseous opportunity fuels, this unique, fuel- fexible catalytic combustor for gas turbines can reduce natural gas consumption in industry. Introduction Gas turbines are commonly used in industry for onsite power and heating needs because of their high

  10. The Potential for Increased Atmospheric CO2 Emissions and Accelerated Consumption of Deep Geologic CO2 Storage Resources Resulting from the Large-Scale Deployment of a CCS-Enabled Unconventional Fossil Fuels Industry in the U.S.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dooley, James J.; Dahowski, Robert T.; Davidson, Casie L.

    2009-11-02

    Desires to enhance the energy security of the United States have spurred significant interest in the development of abundant domestic heavy hydrocarbon resources including oil shale and coal to produce unconventional liquid fuels to supplement conventional oil supplies. However, the production processes for these unconventional fossil fuels create large quantities of carbon dioxide (CO2) and this remains one of the key arguments against such development. Carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) technologies could reduce these emissions and preliminary analysis of regional CO2 storage capacity in locations where such facilities might be sited within the U.S. indicates that there appears to be sufficient storage capacity, primarily in deep saline formations, to accommodate the CO2 from these industries. Nevertheless, even assuming wide-scale availability of cost-effective CO2 capture and geologic storage resources, the emergence of a domestic U.S. oil shale or coal-to-liquids (CTL) industry would be responsible for significant increases in CO2 emissions to the atmosphere. The authors present modeling results of two future hypothetical climate policy scenarios that indicate that the oil shale production facilities required to produce 3MMB/d from the Eocene Green River Formation of the western U.S. using an in situ retorting process would result in net emissions to the atmosphere of between 3000-7000 MtCO2, in addition to storing potentially 900-5000 MtCO2 in regional deep geologic formations via CCS in the period up to 2050. A similarly sized, but geographically more dispersed domestic CTL industry could result in 4000-5000 MtCO2 emitted to the atmosphere in addition to potentially 21,000-22,000 MtCO2 stored in regional deep geologic formations over the same period. While this analysis shows that there is likely adequate CO2 storage capacity in the regions where these technologies are likely to deploy, the reliance by these industries on large-scale CCS could result in an accelerated rate of utilization of the nations CO2 storage resource, leaving less high-quality storage capacity for other carbon-producing industries including electric power generation.

  11. Deriving In-Use PHEV Fuel Economy Predictions from Standardized Test Cycle Results: Preprint

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gonder, J.; Brooker, A.; Carlson, R.; Smart, J.

    2009-08-01

    Explores the issue of how to apply an adjustment method to raw plug-in hybrid vehicle dynamometer test results to better estimate PHEVs' in-use fuel and electricity consumption.

  12. Consumption

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

    . Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Climate Zonea for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,,,"Total Floorspace of...

  13. Consumption

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

    A. Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Climate Zonea for All Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,,,"Total Floorspace of...

  14. Consumption

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

    A. Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Building Size for All Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total Floorspace of...

  15. Consumption

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

    3. Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity, 1999" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total Floorspace of Buildings Using Electricity (million square...

  16. Consumption

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

    A. Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Division for All Buildings, 2003: Part 1" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total Floorspace...

  17. Consumption

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

    . Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Building Size for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total Floorspace of...

  18. Consumption

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

    . Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Division for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003: Part 1" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total...

  19. Consumption

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

    . Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Division for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003: Part 2" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total...

  20. Consumption

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

    9A. Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Division for All Buildings, 2003: Part 3" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total Floorspace...

  1. Consumption

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

    Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Region, 1999" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,,"Total Floorspace of Buildings Using Electricity...

  2. Consumption

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

    . Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Region for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,,"Total Floorspace of...

  3. Consumption

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

    A. Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Region for All Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,,"Total Floorspace of...

  4. Consumption

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

    . Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Year Constructed for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total Floorspace of...

  5. Consumption

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

    4. Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Year Constructed, 1999" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total Floorspace of Buildings Using...

  6. Consumption

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

    A. Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Division for All Buildings, 2003: Part 2" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total Floorspace...

  7. Consumption

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

    A. Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Year Constructed for All Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total Floorspace of...

  8. Consumption

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

    . Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Division for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003: Part 3" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total...

  9. Reduced Energy Consumption through the Development of Fuel-Flexible Gas Turbines

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

    Development of Fuel-Flexible Combustion Systems Utilizing Opportunity Fuels in Gas Turbines ADVANCED MANUFACTURING OFFICE Reduced Energy Consumption through the Development of Fuel-Flexible Gas Turbines Introduction Gas turbines-heat engines that use high-temperature and high-pressure gas as the combustible fuel-are used extensively throughout U.S. industry to power industrial processes. The majority of turbines are operated using natural gas because of its availability, low cost, and

  10. Optimization to reduce fuel consumption in charge depleting mode

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Roos, Bryan Nathaniel; Martini, Ryan D.

    2014-08-26

    A powertrain includes an internal combustion engine, a motor utilizing electrical energy from an energy storage device, and a plug-in connection. A Method for controlling the powertrain includes monitoring a fuel cut mode, ceasing a fuel flow to the engine based upon the fuel cut mode, and through a period of operation including acceleration of the powertrain, providing an entirety of propelling torque to the powertrain with the electrical energy from the energy storage device based upon the fuel cut mode.

  11. EIA Energy Efficiency-Table 1b. Fuel Consumption for Selected...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    b Page Last Modified: May 2010 Table 1b. End Uses of Fuel Consumption (Site Energy) for Selected Industries, 1998, 2002, and 2006 (Trillion Btu) MECS Survey Years NAICS Subsector...

  12. EIA Energy Efficiency-Table 2b. Primary Fuel Consumption for...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    b Page Last Modified: May 2010 Table 2b. End Uses of Fuel Consumption (Primary 1 Energy) for Selected Industries, 1998, 2002, and 2006 (Trillion Btu) MECS Survey Years NAICS...

  13. Fact #705: December 12, 2011 Fuel Consumption Standards for Combination Tractors

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration published a final rule setting fuel consumption standards for heavy trucks in September 2011. For tractor-trailers, the standards focus on the...

  14. Fact #861 February 23, 2015 Idle Fuel Consumption for Selected Gasoline and Diesel Vehicles

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Based on a worksheet developed by Argonne National Laboratory, the idle fuel consumption rate for selected gasoline and diesel vehicles with no load (no use of accessories such as air conditioners,...

  15. Short-Term Energy Outlook Model Documentation: Electricity Generation and Fuel Consumption Models

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

    Model Documentation: Electricity Generation and Fuel Consumption Models January 2014 Independent Statistics & Analysis www.eia.gov U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 U.S. Energy Information Administration | STEO Model Documentation: Electricity Generation and Fuel Consumption Models i This report was prepared by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the statistical and analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. By law, EIA's data, analyses, and forecasts

  16. HEAVY-DUTY TRUCK EMISSIONS AND FUEL CONSUMPTION SIMULATING REAL-WORLD

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

    DRIVING IN LABORATORY CONDITIONS | Department of Energy HEAVY-DUTY TRUCK EMISSIONS AND FUEL CONSUMPTION SIMULATING REAL-WORLD DRIVING IN LABORATORY CONDITIONS HEAVY-DUTY TRUCK EMISSIONS AND FUEL CONSUMPTION SIMULATING REAL-WORLD DRIVING IN LABORATORY CONDITIONS 2005 Diesel Engine Emissions Reduction (DEER) Conference Presentations and Posters PDF icon 2005_deer_erkkila.pdf More Documents & Publications Evaluating Exhaust Emission Performance of Urban Buses Using Transient Heavy-Duty

  17. Table 10.5 Estimated Number of Alternative-Fueled Vehicles in Use and Fuel Consumption, 1992-2010

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

    Estimated Number of Alternative-Fueled Vehicles in Use and Fuel Consumption, 1992-2010 Year Alternative and Replacement Fuels 1 Liquefied Petroleum Gases Compressed Natural Gas Liquefied Natural Gas Methanol, 85 Percent (M85) 3 Methanol, Neat (M100) 4 Ethanol, 85 Percent (E85) 3,5 Ethanol, 95 Percent (E95) 3 Elec- tricity 6 Hydro- gen Other Fuels 7 Subtotal Oxygenates 2 Bio- diesel 10 Total Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether 8 Ethanol in Gasohol 9 Total Alternative-Fueled Vehicles in Use 11

  18. 2014 Annual Merit Review Results Report - Fuels & Lubricants...

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

    Fuels & Lubricants Technologies 2014 Annual Merit Review Results Report - Fuels & Lubricants Technologies Merit review of DOE Vehicle Technologies research activities...

  19. Study of fuel consumption and cooling system in low heat rejection turbocharged diesel engines

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Taymaz, I.; Gur, M.; Cally, I.; Mimaroglu, A.

    1998-07-01

    In a conventional internal combustion engine, approximately one-third of total fuel input energy is converted to useful work. Since the working gas in a practical engine cycle is not exhausted at ambient temperature, a major part of the energy is lost with the exhaust gases. In addition another major part of energy input is rejected in the form of heat via the cooling system. If the energy normally rejected to the coolant could be recovered instead on the crankshaft as useful work, then a substantial improvement in fuel economy would result. At the same time, the cooling water, antifreeze, thermostat, radiator, water pump, cooling fan, and associated hoses and clamps could be eliminated. A new trend in the field of internal combustion engines is to insulate the heat transfer surfaces such as the combustion chamber, cylinder wall, cylinder head, piston and valves by ceramic insulating materials for the improvement of engine performance and elimination of cooling system. In this study, the effect of insulated heat transfer surfaces on direct injected and turbocharged diesel engine fuel consumption and cooling system were investigated. The research engine was a four-stroke, direct injected, six cylinder, turbocharged and intercooled diesel engine. This engine was tested at different speeds and loads conditions without coating. Then, combustion chamber surfaces, cylinder head, valves and piston crown faces was coated with ceramic materials. Ceramic layers were made of CaZrO{sub 3} and MgZrO{sub 3} and plasma coated onto base of the NiCrAl bond coat. The ceramic coated research engine was tested at the same operation conditions as the standard (without coating) engine. The results indicate a reduction in fuel consumption and heat losses to engine cooling system of the ceramic coated engine.

  20. Fact #704: December 5, 2011 Fuel Consumption Standards for New Heavy

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

    Pickups and Vans | Department of Energy 4: December 5, 2011 Fuel Consumption Standards for New Heavy Pickups and Vans Fact #704: December 5, 2011 Fuel Consumption Standards for New Heavy Pickups and Vans In September 2011 the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued the final rule to set standards regulating the fuel use of new vehicles heavier than 8,500 lbs. gross vehicle weight. Included in the new standards are pickup trucks over 8,500 lbs., cargo trucks over 8,500 lbs., and

  1. Drive Cycle Analysis, Measurement of Emissions and Fuel Consumption...

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

    ... Relative to the baseline school bus, the PHEV fuel savings in charge-depleting (CD) mode ... PHEV school bus would initially operate in CD mode for some distance, then in a ...

  2. Issues in International Energy Consumption Analysis: Chinese Transportation Fuel Demand

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2014-01-01

    Since the 1990s, China has experienced tremendous growth in its transportation sector. By the end of 2010, China's road infrastructure had emerged as the second-largest transportation system in the world after the United States. Passenger vehicle sales are dramatically increasing from a little more than half a million in 2000, to 3.7 million in 2005, to 13.8 million in 2010. This represents a twenty-fold increase from 2000 to 2010. The unprecedented motorization development in China led to a significant increase in oil demand, which requires China to import progressively more petroleum from other countries, with its share of petroleum imports exceeding 50% of total petroleum demand since 2009. In response to growing oil import dependency, the Chinese government is adopting a broad range of policies, including promotion of fuel-efficient vehicles, fuel conservation, increasing investments in oil resources around the world, and many others.

  3. ,"Montana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Montana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  4. ,"Nebraska Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Nebraska Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  5. ,"Nevada Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Nevada Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  6. ,"New Hampshire Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Hampshire Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  7. ,"New Jersey Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Jersey Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  8. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  9. ,"New York Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New York Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  10. ,"North Carolina Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","North Carolina Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  11. ,"North Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","North Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  12. ,"Ohio Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Ohio Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  13. ,"Oklahoma Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Oklahoma Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  14. ,"Oregon Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Oregon Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  15. ,"Pennsylvania Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Pennsylvania Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  16. ,"Rhode Island Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Rhode Island Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  17. ,"South Carolina Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","South Carolina Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  18. ,"South Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","South Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  19. ,"Tennessee Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Tennessee Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  20. ,"Texas Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  1. ,"Utah Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Utah Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  2. ,"Vermont Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Vermont Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  3. ,"Virginia Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Virginia Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  4. ,"Washington Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Washington Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  5. ,"West Virginia Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","West Virginia Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  6. ,"Wisconsin Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Wisconsin Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  7. ,"Wyoming Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Wyoming Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  8. Arizona Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Arizona Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 33 20 34 1970's 50 50 44 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's 0 222 7 7 7 6 5 6 5 35 1990's 71 45 41 49 61 57 58 51 46 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring

  9. Missouri Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 494 0 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas

  10. Nevada Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's 0 168 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 53 30 21 16 1 11 9 9 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas

  11. Oregon Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Oregon Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 32 30 37 30 30 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 120 131 130 115 59 1990's 93 60 68 118 95 66 40 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring

  12. Rhode Island Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Rhode Island Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural

  13. South Dakota Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) South Dakota Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's 0 0 63 61 76 93 70 125 123 112 1990's 158 393 451 452 437 404 424 911 848 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  14. Tennessee Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 355 753 986 1970's 1,265 1,524 1,150 1,263 1,087 387 537 509 516 616 1980's 0 0 78 113 153 138 98 93 60 45 1990's 74 44 39 49 44 47 37 45 31 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016

  15. Virginia Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 128 211 1970's 252 213 157 170 307 168 157 157 191 266 1980's 240 361 181 124 272 443 438 669 536 425 1990's 489 327 653 1,120 1,102 1,296 1,183 1,330 1,243 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

  16. ,"Alabama Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alabama Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  17. ,"Alaska Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alaska Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  18. ,"Arizona Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Arizona Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  19. ,"Arkansas Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Arkansas Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  20. ,"California Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  1. ,"Colorado Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Colorado Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  2. ,"Connecticut Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Connecticut Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  3. ,"Delaware Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Delaware Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  4. ,"Florida Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Florida Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  5. ,"Georgia Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Georgia Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  6. ,"Hawaii Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Hawaii Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  7. ,"Idaho Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Idaho Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  8. ,"Illinois Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Illinois Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  9. ,"Indiana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Indiana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  10. ,"Iowa Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Iowa Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  11. ,"Kansas Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kansas Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  12. ,"Kentucky Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kentucky Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  13. ,"Louisiana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  14. ,"Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  15. ,"Maryland Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Maryland Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  16. ,"Massachusetts Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Massachusetts Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  17. ,"Michigan Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Michigan Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  18. ,"Minnesota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Minnesota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  19. ,"Mississippi Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Mississippi Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  20. ,"Missouri Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Missouri Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  1. Delaware Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Lease and

  2. Idaho Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Idaho Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 38 5 6 22 4 1980's 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Lease and

  3. Indiana Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 5 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1980's 7 51 10 4 12 11 10 7 12 10 1990's 13 5 5 6 2 5 8 12 13 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  4. Maryland Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Maryland Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 257 310 381 1970's 319 451 67 474 392 277 415 342 889 2,488 1980's 0 0 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1990's 1 0 0 1 1 1 3 3 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  5. Complete Fuel Combustion for Diesel Engines Resulting in Greatly...

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

    Resulting in Greatly Reduced Emissions and Improved Fuel Efficiency An advanced engine design that is 15 percent more efficient than diesel, pollution free, and uses any fuel. ...

  6. Consumption

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

    (million square feet)",,,"Energy Intensity for Sum of Major Fuels (thousand Btu square foot)" ,"West North Central","South Atlantic","East South Central","West North...

  7. Consumption

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

    (million square feet)",,,,"Energy Intensity for Sum of Major Fuels (thousand Btu square foot)" ,"North- east","Mid- west","South","West","North- east","Mid-...

  8. Consumption

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

    (million square feet)",,,"Energy Intensity for Sum of Major Fuels (thousand Btu square foot)" ,"West South Central","Moun- tain","Pacific","West South Central","Moun-...

  9. Consumption

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

    (million square feet)",,,,"Energy Intensity for Sum of Major Fuels (thousand Btusquare foot)" ,"North- east","Mid- west","South","West","North- east","Mid-...

  10. Complete Fuel Combustion for Diesel Engines Resulting in Greatly Reduced

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

    Emissions and Improved Fuel Efficiency | Department of Energy Complete Fuel Combustion for Diesel Engines Resulting in Greatly Reduced Emissions and Improved Fuel Efficiency Complete Fuel Combustion for Diesel Engines Resulting in Greatly Reduced Emissions and Improved Fuel Efficiency An advanced engine design that is 15 percent more efficient than diesel, pollution free, and uses any fuel. PDF icon deer08_zajac.pdf More Documents & Publications Impact of Biodiesel Metals on the

  11. Consumption

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

    (million square feet)",,,"Energy Intensity for Sum of Major Fuels (thousand Btusquare foot)" ,"1959 or Before","1960 to 1989","1990 to 2003","1959 or Before","1960 to...

  12. Consumption

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

    (million square feet)",,,"Energy Intensity for Sum of Major Fuels (thousand Btusquare foot)" ,"1,001 to 10,000 Square Feet","10,001 to 100,000 Square Feet","Over 100,000...

  13. Consumption

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

    (million square feet)",,,"Energy Intensity for Sum of Major Fuels (thousand Btu square foot)" ,"New England","Middle Atlantic","East North Central","New England","Middle...

  14. Consumption

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

    (million square feet)",,,"Energy Intensity for Sum of Major Fuels (thousand Btu square foot)" ,"1,001 to 10,000 Square Feet","10,001 to 100,000 Square Feet","Over 100,000...

  15. Consumption

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

    (million square feet)",,,,,"Energy Intensity for Sum of Major Fuels (thousand Btu square foot)" ,"Zone 1","Zone 2","Zone 3","Zone 4","Zone 5","Zone 1","Zone 2","Zone 3","Zone...

  16. Consumption

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

    (million square feet)",,,"Energy Intensity for Sum of Major Fuels (thousand Btusquare foot)" ,"1959 or Before","1960 to 1989","1990 to 1999","1959 or Before","1960 to...

  17. Development of a Life Cycle Inventory of Water Consumption Associated with the Production of Transportation Fuels

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lampert, David J.; Cai, Hao; Wang, Zhichao; Keisman, Jennifer; Wu, May; Han, Jeongwoo; Dunn, Jennifer; Sullivan, John L.; Elgowainy, Amgad; Wang, Michael; Keisman, Jennifer

    2015-10-01

    The production of all forms of energy consumes water. To meet increased energy demands, it is essential to quantify the amount of water consumed in the production of different forms of energy. By analyzing the water consumed in different technologies, it is possible to identify areas for improvement in water conservation and reduce water stress in energy-producing regions. The transportation sector is a major consumer of energy in the United States. Because of the relationships between water and energy, the sustainability of transportation is tied to management of water resources. Assessment of water consumption throughout the life cycle of a fuel is necessary to understand its water resource implications. To perform a comparative life cycle assessment of transportation fuels, it is necessary first to develop an inventory of the water consumed in each process in each production supply chain. The Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation (GREET) model is an analytical tool that can used to estimate the full life-cycle environmental impacts of various transportation fuel pathways from wells to wheels. GREET is currently being expanded to include water consumption as a sustainability metric. The purpose of this report was to document data sources and methodologies to estimate water consumption factors (WCF) for the various transportation fuel pathways in GREET. WCFs reflect the quantity of freshwater directly consumed per unit production for various production processes in GREET. These factors do not include consumption of precipitation or low-quality water (e.g., seawater) and reflect only water that is consumed (i.e., not returned to the source from which it was withdrawn). The data in the report can be combined with GREET to compare the life cycle water consumption for different transportation fuels.

  18. 2014 Annual Merit Review Results Report - Fuels & Lubricants Technologies |

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

    Department of Energy Fuels & Lubricants Technologies 2014 Annual Merit Review Results Report - Fuels & Lubricants Technologies Merit review of DOE Vehicle Technologies research activities PDF icon 2014_amr_05.pdf More Documents & Publications 2011 Annual Merit Review Results Report - Fuels & Lubricants 2010 DOE EERE Vehicle Technologies Program Merit Review - Fuels Technologies 2011 Annual Merit Review Results Report - Fuels & Lubricants

  19. Quantitative Effects of Vehicle Parameters on Fuel Consumption for Heavy-Duty Vehicle

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wang, Lijuan; Kelly, Kenneth; Walkowicz, Kevin; Duran, Adam

    2015-10-16

    The National Renewable Energy Laboratory's (NREL's) Fleet Test and Evaluations team recently conducted chassis dynamometer tests of a class 8 conventional regional delivery truck over the Heavy Heavy-Duty Diesel Truck (HHDDT), West Virginia University City (WVU City), and Composite International Truck Local and Commuter Cycle (CILCC) drive cycles. A quantitative study was conducted by analyzing the impacts of various factors on fuel consumption (FC) and fuel economy (FE) by modeling and simulating the truck using NREL's Future Automotive Systems Technology Simulator (FASTSim). Factors used in this study included vehicle weight, and the coefficients of rolling resistance and aerodynamic drag. The simulation results from a single parametric study revealed that FC was approximately a linear function of the weight, coefficient of aerodynamic drag, and rolling resistance over various drive cycles. Among these parameters, the truck weight had the largest effect on FC. The study of the impact of two technologies on FE suggested that, depending on the circumstances, it may be more cost effective to reduce one parameter (such as coefficient of aerodynamic drag) to increase fuel economy, or it may be more beneficial to reduce another (such as the coefficient of rolling resistance). It also provided a convenient way to estimate FE by interpolating within the parameter values and extrapolating outside of them. The simulation results indicated that the FC could be reduced from 38.70 L/100 km, 50.72 L/100 km, and 38.42 L/100 km in the baseline truck to 26.78 L/100 km, 43.14 L/100 km and 29.84 L/100 km over the HHDDT, WVU City and CILCC drive cycles, respectively, when the U.S. Department of Energy's three targeted new technologies were applied simultaneously.

  20. Manufacturing Consumption of Energy 1994

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

    (MECS) > MECS 1994 Combined Consumption and Fuel Switching Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey 1994 (Combined Consumption and Fuel Switching) Manufacturing Energy Consumption...

  1. Evaluation of fuel consumption potential of medium and heavy duty vehicles through modeling and simulation.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Delorme, A.; Karbowski, D.; Sharer, P.; Energy Systems

    2010-03-31

    The main objective of this report is to provide quantitative data to support the Committee in its task of establishing a report to support rulemaking on medium- and heavy-duty fuel efficiency improvement. In particular, it is of paramount importance for the Committee to base or illustrate their conclusions on established models and actual state-of-the art data. The simulations studies presented in the report have been defined and requested by the members of the National Academy committee to provide quantitative inputs to support their recommendations. As such, various technologies and usage scenarios were considered for several applications. One of the objective is to provide the results along with their associated assumptions (both vehicle and drive cycles), information generally missing from public discussions on literature search. Finally, the advantages and limitations of using simulation will be summarized. The study addresses several of the committee tasks, including: (1) Discussion of the implication of metric selection; (2) Assessing the impact of existing technologies on fuel consumption through energy balance analysis (both steady-state and standard cycles) as well as real world drive cycles; and (3) Impact of future technologies, both individually and collectively.

  2. 2013 Annual Merit Review Results Report - Fuels & Lubricants | Department

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

    of Energy Fuels & Lubricants 2013 Annual Merit Review Results Report - Fuels & Lubricants Merit review of DOE Vehicle Technologies research activities PDF icon 2013_amr_05.pdf More Documents & Publications 2010 DOE EERE Vehicle Technologies Program Merit Review - Fuels Technologies 2011 Annual Merit Review Results Report - Fuels & Lubricants Vehicle Technologies Office: 2010 Fuel Technologies R&D Annual Progress Report

  3. Projections of motor vehicle growth, fuel consumption and CO{sub 2} emissions for the next thirty years in China.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    He, D.; Wang, M.

    2000-12-12

    Since the early 1990s, China's motor vehicles have entered a period of fast growth resultant from the rapid economic expansion. As the largest developing country, the fast growth of China's motor vehicles will have tremendous effects on the world's automotive and fuel market and on global CO{sub 2} emissions. In this study, we projected Chinese vehicle stocks for different vehicle types on the provincial level. First, we reviewed the historical data of China's vehicle growth in the past 10 years and the correlations between vehicle growth and economic growth in China. Second, we investigated historical vehicle growth trends in selected developed countries over the past 50 or so years. Third, we established a vehicle growth scenario based on the historical trends in several developed nations. Fourth, we estimated fuel economy, annual mileage and other vehicle usage parameters for Chinese vehicles. Finally, we projected vehicle stocks and estimated motor fuel use and CO{sub 2} emissions in each Chinese province from 2000 to 2030. Our results show that China will continue the rapid vehicle growth, increase gasoline and diesel consumption and increased CO{sub 2} emissions in the next 30 years. We estimated that by year 2030, Chinese motor vehicle fuel consumption and CO{sub 2} emissions could reach the current US levels.

  4. Fact #861 February 23, 2015 Idle Fuel Consumption for Selected...

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

    from a study by the American Trucking Associations; both of the medium heavy truck results were from a study published in the Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association. ...

  5. Experimental Results for SimFuels

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Buck, Edgar C.; Casella, Andrew M.; Skomurski, Frances N.; MacFarlan, Paul J.; Soderquist, Chuck Z.; Wittman, Richard S.; Mcnamara, Bruce K.

    2012-08-22

    Assessing the performance of Spent (or Used) Nuclear Fuel (UNF) in geological repository requires quantification of time-dependent phenomena that may influence its behavior on a time-scale up to millions of years. A high-level waste repository environment will be a dynamic redox system because of the time-dependent generation of radiolytic oxidants and reductants and the corrosion of Fe-bearing canister materials. One major difference between used fuel and natural analogues, including unirradiated UO2, is the intense radiolytic field. The radiation emitted by used fuel can produce radiolysis products in the presence of water vapor or a thin-film of water that may increase the waste form degradation rate and change radionuclide behavior. To study UNF, we have been working on producing synthetic UO2 ceramics, or SimFuels that can be used in testing and which will contain specific radionuclides or non-radioactive analogs so that we can test the impact of radiolysis on fuel corrosion without using actual spent fuel. Although, testing actual UNF would be ideal for understanding the long term behavior of UNF, it requires the use of hot cells and is extremely expensive. In this report, we discuss, factors influencing the preparation of SimFuels and the requirements for dopants to mimic the behavior of UNF. We have developed a reliable procedure for producing large grain UO2 at moderate temperatures. This process will be applied to a series of different formulations.

  6. Reduction of Heavy-Duty Fuel Consumption and CO2 Generation-- What the Industry Does and What the Government Can Do

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Smart regulations, funding for advanced technologies, and improvements to operations and infrastructure play important roles in reducing fuel consumption

  7. Alabama Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 162 152 150 1970's 214 476 1,070 1,329 1,301 1,968 2,714 5,444 3,371 21,454 1980's 9,990 5,804 5,037 4,729 5,332 5,476 5,442 6,878 6,655 6,152 1990's 9,881 8,627 12,868 13,365 0 14,274 13,319 9,488 10,041 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid

  8. Alaska Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 1,659 2,240 6,864 1970's 4,748 8,459 16,056 15,217 14,402 17,842 15,972 17,336 15,895 12,153 1980's 30,250 15,249 94,232 97,828 111,069 64,148 72,686 116,682 153,670 192,239 1990's 193,875 223,194 234,716 237,702 238,156 292,811 295,834 271,284 281,872 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable;

  9. Arkansas Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 10,267 4,027 6,268 1970's 9,184 6,433 4,740 3,000 4,246 4,200 4,049 4,032 3,760 7,661 1980's 1,949 2,549 5,096 5,384 5,922 12,439 9,062 11,990 12,115 11,586 1990's 7,101 1,406 5,838 6,405 4,750 5,551 5,575 6,857 8,385 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld

  10. Federal Offshore--Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Federal Offshore--Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0 2000's 0 114,017 109,277 98,372 90,025 78,139 102,242 115,528 102,389 103,976 2010's 108,490 101,217 93,985 95,207 93,855 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  11. Michigan Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Michigan Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 2,798 2,012 2,074 1970's 3,440 2,145 2,143 2,551 3,194 8,420 7,647 8,022 11,076 14,695 1980's 6,494 3,461 9,699 8,130 8,710 8,195 7,609 9,616 8,250 8,003 1990's 9,094 9,595 7,274 8,171 9,766 9,535 8,489 12,060 9,233 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld

  12. Montana Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 5,904 5,188 6,183 1970's 5,091 6,148 5,924 4,281 3,683 2,315 2,754 2,972 2,792 4,796 1980's 3,425 1,832 2,012 1,970 2,069 2,138 1,808 2,088 1,994 1,766 1990's 2,262 1,680 1,871 2,379 2,243 2,238 2,401 2,277 2,000 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to

  13. Nebraska Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 2,164 1,945 1,877 1970's 1,650 1,275 814 1,809 1,194 1,036 708 695 1,160 1,867 1980's 3,779 132 107 94 105 87 59 74 47 34 1990's 26 31 40 56 89 60 46 45 37 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  14. New Mexico Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 46,793 46,331 45,309 1970's 47,998 46,114 48,803 52,553 43,452 38,604 49,160 43,751 37,880 50,798 1980's 36,859 22,685 55,722 47,630 50,662 46,709 35,615 48,138 41,706 42,224 1990's 65,889 44,766 53,697 49,658 54,786 52,589 81,751 64,458 59,654 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  15. North Dakota Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) North Dakota Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 17,133 16,163 14,691 1970's 14,067 13,990 12,773 12,462 11,483 12,008 15,998 13,697 12,218 3,950 1980's 1,017 13,759 3,514 4,100 4,563 4,710 3,974 5,194 4,014 3,388 1990's 6,939 11,583 8,462 8,256 11,306 11,342 11,603 8,572 8,309 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA =

  16. Ohio Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 2,656 3,505 2,879 1970's 3,140 4,302 3,397 3,548 2,957 2,925 2,742 2,814 3,477 22,094 1980's 1,941 1,776 3,671 4,377 5,741 5,442 5,243 5,802 4,869 3,876 1990's 5,129 1,476 1,450 1,366 1,332 1,283 1,230 1,201 1,125 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to

  17. Oklahoma Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 65,167 84,259 103,361 1970's 98,417 101,126 98,784 80,233 80,780 79,728 84,025 77,631 82,046 128,475 1980's 59,934 56,785 91,465 79,230 91,707 88,185 84,200 104,415 100,926 90,225 1990's 111,567 88,366 92,978 99,869 91,039 80,846 73,039 81,412 61,543 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable;

  18. U.S. Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) U.S. Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (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 595,172 687,356 598,475 573,793 741,268 697,703 640,633 1990's 807,735 672,314 710,250 723,118 699,842 792,315 799,629 776,306 771,366 679,480 2000's 746,889 747,411 730,579 758,380 731,563 756,324 782,992 861,063 864,113 913,229 2010's 916,797 938,340 987,957 1,068,289 1,074,943 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  19. U.S. Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) U.S. Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (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 383,077 389,525 367,572 348,731 408,115 398,180 429,269 1990's 428,657 456,954 460,571 448,822 423,878 427,853 450,033 426,873 401,314 399,509 2000's 404,059 371,141 382,503 363,903 366,341 355,193 358,985 365,323 355,590 362,009 2010's 368,830 384,248 408,316 414,796 425,238 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  20. Utah Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Utah Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 1,956 1,503 2,113 1970's 633 2,115 1,978 2,435 4,193 7,240 9,150 7,585 8,325 14,123 1980's 7,594 511 5,965 4,538 8,375 9,001 13,289 17,671 16,889 16,211 1990's 19,719 13,738 12,611 12,526 13,273 27,012 27,119 24,619 27,466 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  1. Colorado Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 2,668 2,361 2,604 1970's 2,726 3,231 4,676 7,202 5,822 7,673 7,739 9,124 10,619 21,610 1980's 7,041 7,093 13,673 10,000 10,560 10,829 9,397 12,095 11,622 12,221 1990's 17,343 23,883 21,169 24,832 24,347 25,130 27,492 29,585 31,074 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available;

  2. Florida Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 210 201 176 1970's 234 294 1,782 3,027 2,700 6,304 6,306 4,890 5,314 7,628 1980's 8,284 9,035 10,603 8,520 7,847 7,174 6,156 7,563 7,275 8,942 1990's 1,716 3,751 5,134 1,717 820 765 2,174 2,434 2,329 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid

  3. Kansas Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 7,842 15,867 17,587 1970's 20,841 27,972 28,183 32,663 35,350 27,212 31,044 29,142 30,491 48,663 1980's 24,521 19,665 41,392 37,901 40,105 42,457 38,885 44,505 45,928 43,630 1990's 40,914 44,614 43,736 56,657 44,611 47,282 49,196 46,846 33,989 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not

  4. Kentucky Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kentucky Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 1,828 1,992 2,277 1970's 2,317 2,212 1,509 1,238 1,206 1,218 1,040 1,107 1,160 1,214 1980's 989 1,040 9,772 8,361 9,038 9,095 6,335 3,254 2,942 2,345 1990's 3,149 2,432 2,812 3,262 2,773 2,647 2,426 2,457 2,325 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to

  5. Louisiana Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 195,990 212,134 273,213 1970's 287,222 292,589 312,145 336,832 347,098 301,816 556,772 591,292 558,877 305,181 1980's 196,033 180,687 337,398 275,698 303,284 258,069 243,283 301,279 272,455 256,123 1990's 258,267 195,526 220,711 222,813 207,171 209,670 213,721 227,542 194,963 - = No Data

  6. West Virginia Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) West Virginia Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 2,052 2,276 0 1970's 2,551 3,043 3,808 2,160 1,909 1,791 1,490 1,527 1,233 1,218 1980's 2,482 2,515 6,426 5,826 7,232 7,190 6,658 8,835 8,343 7,882 1990's 9,631 7,744 8,097 7,065 8,087 8,045 6,554 7,210 6,893 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  7. Wyoming Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 15,722 17,271 19,964 1970's 19,625 20,348 22,402 21,151 14,302 15,102 16,726 16,601 20,363 31,081 1980's 17,763 17,527 26,559 28,010 34,459 34,709 30,599 41,371 40,698 40,361 1990's 41,415 35,142 40,599 20,643 18,615 19,466 19,661 19,696 20,001 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA =

  8. 2011 Annual Merit Review Results Report - Fuels & Lubricants | Department

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

    of Energy 2_amr_05.pdf More Documents & Publications 2011 Annual Merit Review Results Report - Fuels & Lubricants 2010 DOE EERE Vehicle Technologies Program Merit Review - Fuels Technologies

  9. 2011 Annual Merit Review Results Report - Fuels & Lubricants | Department

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

    of Energy 1_amr_05.pdf More Documents & Publications 2010 DOE EERE Vehicle Technologies Program Merit Review - Fuels Technologies 2011 Annual Merit Review Results Report - Fuels & Lubricants

  10. NP-MHTGR Fuel Development Program Results

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Maki, John Thomas; Petti, David Andrew; Hobbins, Richard Redfield; McCardell, Richard K.; Shaber, Eric Lee; Southworth, Finis Hio

    2002-10-01

    In August 1988, the Secretary of Energy announced a strategy to acquire New Production Reactor capacity for producing tritium. The strategy involved construction of a New Production Modular High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor (NP-MHTGR) where the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) was selected as the Management and Operations contractor for the project. Immediately after the announcement in August 1988, tritium target particle development began with the INEEL selected as the lead laboratory. Fuel particle development was initially not considered to be on a critical path for the project, therefore, the fuel development program was to run concurrently with the design effort of the NP-MHTGR.

  11. Fuel Cell Bus Evaluation Results (Presentation) | Department of Energy

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

    Evaluation Results (Presentation) Fuel Cell Bus Evaluation Results (Presentation) Presented at the Transportation Research Board (TRB) 87th Annual Meeting held January 13-17, 2008 in Washington, D.C. PDF icon 42665.pdf More Documents & Publications Technology Validation: Fuel Cell Bus Evaluations Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Transit Bus Evaluations: Joint Evaluation Plan for the U.S. Department of Energy and the Federal Transit Administration; Appendix VTA Prototype Fuel Cell Bus Evaluation:

  12. VTA Prototype Fuel Cell Bus Evaluation: Interim Results (Presentation) |

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

    Department of Energy VTA Prototype Fuel Cell Bus Evaluation: Interim Results (Presentation) VTA Prototype Fuel Cell Bus Evaluation: Interim Results (Presentation) Details hydrogen fuel cell buses being evaluated in service at AC Transit. Presented at the APTA Bus and Paratransit Conference in Anaheim, California, April 30 through May 3, 2006. PDF icon 40012.pdf More Documents & Publications Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority and San Mateo County Transit District -- Fuel Cell

  13. Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption and Expenditures 1992...

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

    Consumption and Expenditures Electricity Consumption Natural Gas Consumption Wood and Solar Energy Consumption Fuel Oil and District Heat Consumption Energy Consumption in...

  14. Modeling Heavy/Medium-Duty Fuel Consumption Based on Drive Cycle Properties

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wang, Lijuan; Duran, Adam; Gonder, Jeffrey; Kelly, Kenneth

    2015-10-13

    This paper presents multiple methods for predicting heavy/medium-duty vehicle fuel consumption based on driving cycle information. A polynomial model, a black box artificial neural net model, a polynomial neural network model, and a multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS) model were developed and verified using data collected from chassis testing performed on a parcel delivery diesel truck operating over the Heavy Heavy-Duty Diesel Truck (HHDDT), City Suburban Heavy Vehicle Cycle (CSHVC), New York Composite Cycle (NYCC), and hydraulic hybrid vehicle (HHV) drive cycles. Each model was trained using one of four drive cycles as a training cycle and the other three as testing cycles. By comparing the training and testing results, a representative training cycle was chosen and used to further tune each method. HHDDT as the training cycle gave the best predictive results, because HHDDT contains a variety of drive characteristics, such as high speed, acceleration, idling, and deceleration. Among the four model approaches, MARS gave the best predictive performance, with an average absolute percent error of -1.84% over the four chassis dynamometer drive cycles. To further evaluate the accuracy of the predictive models, the approaches were first applied to real-world data. MARS outperformed the other three approaches, providing an average absolute percent error of -2.2% of four real-world road segments. The MARS model performance was then compared to HHDDT, CSHVC, NYCC, and HHV drive cycles with the performance from Future Automotive System Technology Simulator (FASTSim). The results indicated that the MARS method achieved a comparative predictive performance with FASTSim.

  15. Fuel Cell Vehicle Learning Demonstration: Spring 2008 Results (Presentation)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wipke, K.; Sprik, S.; Kurtz, J.; Garbak, J.

    2008-04-02

    Presentation prepared for the 2008 National Hydrogen Association Conference that describes the spring 2008 results for DOE's Fuel Cell Vehicle Learning Demonstration.

  16. Drive Cycle Analysis, Measurement of Emissions and Fuel Consumption of a PHEV School Bus: Preprint

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

    Drive Cycle Analysis, Measurement of Emissions and Fuel Consumption of a PHEV School Bus Preprint Robb Barnitt and Jeff Gonder To be presented at the SAE 2011 World Congress Detroit, Michigan April 12-14, 2011 Conference Paper NREL/CP-5400-50251 April 2011 NOTICE The submitted manuscript has been offered by an employee of the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC (Alliance), a contractor of the US Government under Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308. Accordingly, the US Government and Alliance retain

  17. Table 3.6 Selected Wood and Wood-Related Products in Fuel Consumption, 2010;

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

    Table 3.6 Selected Wood and Wood-Related Products in Fuel Consumption, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Selected NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Trillion Btu. Wood Residues and Wood-Related Pulping Liquor Wood Byproducts and NAICS or Biomass Agricultural Harvested Directly from Mill Paper-Related Code(a) Subsector and Industry Black Liquor Total(b) Waste(c) from Trees(d) Processing(e) Refuse(f) Total United States 311 Food 0 44 43 * * 1 311221 Wet Corn Milling 0 1 1 0 0 0

  18. Table N5.1. Selected Byproducts in Fuel Consumption, 1998

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

    1. Selected Byproducts in Fuel Consumption, 1998;" " Level: National Data and Regional Totals; " " Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Trillion Btu." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," ","Waste"," ",," " " "," "," ","Blast"," "," ","Pulping Liquor","

  19. Connecticut Transit (CTTRANSIT) Fuel Cell Transit Bus: Preliminary Evaluation Results

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This report provides preliminary results from the evaluation of a protoptye fuel cell transit bus operating at Connecticut Transit in Hartford. Included are descriptions of the planned fuel cell bus demonstration and equipment, early results and agency experience are also provided.

  20. 2008 Annual Merit Review Results Summary - 10. Fuels Technologies |

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

    Department of Energy 0. Fuels Technologies 2008 Annual Merit Review Results Summary - 10. Fuels Technologies DOE Vehicle Technologies Annual Merit Review PDF icon 2008_merit_review_10.pdf More Documents & Publications 2008 Annual Merit Review Results Summary - 14. Vehicle Systems and Simulation 2008 Annual Merit Review Results Summary - 5. Advanced Power Electronics 2008 Annual Merit Review Results Summary - 13. Health Impacts

  1. Impact of Solar Control PVB Glass on Vehicle Interior Temperatures, Air-Conditioning Capacity, Fuel Consumption, and Vehicle Range

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rugh, J.; Chaney, L.; Venson, T.; Ramroth, L.; Rose, M.

    2013-04-01

    The objective of the study was to assess the impact of Saflex1 S-series Solar Control PVB (polyvinyl butyral) configurations on conventional vehicle fuel economy and electric vehicle (EV) range. The approach included outdoor vehicle thermal soak testing, RadTherm cool-down analysis, and vehicle simulations. Thermal soak tests were conducted at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's Vehicle Testing and Integration Facility in Golden, Colorado. The test results quantified interior temperature reductions and were used to generate initial conditions for the RadTherm cool-down analysis. The RadTherm model determined the potential reduction in air-conditioning (A/C) capacity, which was used to calculate the A/C load for the vehicle simulations. The vehicle simulation tool identified the potential reduction in fuel consumption or improvement in EV range between a baseline and modified configurations for the city and highway drive cycles. The thermal analysis determined a potential 4.0% reduction in A/C power for the Saflex Solar PVB solar control configuration. The reduction in A/C power improved the vehicle range of EVs and fuel economy of conventional vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles.

  2. Table 3.6 Selected Wood and Wood-Related Products in Fuel Consumption, 2002

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

    6 Selected Wood and Wood-Related Products in Fuel Consumption, 2002;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: Selected NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Trillion Btu." ,,"S e l e c t e d","W o o d","a n d","W o o d -","R e l a t e d","P r o d u c t s" ,,,,,"B i o m a s s" ,,,,,,"Wood Residues" ,,,,,,"and","Wood-Related" " ","

  3. Table N5.2. Selected Wood and Wood-Related Products in Fuel Consumption, 1998

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

    2. Selected Wood and Wood-Related Products in Fuel Consumption, 1998;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: Selected NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Trillion Btu." ,,"S e l e c t e d","W o o d","a n d","W o o d -","R e l a t e d","P r o d u c t s" ,,,,,"B i o m a s s" ,,,,,,"Wood Residues" ,,,,,,"and","Wood-Related" " ","

  4. Energy Information Administration - Commercial Energy Consumption...

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

    3A. Total Fuel Oil Consumption and Expenditures for All Buildings, 2003 All Buildings Using Fuel Oil Fuel Oil Consumption Fuel Oil Expenditures Number of Buildings (thousand)...

  5. Loss of spent fuel pool cooling PRA: Model and results

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Siu, N.; Khericha, S.; Conroy, S.; Beck, S.; Blackman, H.

    1996-09-01

    This letter report documents models for quantifying the likelihood of loss of spent fuel pool cooling; models for identifying post-boiling scenarios that lead to core damage; qualitative and quantitative results generated for a selected plant that account for plant design and operational practices; a comparison of these results and those generated from earlier studies; and a review of available data on spent fuel pool accidents. The results of this study show that for a representative two-unit boiling water reactor, the annual probability of spent fuel pool boiling is 5 {times} 10{sup {minus}5} and the annual probability of flooding associated with loss of spent fuel pool cooling scenarios is 1 {times} 10{sup {minus}3}. Qualitative arguments are provided to show that the likelihood of core damage due to spent fuel pool boiling accidents is low for most US commercial nuclear power plants. It is also shown that, depending on the design characteristics of a given plant, the likelihood of either: (a) core damage due to spent fuel pool-associated flooding, or (b) spent fuel damage due to pool dryout, may not be negligible.

  6. Manufacturing Consumption of Energy 1991--Combined Consumption...

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

    call 202-586-8800 for help. Return to Energy Information Administration Home Page. Home > Energy Users > Manufacturing > Consumption and Fuel Switching Manufacturing Consumption of...

  7. Effects of Village Power Quality on Fuel Consumption and Operating Expenses

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Richard Wies; Ron Johnson

    2008-12-31

    Alaska's rural village electric utilities are isolated from the Alaska railbelt electrical grid intertie and from each other. Different strategies have been developed for providing power to meet demand in each of these rural communities. Many of these communities rely on diesel electric generators (DEGs) for power. Some villages have also installed renewable power sources and automated generation systems for controlling the DEGs and other sources of power. For example, Lime Village has installed a diesel battery photovoltaic hybrid system, Kotzebue and Wales have wind-diesel hybrid systems, and McGrath has installed a highly automated system for controlling diesel generators. Poor power quality and diesel engine efficiency in village power systems increases the cost of meeting the load. Power quality problems may consist of poor power factor (PF) or waveform disturbances, while diesel engine efficiency depends primarily on loading, the fuel type, the engine temperature, and the use of waste heat for nearby buildings. These costs take the form of increased fuel use, increased generator maintenance, and decreased reliability. With the cost of bulk fuel in some villages approaching $1.32/liter ($5.00/gallon) a modest 5% decrease in fuel use can result in substantial savings with short payback periods depending on the village's load profile and the cost of corrective measures. This project over its five year history has investigated approaches to improving power quality and implementing fuel savings measures through the use of performance assessment software tools developed in MATLAB{reg_sign} Simulink{reg_sign} and the implementation of remote monitoring, automated generation control, and the addition of renewable energy sources in select villages. The results have shown how many of these communities would benefit from the use of automated generation control by implementing a simple economic dispatch scheme and the integration of renewable energy sources such as wind generation.

  8. Drive Cycle Analysis, Measurement of Emissions and Fuel Consumption of a PHEV School Bus: Preprint

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barnitt, R.; Gonder, J.

    2011-04-01

    The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) collected and analyzed real-world school bus drive cycle data and selected similar standard drive cycles for testing on a chassis dynamometer. NREL tested a first-generation plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) school bus equipped with a 6.4L engine and an Enova PHEV drive system comprising a 25-kW/80 kW (continuous/peak) motor and a 370-volt lithium ion battery pack. A Bluebird 7.2L conventional school bus was also tested. Both vehicles were tested over three different drive cycles to capture a range of driving activity. PHEV fuel savings in charge-depleting (CD) mode ranged from slightly more than 30% to a little over 50%. However, the larger fuel savings lasted over a shorter driving distance, as the fully charged PHEV school bus would initially operate in CD mode for some distance, then in a transitional mode, and finally in a charge-sustaining (CS) mode for continued driving. The test results indicate that a PHEV school bus can achieve significant fuel savings during CD operation relative to a conventional bus. In CS mode, the tested bus showed small fuel savings and somewhat higher nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions than the baseline comparison bus.

  9. Computer usage and national energy consumption: Results from a field-metering study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Desroches, Louis-Benoit; Fuchs, Heidi; Greenblatt, Jeffery; Pratt, Stacy; Willem, Henry; Claybaugh, Erin; Beraki, Bereket; Nagaraju, Mythri; Price, Sarah; Young, Scott

    2014-12-01

    The electricity consumption of miscellaneous electronic loads (MELs) in the home has grown in recent years, and is expected to continue rising. Consumer electronics, in particular, are characterized by swift technological innovation, with varying impacts on energy use. Desktop and laptop computers make up a significant share of MELs electricity consumption, but their national energy use is difficult to estimate, given uncertainties around shifting user behavior. This report analyzes usage data from 64 computers (45 desktop, 11 laptop, and 8 unknown) collected in 2012 as part of a larger field monitoring effort of 880 households in the San Francisco Bay Area, and compares our results to recent values from the literature. We find that desktop computers are used for an average of 7.3 hours per day (median = 4.2 h/d), while laptops are used for a mean 4.8 hours per day (median = 2.1 h/d). The results for laptops are likely underestimated since they can be charged in other, unmetered outlets. Average unit annual energy consumption (AEC) for desktops is estimated to be 194 kWh/yr (median = 125 kWh/yr), and for laptops 75 kWh/yr (median = 31 kWh/yr). We estimate national annual energy consumption for desktop computers to be 20 TWh. National annual energy use for laptops is estimated to be 11 TWh, markedly higher than previous estimates, likely reflective of laptops drawing more power in On mode in addition to greater market penetration. This result for laptops, however, carries relatively higher uncertainty compared to desktops. Different study methodologies and definitions, changing usage patterns, and uncertainty about how consumers use computers must be considered when interpreting our results with respect to existing analyses. Finally, as energy consumption in On mode is predominant, we outline several energy savings opportunities: improved power management (defaulting to low-power modes after periods of inactivity as well as power scaling), matching the rated power of power supplies to computing needs, and improving the efficiency of individual components.

  10. Deriving In-Use PHEV Fuel Economy Predictions from Standardized Test Cycle Results

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    John Smart; Richard "Barney" Carlson; Jeff Gonder; Aaron Brooker

    2009-09-01

    Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) have potential to reduce or eliminate the U.S. dependence on foreign oil. Quantifying the amount of petroleum each uses, however, is challenging. To estimate in-use fuel economy for conventional vehicles the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) conducts chassis dynamometer tests on standard historic drive cycles and then adjusts the resulting raw fuel economy measurements downward. Various publications, such as the forthcoming update to the SAE J1711 recommended practice for PHEV fuel economy testing, address the challenges of applying standard test procedures to PHEVs. This paper explores the issue of how to apply an adjustment method to such raw PHEV dynamometer test results in order to more closely estimate the in-use fuel and electricity consumption characteristics of these vehicles. The paper discusses two possible adjustment methods, and evaluates one method by applying it to dynamometer data and comparing the result to in-use fleet data (on an aftermarket conversion PHEV). The paper will also present the methodologies used to collect the data needed for this comparison.

  11. Energy Information Administration - Commercial Energy Consumption...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4A. Fuel Oil Consumption and Expenditure Intensities for All Buildings, 2003 Fuel Oil Consumption Fuel Oil Expenditures per Building (gallons) per Square Foot (gallons) per...

  12. Indoor air pollution from portable kerosene-fired space heaters. [Effects of wick height and fuel consumption rate

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Traynor, G.W.; Apte, M.G.; Dillworth, J.F.; Grimsrud, D.T.

    1983-02-01

    Indoor use of unvented combustion appliances is known to cause an increase in indoor air pollutant levels. Laboratory tests were conducted on radiant and convective portable kerosene-fired space heaters to identify the pollutants they emit and to determine their emission rates. Laboratory-derived CO and NO/sub 2/ emission rates from unvented portable kerosense-fired space heaters are summarized and the effect of wick height and fuel consumption rate on CO and NO/sub 2/ emissions is given. Pollutant concentration profiles resulting from the use of kerosene heaters in a 27m/sup 3/ environmental chamber and a 240m/sup 3/ house are presented. When such heaters are operated for one hour in a 27m/sup 3/ chamber with 0.4 air changes per hour, the resultant CO/sub 2/ concentrations are well above the U.S. occupational standard, and NO/sub 2/ concentrations are well above California's short-term outdoor standard. Further data on parameters such as heater usage patterns and air exchange rates are needed to determine the actual pollutant exposure that kerosene heater users experience.

  13. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maps and Data

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Consumption and Efficiency All Categories Vehicles AFVs and HEVs Fuel Consumption and Efficiency Vehicle Market Driving Patterns Fuels & Infrastructure Fuel Trends Emissions Alternative Fueling Stations Idle Reduction Transportation Infrastructure Biofuels Production Laws & Incentives Regulated Fleets Federal Fleets State & Alt Fuel Providers Clean Cities Vehicles Petroleum Use Reduction Program OR Go Sort by: Category Most Recent Most Popular 15 results

  14. Residential Energy Consumption Survey:

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

    ... ...*...,,.<,<,...,,.,,.,,. 97 Table 6. Residential Fuel Oil and Kerosene Consumption and Expenditures April 1979 Through March 1980 Northeast...

  15. BC Transit Fuel Cell Bus Project Evaluation Results: Second Report

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    BC Transit Fuel Cell Bus Project Evaluation Results: Second Report L. Eudy and M. Post National Renewable Energy Laboratory Technical Report NREL/TP-5400-62317 September 2014 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications. Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 National

  16. A STUDY OF THE DISCREPANCY BETWEEN FEDERAL AND STATE MEASUREMENTS OF ON-HIGHWAY FUEL CONSUMPTION

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hwang, HL

    2003-08-11

    Annual highway fuel taxes are collected by the Treasury Department and placed in the Highway Trust Fund (HTF). There is, however, no direct connection between the taxes collected by the Treasury Department and the gallons of on-highway fuel use, which can lead to a discrepancy between these totals. This study was conducted to determine how much of a discrepancy exists between the total fuel usages estimated based on highway revenue funds as reported by the Treasury Department and the total fuel usages used in the apportionment of the HTF to the States. The analysis was conducted using data from Highway Statistics Tables MF-27 and FE-9 for the years 1991-2001. It was found that the overall discrepancy is relatively small, mostly within 5% difference. The amount of the discrepancy varies from year to year and varies among the three fuel types (gasoline, gasohol, special fuels). Several potential explanations for these discrepancies were identified, including issues on data, tax measurement, gallon measurement, HTF receipts, and timing. Data anomalies caused by outside forces, such as deferment of tax payments from one fiscal year to the next, can skew fuel tax data. Fuel tax evasion can lead to differences between actual fuel use and fuel taxes collected. Furthermore, differences in data collection and reporting among States can impact fuel use data. Refunds, credits, and transfers from the HTF can impact the total fuel tax receipt data. Timing issues, such as calendar year vs. fiscal year, can also cause some discrepancy between the two data sources.

  17. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maps and Data

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Fuels & Infrastructure All Categories Vehicles AFVs and HEVs Fuel Consumption and Efficiency Vehicle Market Driving Patterns Fuels & Infrastructure Fuel Trends Emissions Alternative Fueling Stations Idle Reduction Transportation Infrastructure Biofuels Production Laws & Incentives Regulated Fleets Federal Fleets State & Alt Fuel Providers Clean Cities Vehicles Petroleum Use Reduction Program OR Go Sort by: Category Most Recent Most Popular 54 results Fuel Trends -

  18. 2013 Annual Merit Review Results Report - Fuels & Lubricants

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

    1 5. Fuels & Lubricants Technologies The Fuel and Lubricant Technologies subprogram supports research and development (R&D) to provide vehicle users with cost- competitive options that enable high fuel economy (FE) with low emissions, and contribute to petroleum displacement. This is accomplished through exploitation of fuel-properties to enable advanced combustion, development of efficiency-improving lubricants compatible with new and existing engines and vehicles, and fit-for-service

  19. Fuel Cell Technologies Office: Plans, Implementation, and Results

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

    Chart & Contacts Quick Links Hydrogen Production Hydrogen Delivery Hydrogen Storage Fuel Cells Technology Validation Codes & Standards Education Systems Analysis Plans,...

  20. Fossil fuel potential of Turkey: A statistical evaluation of reserves, production, and consumption

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Korkmaz, S.; Kara-Gulbay, R.; Turan, M.

    2008-07-01

    Since Turkey is a developing country with tremendous economic growth, its energy demand is also getting increased. Of this energy, about 70% is supplied from fossil fuels and the remaining 30% is from renewable sources. Among the fossil fuels, 90% of oil, natural gas, and coal are imported, and only 10% is from domestic sources. All the lignite is supplied from domestic sources. The total share of renewable sources and lignite in the total energy production is 45%. In order for Turkey to have sufficient and reliable energy sources, first the renewable energy sources must be developed, and energy production from fossil fuels, except for lignite, must be minimized. Particularly, scarcity of fossil fuels and increasing oil prices have a strong effect on economic growth of the country.

  1. VTA Prototype Fuel Cell Bus Evaluation: Interim Results (Presentation...

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

    April 30 through May 3, 2006. PDF icon 40012.pdf More Documents & Publications Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority and San Mateo County Transit District -- Fuel...

  2. Analysis of Technology Options to Reduce the Fuel Consumption of Idling Trucks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    F. Stodolsky; L. Gaines; A. Vyas

    2000-06-01

    Long-haul trucks idling overnight consume more than 838 million gallons (20 million barrels) of fuel annually. Idling also emits pollutants. Truck drivers idle their engines primarily to (1) heat or cool the cab and/or sleeper, (2) keep the fuel warm in winter, and (3) keep the engine warm in the winter so that the engine is easier to start. Alternatives to overnight idling could save much of this fuel, reduce emissions, and cut operating costs. Several fuel-efficient alternatives to idling are available to provide heating and cooling: (1) direct-fired heater for cab/sleeper heating, with or without storage cooling; (2) auxiliary power units; and (3) truck stop electrification. Many of these technologies have drawbacks that limit market acceptance. Options that supply electricity are economically viable for trucks that are idled for 1,000-3,000 or more hours a year, while heater units could be used across the board. Payback times for fleets, which would receive quantity discounts on the prices, would be somewhat shorter.

  3. Energy Information Administration - Commercial Energy Consumption...

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

    5A. Fuel Oil Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Region for All Buildings, 2003 Total Fuel Oil Consumption (million gallons) Total Floorspace of Buildings Using...

  4. Energy Information Administration - Commercial Energy Consumption...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    A. Consumption and Gross Energy Intensity by Year Constructed for Sum of Major Fuels for All Buildings, 2003 Sum of Major Fuel Consumption (trillion Btu) Total Floorspace of...

  5. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maps and Data

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    State & Alt Fuel Providers All Categories Vehicles AFVs and HEVs Fuel Consumption and Efficiency Vehicle Market Driving Patterns Fuels & Infrastructure Fuel Trends Emissions Alternative Fueling Stations Idle Reduction Transportation Infrastructure Biofuels Production Laws & Incentives Regulated Fleets Federal Fleets State & Alt Fuel Providers Clean Cities Vehicles Petroleum Use Reduction Program OR Go Sort by: Category Most Recent Most Popular 6 results

  6. Reducing Fuel Consumption through Semi-Automated Platooning with Class 8 Tractor Trailer Combinations (Poster)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lammert, M.; Gonder, J.

    2014-07-01

    This poster describes the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's evaluation of the fuel savings potential of semi-automated truck platooning. Platooning involves reducing aerodynamic drag by grouping vehicles together and decreasing the distance between them through the use of electronic coupling, which allows multiple vehicles to accelerate or brake simultaneously. The NREL study addressed the need for data on American style line-haul sleeper cabs with modern aerodynamics and over a range of trucking speeds common in the United States.

  7. Emissions and Fuel Consumption Test Results from a Plug-In Hybrid...

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

    More Documents & Publications AVTA: Plug-In Hybrid Electric School Buses Medium and Heavy Duty Vehicle and Engine Testing Medium- and Heavy-Duty Electric Drive Vehicle Simulation ...

  8. Emissions and Fuel Consumption Test Results from a Plug-In Hybrid Electric School Bus

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    2010 DOE Vehicle Technologies and Hydrogen Programs Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting, June 7-11, 2010 -- Washington D.C.

  9. Table 8.5c Consumption of Combustible Fuels for Electricity Generation: Electric Power Sector by Plant Type, 1989-2011 (Breakout of Table 8.5b)

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

    5c Consumption of Combustible Fuels for Electricity Generation: Electric Power Sector by Plant Type, 1989-2011 (Breakout of Table 8.5b) Year Coal 1 Petroleum Natural Gas 6 Other Gases 7 Biomass Other 10 Distillate Fuel Oil 2 Residual Fuel Oil 3 Other Liquids 4 Petroleum Coke 5 Total 5 Wood 8 Waste 9 Short Tons Barrels Short Tons Barrels Thousand Cubic Feet Billion Btu Billion Btu Billion Btu Electricity-Only Plants 11<//td> 1989 767,378,330 25,574,094 241,960,194 3,460 517,385 270,124,673

  10. BC Transit Fuel Cell Bus Project: Evaluation Results Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eudy, L.; Post, M.

    2014-02-01

    This report evaluates a fuel cell electric bus demonstration led by British Columbia Transit (BC Transit) in Whistler, Canada. BC Transit is collaborating with the California Air Resources Board and the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory to evaluate the buses in revenue service. This evaluation report covers two years of revenue service data on the buses from April 2011 through March 2013.

  11. BC Transit Fuel Cell Bus Project Evaluation Results: Second Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eudy, L.; Post, M.

    2014-09-01

    Second report evaluating a fuel cell electric bus (FCEB) demonstration led by British Columbia Transit (BC Transit) in Whistler, Canada. BC Transit is collaborating with the California Air Resources Board and the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory to evaluate the buses in revenue service. NREL published its first report on the demonstration in February 2014. This report is an update to the previous report; it covers 3 full years of revenue service data on the buses from April 2011 through March 2014 and focuses on the final experiences and lessons learned.

  12. Overview of Vehicle Test and Analysis Results from NREL's A/C Fuel Use Reduction Research

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bharathan, D.; Chaney, L.; Farrington, R. B.; Lustbader, J.; Keyser, M.; Rugh, J. P.

    2007-06-01

    This paper summarizes results of air-conditioning fuel use reduction technologies and techniques for light-duty vehicles evaluated over the last 10 years.

  13. Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Fuel Cell Transit Buses: Evalluation Results Update

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This report is an update to the 2007 preliminary results report on hydrogen fuel cell and diesel buses operating at Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District.

  14. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maps and Data

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Clean Cities All Categories Vehicles AFVs and HEVs Fuel Consumption and Efficiency Vehicle Market Driving Patterns Fuels & Infrastructure Fuel Trends Emissions Alternative Fueling Stations Idle Reduction Transportation Infrastructure Biofuels Production Laws & Incentives Regulated Fleets Federal Fleets State & Alt Fuel Providers Clean Cities Vehicles Petroleum Use Reduction Program OR Go Sort by: Category Most Recent Most Popular 9 results Petroleum Use Reduction -

  15. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maps and Data

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Petroleum Use Reduction All Categories Vehicles AFVs and HEVs Fuel Consumption and Efficiency Vehicle Market Driving Patterns Fuels & Infrastructure Fuel Trends Emissions Alternative Fueling Stations Idle Reduction Transportation Infrastructure Biofuels Production Laws & Incentives Regulated Fleets Federal Fleets State & Alt Fuel Providers Clean Cities Vehicles Petroleum Use Reduction Program OR Go Sort by: Category Most Recent Most Popular 5 results

  16. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maps and Data

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Regulated Fleets All Categories Vehicles AFVs and HEVs Fuel Consumption and Efficiency Vehicle Market Driving Patterns Fuels & Infrastructure Fuel Trends Emissions Alternative Fueling Stations Idle Reduction Transportation Infrastructure Biofuels Production Laws & Incentives Regulated Fleets Federal Fleets State & Alt Fuel Providers Clean Cities Vehicles Petroleum Use Reduction Program OR Go Sort by: Category Most Recent Most Popular 7 results Federal Fleets -

  17. Zero Emission Bay Area (ZEBA) Fuel Cell Bus Demonstration Results. Fourth Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eudy, Leslie; Post, Matthew

    2015-07-02

    This report presents results of a demonstration of fuel cell electric buses (FCEB) operating in Oakland, California. Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit) leads the Zero Emission Bay Area (ZEBA) demonstration, which includes 12 advanced-design fuel cell buses and two hydrogen fueling stations. The FCEBs in service at AC Transit are 40-foot, low-floor buses built by Van Hool with a hybrid electric propulsion system that includes a US Hybrid fuel cell power system and EnerDel lithium-based energy storage system. The buses began revenue service in May 2010.

  18. SunLine Transit Agency Advanced Technology Fuel Cell Bus Evaluation: First Results Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eudy, L.; Chandler, K.

    2011-03-01

    This report describes operations at SunLine Transit Agency for their newest prototype fuel cell bus and five compressed natural gas (CNG) buses. In May 2010, SunLine began operating its sixth-generation hydrogen fueled bus, an Advanced Technology (AT) fuel cell bus that incorporates the latest design improvements to reduce weight and increase reliability and performance. The agency is collaborating with the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to evaluate the bus in revenue service. This report provides the early data results and implementation experience of the AT fuel cell bus since it was placed in service.

  19. SunLine Transit Agency Advanced Technology Fuel Cell Bus Evaluation: Fourth Results Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eudy, L.; Chandler, K.

    2013-01-01

    SunLine Transit Agency, which provides public transit services to the Coachella Valley area of California, has demonstrated hydrogen and fuel cell bus technologies for more than 10 years. In May 2010, SunLine began demonstrating the advanced technology (AT) fuel cell bus with a hybrid electric propulsion system, fuel cell power system, and lithium-based hybrid batteries. This report describes operations at SunLine for the AT fuel cell bus and five compressed natural gas buses. The U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) is working with SunLine to evaluate the bus in real-world service to document the results and help determine the progress toward technology readiness. NREL has previously published three reports documenting the operation of the fuel cell bus in service. This report provides a summary of the results with a focus on the bus operation from February 2012 through November 2012.

  20. Alternative fuel vehicles: The emerging emissions picture. Interim results, Summer 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-10-01

    In this pamphlet, program goal, description, vehicles/fuels tested, and selected emissions results are given for light-duty and heavy-duty vehicles. Other NREL R&D programs and publications are mentioned briefly.

  1. Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption and Expenditures 1992...

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

    1992 Consumption and Expenditures 1992 Consumption & Expenditures Overview Full Report Tables National estimates of electricity, natural gas, fuel oil, and district heat...

  2. Energy Information Administration - Commercial Energy Consumption...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    A. Consumption and Gross Energy Intensity by Climate Zonea for All Buildings, 2003 Sum of Major Fuel Consumption (trillion Btu) Total Floorspace of Buildings (million square feet)...

  3. Results from the DOE Advanced Gas Reactor Fuel Development and Qualification Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    David Petti

    2014-06-01

    Modular HTGR designs were developed to provide natural safety, which prevents core damage under all design basis accidents and presently envisioned severe accidents. The principle that guides their design concepts is to passively maintain core temperatures below fission product release thresholds under all accident scenarios. This level of fuel performance and fission product retention reduces the radioactive source term by many orders of magnitude and allows potential elimination of the need for evacuation and sheltering beyond a small exclusion area. This level, however, is predicated on exceptionally high fuel fabrication quality and performance under normal operation and accident conditions. Germany produced and demonstrated high quality fuel for their pebble bed HTGRs in the 1980s, but no U.S. manufactured fuel had exhibited equivalent performance prior to the Advanced Gas Reactor (AGR) Fuel Development and Qualification Program. The design goal of the modular HTGRs is to allow elimination of an exclusion zone and an emergency planning zone outside the plant boundary fence, typically interpreted as being about 400 meters from the reactor. To achieve this, the reactor design concepts require a level of fuel integrity that is better than that claimed for all prior US manufactured TRISO fuel, by a few orders of magnitude. The improved performance level is about a factor of three better than qualified for German TRISO fuel in the 1980s. At the start of the AGR program, without a reactor design concept selected, the AGR fuel program selected to qualify fuel to an operating envelope that would bound both pebble bed and prismatic options. This resulted in needing a fuel form that could survive at peak fuel temperatures of 1250C on a time-averaged basis and high burnups in the range of 150 to 200 GWd/MTHM (metric tons of heavy metal) or 16.4 to 21.8% fissions per initial metal atom (FIMA). Although Germany has demonstrated excellent performance of TRISO-coated UO2 particle fuel up to about 10% FIMA and 1150C, UO2 fuel is known to have limitations because of CO formation and kernel migration at the high burnups, power densities, temperatures, and temperature gradients that may be encountered in the prismatic modular HTGRs. With uranium oxycarbide (UCO) fuel, the kernel composition is engineered to prevent CO formation and kernel migration, which are key threats to fuel integrity at higher burnups, temperatures, and temperature gradients. Furthermore, the recent poor fuel performance of UO2 TRISO fuel pebbles measured in Chinese irradiation testing in Russia and in German pebbles irradiated at 1250C, and historic data on poorer fuel performance in safety testing of German pebbles that experienced burnups in excess of 10% FIMA [1] have each raised concern about the use of UO2 TRISO above 10% FIMA and 1150C and the degree of margin available in the fuel system. This continues to be an active area of study internationally.

  4. Initial operating results of coal-fired steam generators converted to 100% refuse-derived fuel

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barsin, J.A. ); Graika, P.K. ); Gonyeau, J.A. ); Bloomer, T.M. )

    1988-01-01

    The conversion of Northern States Power Company's (NSP) Red Wing and Wilmarth steam generators to fire refuse-derived fuel (RDF) is discussed. The use of the existing plant with the necessary modifications to the boilers has allowed NSP to effectively incinerate the fuel as required by Washington and Ramsey Counties. This paper covers the six-month start-up of Red Wing No. 1, commencing in May 1987, and the operating results since the plant went commercial in July 1987.

  5. Promising Fuel Cycle Options for R&D – Results, Insights, and Future Directions

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wigeland, Roald Arnold

    2015-05-01

    The Fuel Cycle Options (FCO) campaign in the U.S. DOE Fuel Cycle Research & Development Program conducted a detailed evaluation and screening of nuclear fuel cycles. The process for this study was described at the 2014 ICAPP meeting. This paper reports on detailed insights and questions from the results of the study. The comprehensive study identified continuous recycle in fast reactors as the most promising option, using either U/Pu or U/TRU recycle, and potentially in combination with thermal reactors, as reported at the ICAPP 2014 meeting. This paper describes the examination of the results in detail that indicated that there was essentially no difference in benefit between U/Pu and U/TRU recycle, prompting questions about the desirability of pursuing the more complex U/TRU approach given that the estimated greater challenges for development and deployment. The results will be reported from the current effort that further explores what, if any, benefits of TRU recycle (minor actinides in addition to plutonium recycle) may be in order to inform decisions on future R&D directions. The study also identified continuous recycle using thorium-based fuel cycles as potentially promising, in either fast or thermal systems, but with lesser benefit. Detailed examination of these results indicated that the lesser benefit was confined to only a few of the evaluation metrics, identifying the conditions under which thorium-based fuel cycles would be promising to pursue. For the most promising fuel cycles, the FCO is also conducting analyses on the potential transition to such fuel cycles to identify the issues, challenges, and the timing for critical decisions that would need to be made to avoid unnecessary delay in deployment, including investigation of issues such as the effects of a temporary lack of plutonium fuel resources or supporting infrastructure. These studies are placed in the context of an overall analysis approach designed to provide comprehensive information to the decision-making process.

  6. FTP Emissions Test Results from Flexible-Fuel Methanol Dodge Spirits and Ford Econoline Vans

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    FTP Emissions Test Results from Flexible-Fuel Methanol Dodge Spirits and Ford Econoline Vans Kenneth J. Kelly, Brent K. Bailey, and Timothy C. Coburn National Renewable Energy Laboratory Wendy Clark Automotive Testing Laboratories, Inc. Leslie Eudy ManTech Environmental Technology, Inc. Peter Lissiuk Environmental Research and Development Corp. Presented at Society for Automotive Engineers International Spring Fuels and Lubricants Meeting Dearborn, MI May 6-8, 1996 The work described here was

  7. Federal Test Procedure Emissions Test Results from Ethanol Variable-Fuel Vehicle Chevrolet Luminas

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Federal Test Procedure Emissions Test Results from Ethanol Variable-Fuel Vehicle Chevrolet Luminas Kenneth J. Kelly, Brent K. Bailey, and Timothy C. Coburn National Renewable Energy Laboratory Wendy Clark Automotive Testing Laboratories, Inc. Peter Lissiuk Environmental Research and Development Corp. Presented at Society for Automotive Engineers International Spring Fuels and Lubricants Meeting Dearborn, MI May 6-8, 1996 The work described here was wholly funded by the U.S. Department of Energy,

  8. Health Care Buildings: Consumption Tables

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

    Consumption Tables Sum of Major Fuel Consumption by Size and Type of Health Care Building Total (trillion Btu) per Building (million Btu) per Square Foot (thousand Btu) Dollars per...

  9. United States National Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicle and Infrastructure Learning Demonstration - Status and Results (Presentation)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wipke,K.; Sprik, S.; Kurtz, J.; Ramsden, T.; Garbak, J.

    2009-03-06

    This presentation provides status and results for the United States National Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicle Learning Demonstration, including project objectives, partners, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's role in the project and methodology, how to access complete results, and results of vehicle and infrastructure analysis.

  10. SunLine Transit Agency Advanced Technology Fuel Cell Bus Evaluation: Third Results Reports

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eudy, L.; Chandler, K.

    2012-05-01

    This report describes operations at SunLine Transit Agency for their newest prototype fuel cell bus and five compressed natural gas (CNG) buses. In May 2010, SunLine began operating its sixth-generation hydrogen fueled bus, an Advanced Technology (AT) fuel cell bus that incorporates the latest design improvements to reduce weight and increase reliability and performance. The agency is collaborating with the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to evaluate the bus in revenue service. NREL has previously published two reports documenting the operation of the fuel cell bus in service. This report provides a summary of the results with a focus on the bus operation from July 2011 through January 2012.

  11. SunLine Transit Agency Advanced Technology Fuel Cell Bus Evaluation: Second Results Report and Appendices

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eudy, L.; Chandler, K.

    2011-10-01

    This report describes operations at SunLine Transit Agency for their newest prototype fuel cell bus and five compressed natural gas (CNG) buses. In May 2010, SunLine began operating its sixth-generation hydrogen fueled bus, an Advanced Technology (AT) fuel cell bus that incorporates the latest design improvements to reduce weight and increase reliability and performance. The agency is collaborating with the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to evaluate the bus in revenue service. This is the second results report for the AT fuel cell bus since it was placed in service, and it focuses on the newest data analysis and lessons learned since the previous report. The appendices, referenced in the main report, provide the full background for the evaluation. They will be updated as new information is collected but will contain the original background material from the first report.

  12. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maps and Data

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Alternative Fueling Stations All Categories Vehicles AFVs and HEVs Fuel Consumption and Efficiency Vehicle Market Driving Patterns Fuels & Infrastructure Fuel Trends Emissions Alternative Fueling Stations Idle Reduction Transportation Infrastructure Biofuels Production Laws & Incentives Regulated Fleets Federal Fleets State & Alt Fuel Providers Clean Cities Vehicles Petroleum Use Reduction Program OR Go Sort by: Category Most Recent Most Popular 13 results Arra-thumb ARRA

  13. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maps and Data

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Biofuels Production All Categories Vehicles AFVs and HEVs Fuel Consumption and Efficiency Vehicle Market Driving Patterns Fuels & Infrastructure Fuel Trends Emissions Alternative Fueling Stations Idle Reduction Transportation Infrastructure Biofuels Production Laws & Incentives Regulated Fleets Federal Fleets State & Alt Fuel Providers Clean Cities Vehicles Petroleum Use Reduction Program OR Go Sort by: Category Most Recent Most Popular 16 results Biofuelsatlas BioFuels Atlas

  14. Energy Information Administration - Commercial Energy Consumption...

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

    A. Consumption and Gross Energy Intensity by Census Region for Sum of Major Fuels for All Buildings, 2003 Sum of Major Fuel Consumption (trillion Btu) Total Floorspace of Buildings...

  15. Manufacturing Consumption of Energy 1994

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

    Natural Gas to Residual Fuel Oil, by Industry Group and Selected Industries, 1994 369 Energy Information AdministrationManufacturing Consumption of Energy 1994 SIC Residual...

  16. Sensitivity Analysis of FEAST-Metal Fuel Performance Code: Initial Results

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Edelmann, Paul Guy; Williams, Brian J.; Unal, Cetin; Yacout, Abdellatif

    2012-06-27

    This memo documents the completion of the LANL milestone, M3FT-12LA0202041, describing methodologies and initial results using FEAST-Metal. The FEAST-Metal code calculations for this work are being conducted at LANL in support of on-going activities related to sensitivity analysis of fuel performance codes. The objective is to identify important macroscopic parameters of interest to modeling and simulation of metallic fuel performance. This report summarizes our preliminary results for the sensitivity analysis using 6 calibration datasets for metallic fuel developed at ANL for EBR-II experiments. Sensitivity ranking methodology was deployed to narrow down the selected parameters for the current study. There are approximately 84 calibration parameters in the FEAST-Metal code, of which 32 were ultimately used in Phase II of this study. Preliminary results of this sensitivity analysis led to the following ranking of FEAST models for future calibration and improvements: fuel conductivity, fission gas transport/release, fuel creep, and precipitation kinetics. More validation data is needed to validate calibrated parameter distributions for future uncertainty quantification studies with FEAST-Metal. Results of this study also served to point out some code deficiencies and possible errors, and these are being investigated in order to determine root causes and to improve upon the existing code models.

  17. 1999 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey Detailed Tables

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Consumption and Expenditures Tables Table C1. Total Energy Consumption by Major Fuel ............................................... 124 Table C2. Total Energy Expenditures by Major Fuel................................................ 130 Table C3. Consumption for Sum of Major Fuels ...................................................... 135 Table C4. Expenditures for Sum of Major Fuels....................................................... 140 Table C5. Consumption and Gross Energy Intensity by

  18. Results from Tight and Loose Coupled Multiphysics in Nuclear Fuels Performance Simulations using BISON

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    S. R. Novascone; B. W. Spencer; D. Andrs; R. L. Williamson; J. D. Hales; D. M. Perez

    2013-05-01

    The behavior of nuclear fuel in the reactor environment is affected by multiple physics, most notably heat conduction and solid mechanics, which can have a strong influence on each other. To provide credible solutions, a fuel performance simulation code must have the ability to obtain solutions for each of the physics, including coupling between them. Solution strategies for solving systems of coupled equations can be categorized as loosely-coupled, where the individual physics are solved separately, keeping the solutions for the other physics fixed at each iteration, or tightly coupled, where the nonlinear solver simultaneously drives down the residual for each physics, taking into account the coupling between the physics in each nonlinear iteration. In this paper, we compare the performance of loosely and tightly coupled solution algorithms for thermomechanical problems involving coupled thermal and mechanical contact, which is a primary source of interdependence between thermal and mechanical solutions in fuel performance models. The results indicate that loosely-coupled simulations require significantly more nonlinear iterations, and may lead to convergence trouble when the thermal conductivity of the gap is too small. We also apply the tightly coupled solution strategy to a nuclear fuel simulation of an experiment in a test reactor. Studying the results from these simulations indicates that perhaps convergence for either approach may be problem dependent, i.e., there may be problems for which a loose coupled approach converges, where tightly coupled wont converge and vice versa.

  19. Zero Emission Bay Area (ZEBA) Fuel Cell Bus Demonstration: Second Results Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eudy, L.; Chandler, K.

    2012-07-01

    This report presents results of a demonstration of 12 new fuel cell electric buses (FCEB) operating in Oakland, California. The 12 FCEBs operate as a part of the Zero Emission Bay Area (ZEBA) Demonstration, which also includes two new hydrogen fueling stations. This effort is the largest FCEB demonstration in the United States and involves five participating transit agencies. The ZEBA partners are collaborating with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and DOE's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to evaluate the buses in revenue service. The first results report was published in August 2011, describing operation of these new FCEBs from September 2010 through May 2011. New results in this report provide an update through April 2012.

  20. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maps and Data

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    AFVs and HEVs All Categories Vehicles AFVs and HEVs Fuel Consumption and Efficiency Vehicle Market Driving Patterns Fuels & Infrastructure Fuel Trends Emissions Alternative Fueling Stations Idle Reduction Transportation Infrastructure Biofuels Production Laws & Incentives Regulated Fleets Federal Fleets State & Alt Fuel Providers Clean Cities Vehicles Petroleum Use Reduction Program OR Go Sort by: Category Most Recent Most Popular 20 results Generated_thumb20140804-20533-1loi25i AFV

  1. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maps and Data

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Driving Patterns All Categories Vehicles AFVs and HEVs Fuel Consumption and Efficiency Vehicle Market Driving Patterns Fuels & Infrastructure Fuel Trends Emissions Alternative Fueling Stations Idle Reduction Transportation Infrastructure Biofuels Production Laws & Incentives Regulated Fleets Federal Fleets State & Alt Fuel Providers Clean Cities Vehicles Petroleum Use Reduction Program OR Go Sort by: Category Most Recent Most Popular 8 results Generated_thumb20150707-30390-mmwhbn

  2. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maps and Data

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Emissions All Categories Vehicles AFVs and HEVs Fuel Consumption and Efficiency Vehicle Market Driving Patterns Fuels & Infrastructure Fuel Trends Emissions Alternative Fueling Stations Idle Reduction Transportation Infrastructure Biofuels Production Laws & Incentives Regulated Fleets Federal Fleets State & Alt Fuel Providers Clean Cities Vehicles Petroleum Use Reduction Program OR Go Sort by: Category Most Recent Most Popular 5 results Generated_thumb20130810-31804-53z5da Carbon

  3. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maps and Data

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Federal Fleets All Categories Vehicles AFVs and HEVs Fuel Consumption and Efficiency Vehicle Market Driving Patterns Fuels & Infrastructure Fuel Trends Emissions Alternative Fueling Stations Idle Reduction Transportation Infrastructure Biofuels Production Laws & Incentives Regulated Fleets Federal Fleets State & Alt Fuel Providers Clean Cities Vehicles Petroleum Use Reduction Program OR Go Sort by: Category Most Recent Most Popular 1 result Generated_thumb20140804-6137-1paywcu AFV

  4. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maps and Data

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Trends All Categories Vehicles AFVs and HEVs Fuel Consumption and Efficiency Vehicle Market Driving Patterns Fuels & Infrastructure Fuel Trends Emissions Alternative Fueling Stations Idle Reduction Transportation Infrastructure Biofuels Production Laws & Incentives Regulated Fleets Federal Fleets State & Alt Fuel Providers Clean Cities Vehicles Petroleum Use Reduction Program OR Go Sort by: Category Most Recent Most Popular 13 results Generated_thumb20150812-20436-7eyqju Average

  5. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maps and Data

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Idle Reduction All Categories Vehicles AFVs and HEVs Fuel Consumption and Efficiency Vehicle Market Driving Patterns Fuels & Infrastructure Fuel Trends Emissions Alternative Fueling Stations Idle Reduction Transportation Infrastructure Biofuels Production Laws & Incentives Regulated Fleets Federal Fleets State & Alt Fuel Providers Clean Cities Vehicles Petroleum Use Reduction Program OR Go Sort by: Category Most Recent Most Popular 2 results Generated_thumb20150813-22546-19hiukh

  6. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maps and Data

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Laws & Incentives All Categories Vehicles AFVs and HEVs Fuel Consumption and Efficiency Vehicle Market Driving Patterns Fuels & Infrastructure Fuel Trends Emissions Alternative Fueling Stations Idle Reduction Transportation Infrastructure Biofuels Production Laws & Incentives Regulated Fleets Federal Fleets State & Alt Fuel Providers Clean Cities Vehicles Petroleum Use Reduction Program OR Go Sort by: Category Most Recent Most Popular 10 results - Biodiesel_li_by_state Biodiesel

  7. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maps and Data

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Program All Categories Vehicles AFVs and HEVs Fuel Consumption and Efficiency Vehicle Market Driving Patterns Fuels & Infrastructure Fuel Trends Emissions Alternative Fueling Stations Idle Reduction Transportation Infrastructure Biofuels Production Laws & Incentives Regulated Fleets Federal Fleets State & Alt Fuel Providers Clean Cities Vehicles Petroleum Use Reduction Program OR Go Sort by: Category Most Recent Most Popular 2 results Ccities_map Clean Cities Coalition Locations

  8. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maps and Data

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Transportation Infrastructure All Categories Vehicles AFVs and HEVs Fuel Consumption and Efficiency Vehicle Market Driving Patterns Fuels & Infrastructure Fuel Trends Emissions Alternative Fueling Stations Idle Reduction Transportation Infrastructure Biofuels Production Laws & Incentives Regulated Fleets Federal Fleets State & Alt Fuel Providers Clean Cities Vehicles Petroleum Use Reduction Program OR Go Sort by: Category Most Recent Most Popular 5 results Freight_tons_thumbnail

  9. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maps and Data

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Vehicle Market All Categories Vehicles AFVs and HEVs Fuel Consumption and Efficiency Vehicle Market Driving Patterns Fuels & Infrastructure Fuel Trends Emissions Alternative Fueling Stations Idle Reduction Transportation Infrastructure Biofuels Production Laws & Incentives Regulated Fleets Federal Fleets State & Alt Fuel Providers Clean Cities Vehicles Petroleum Use Reduction Program OR Go Sort by: Category Most Recent Most Popular 7 results Generated_thumb20150623-24606-9p4e26 AFV

  10. High Temperature Reactor (HTR) Deep Burn Core and Fuel Analysis: Design Selection for the Prismatic Block Reactor With Results from FY-2011 Activities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Michael A. Pope

    2011-10-01

    The Deep Burn (DB) Project is a U.S. Department of Energy sponsored feasibility study of Transuranic Management using high burnup fuel in the high temperature helium cooled reactor (HTR). The DB Project consists of seven tasks: project management, core and fuel analysis, spent fuel management, fuel cycle integration, TRU fuel modeling, TRU fuel qualification, and HTR fuel recycle. In the Phase II of the Project, we conducted nuclear analysis of TRU destruction/utilization in the HTR prismatic block design (Task 2.1), deep burn fuel/TRISO microanalysis (Task 2.3), and synergy with fast reactors (Task 4.2). The Task 2.1 covers the core physics design, thermo-hydraulic CFD analysis, and the thermofluid and safety analysis (low pressure conduction cooling, LPCC) of the HTR prismatic block design. The Task 2.3 covers the analysis of the structural behavior of TRISO fuel containing TRU at very high burnup level, i.e. exceeding 50% of FIMA. The Task 4.2 includes the self-cleaning HTR based on recycle of HTR-generated TRU in the same HTR. Chapter IV contains the design and analysis results of the 600MWth DB-HTR core physics with the cycle length, the average discharged burnup, heavy metal and plutonium consumptions, radial and axial power distributions, temperature reactivity coefficients. Also, it contains the analysis results of the 450MWth DB-HTR core physics and the analysis of the decay heat of a TRU loaded DB-HTR core. The evaluation of the hot spot fuel temperature of the fuel block in the DB-HTR (Deep-Burn High Temperature Reactor) core under full operating power conditions are described in Chapter V. The investigated designs are the 600MWth and 460MWth DB-HTRs. In Chapter VI, the thermo-fluid and safety of the 600MWth DB-HTRs has been analyzed to investigate a thermal-fluid design performance at the steady state and a passive safety performance during an LPCC event. Chapter VII describes the analysis results of the TRISO fuel microanalysis of the 600MWth and 450MWth DB-HTRs. The TRISO fuel microanalysis covers the gas pressure buildup in a coated fuel particle including helium production, the thermo-mechanical behavior of a CFP, the failure probabilities of CFPs, the temperature distribution in a CPF, and the fission product (FP) transport in a CFP and a graphite. In Chapter VIII, it contains the core design and analysis of sodium cooled fast reactor (SFR) with deep burn HTR reactor. It considers a synergistic combination of the DB-MHR and an SFR burner for a safe and efficient transmutation of the TRUs from LWRs. Chapter IX describes the design and analysis results of the self-cleaning (or self-recycling) HTR core. The analysis is considered zero and 5-year cooling time of the spent LWR fuels.

  11. Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority and San Mateo County Transit District; Fuel Cell Transit Buses: Preliminary Evaluation Results

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eudy, L.; Chandler, K.

    2006-03-01

    Report provides preliminary results from an evaluation of prototype fuel cell transit buses operating at Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) in San Jose, California.

  12. Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority and San Mateo County Transit District -- Fuel Cell Transit Buses: Evaluation Results

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chandler, K.; Eudy, L.

    2006-11-01

    This report provides evaluation results for prototype fuel cell transit buses operating at Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority in San Jose, California.

  13. Zero Emission Bay Area (ZEBA) Fuel Cell Bus Demonstration Results: Third Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eudy, L.; Post, M.

    2014-05-01

    This report presents results of a demonstration of 12 fuel cell electric buses (FCEB) operating in Oakland, California. The 12 FCEBs operate as a part of the Zero Emission Bay Area (ZEBA) Demonstration, which also includes two new hydrogen fueling stations. This effort is the largest FCEB demonstration in the United States and involves five participating transit agencies. The ZEBA partners are collaborating with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and DOE's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to evaluate the buses in revenue service. NREL has published two previous reports, in August 2011 and July 2012, describing operation of these buses. New results in this report provide an update covering eight months through October 2013.

  14. Survey Consumption

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

    purchase diaries from a subset of respondents composing a Household Transportation Panel and is reported separately. Residential Energy Consumption Survey: Consumption and...

  15. Table 8.6a Estimated Consumption of Combustible Fuels for Useful Thermal Output at Combined-Heat-and-Power Plants: Total (All Sectors), 1989-2011 (Sum of Tables 8.6b and 8.6c)

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

    a Estimated Consumption of Combustible Fuels for Useful Thermal Output at Combined-Heat-and-Power Plants: Total (All Sectors), 1989-2011 (Sum of Tables 8.6b and 8.6c) Year Coal 1 Petroleum Natural Gas 6 Other Gases 7 Biomass Other 10 Distillate Fuel Oil 2 Residual Fuel Oil 3 Other Liquids 4 Petroleum Coke 5 Total 5 Wood 8 Waste 9 Short Tons Barrels Short Tons Barrels Thousand Cubic Feet Billion Btu Billion Btu Billion Btu 1989 16,509,639 1,410,151 16,356,550 353,000 247,409 19,356,746

  16. Table 8.6b Estimated Consumption of Combustible Fuels for Useful Thermal Output at Combined-Heat-and-Power Plants: Electric Power Sector, 1989-2011 (Subset of Table 8.6a)

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

    b Estimated Consumption of Combustible Fuels for Useful Thermal Output at Combined-Heat-and-Power Plants: Electric Power Sector, 1989-2011 (Subset of Table 8.6a) Year Coal 1 Petroleum Natural Gas 6 Other Gases 7 Biomass Other 10 Distillate Fuel Oil 2 Residual Fuel Oil 3 Other Liquids 4 Petroleum Coke 5 Total 5 Wood 8 Waste 9 Short Tons Barrels Short Tons Barrels Thousand Cubic Feet Billion Btu Billion Btu Billion Btu 1989 638,798 119,640 1,471,031 762 – 1,591,433 81,669,945 2,804 24,182 5,687

  17. Table 8.6c Estimated Consumption of Combustible Fuels for Useful Thermal Output at Combined-Heat-and-Power Plants: Commercial and Industrial Sectors, 1989-2011 (Subset of Table 8.6a)

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

    c Estimated Consumption of Combustible Fuels for Useful Thermal Output at Combined-Heat-and-Power Plants: Commercial and Industrial Sectors, 1989-2011 (Subset of Table 8.6a) Year Coal 1 Petroleum Natural Gas 6 Other Gases 7 Biomass Other 10 Distillate Fuel Oil 2 Residual Fuel Oil 3 Other Liquids 4 Petroleum Coke 5 Total 5 Wood 8 Waste 9 Short Tons Barrels Short Tons Barrels Thousand Cubic Feet Billion Btu Billion Btu Billion Btu Commercial Sector 11<//td> 1989 711,212 202,091 600,653 – –

  18. Surrogate/spent fuel sabotage aerosol ratio testing:phase 1 summary and results.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Vigil, Manuel Gilbert; Sorenson, Ken Bryce; Lange, F. , Germany); Nolte, O. (Fraunhofer Institut fur Toxikologie und Experimentelle Medizin, Germany); Koch, W. (Fraunhofer Institut fur Toxikologie und Experimentelle Medizin, Germany); Dickey, Roy R.; Yoshimura, Richard Hiroyuki; Molecke, Martin Alan; Autrusson, Bruno (Institut de Radioprotection et de Surete Nucleaire , France); Young, F. I.; Pretzsch, Gunter Guido (Gesellschaft fur Anlagen- und reaktorsicherheit , Germany)

    2005-10-01

    This multinational test program is quantifying the aerosol particulates produced when a high energy density device (HEDD) impacts surrogate material and actual spent fuel test rodlets. The experimental work, performed in four consecutive test phases, has been in progress for several years. The overall program provides needed data that are relevant to some sabotage scenarios in relation to spent fuel transport and storage casks, and associated risk assessments. This program also provides significant political benefits in international cooperation for nuclear security related evaluations. The spent fuel sabotage--aerosol test program is coordinated with the international Working Group for Sabotage Concerns of Transport and Storage Casks (WGSTSC), and supported by both the U.S. Department of Energy and Nuclear Regulatory Commission. This report summarizes the preliminary, Phase 1 work performed in 2001 and 2002 at Sandia National Laboratories and the Fraunhofer Institute, Germany, and documents the experimental results obtained, observations, and preliminary interpretations. Phase 1 testing included: performance quantifications of the HEDD devices; characterization of the HEDD or conical shaped charge (CSC) jet properties with multiple tests; refinement of the aerosol particle collection apparatus being used; and, CSC jet-aerosol tests using leaded glass plates and glass pellets, serving as representative brittle materials. Phase 1 testing was quite important for the design and performance of the following Phase 2 test program and test apparatus.

  19. Used Nuclear Fuel Loading and Structural Performance Under Normal Conditions of Transport – Demonstration of Approach and Results of Used Fuel Performance Characterization

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This report provides results of the initial demonstration of the modeling capability developed to perform preliminary deterministic evaluations of moderate-to-high burnup used nuclear fuel (UNF) mechanical performance under normal conditions of storage (NCS) and transport (NCT).

  20. EPAct Alternative Fuel Transportation Program: State and Alternative Fuel Provider Fleet Compliance Annual Report, Fleet Compliance Results for MY 2009/FY 2010 (Brochure)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    2010-12-01

    This annual report summarizes the compliance results of state and alternative fuel provider fleets covered by the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct) for model year 2009/fiscal year 2010.

  1. fuel

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    4%2A en Cheaper catalyst may lower fuel costs for hydrogen-powered cars http:www.nnsa.energy.govblogcheaper-catalyst-may-lower-fuel-costs-hydrogen-powered-cars

  2. fuel

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    4%2A en Cheaper catalyst may lower fuel costs for hydrogen-powered cars http:nnsa.energy.govblogcheaper-catalyst-may-lower-fuel-costs-hydrogen-powered-cars

  3. Fuels

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

    Fuels Research Team Members Key Contacts Fuels Gasification will likely be the cornerstone of future energy and chemical processes due to its flexibility to accommodate numerous feedstocks such as coal, biomass, and natural gas, and to produce a variety of products, including heat and specialty chemicals. Advanced integrated gasification combined cycle schemes require the production of clean hydrogen to fuel innovative combustion turbines and fuel cells. This research will focus on development

  4. China: Emissions pattern of the world leader in CO2 emissions from fossil fuel consumption and cement production

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gregg, J; Andres, Robert Joseph; Marland, Gregg

    2008-01-01

    Release of carbon dioxide (CO2) from fossil fuel combustion and cement manufacture is the primary anthropogenic driver of climate change. Our best estimate is that China became the largest national source of CO2 emissions during 2006. Previously, the United States (US) had occupied that position. However, the annual emission rate in the US has remained relatively stable between 2001-2006 while the emission rate in China has more than doubled, apparently eclipsing that of the US in late 2006. Here we present the seasonal and spatial pattern of CO2 emissions in China, as well as the sectoral breakdown of emissions. Though our best point estimate places China in the lead position in terms of CO2 emissions, we qualify this statement in a discussion of the uncertainty in the underlying data (3-5% for the US; 15-20% for China). Finally, we comment briefly on the implications of China's new position with respect to international agreements to mitigate climate change.

  5. Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit) Fuel Cell Transit Buses: Preliminary Evaluation Results

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chandler, K.; Eudy, L.

    2007-03-01

    This report provides an evaluation of three prototype fuel cell-powered transit buses operating at AC Transit in Oakland, California, and six baseline diesel buses similar in design to the fuel cell buses.

  6. Fuel Cell Vehicle and Infrastructure Learning Demonstration Status and Results (Presentation)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wipke, K.; Sprik, S.; Kurtz, J.; Ramsden, T.; Garbak, J.

    2008-10-13

    Presentation on the Fuel Cell Vehicle and Infrastructure Learning Demonstration project prepared for the 215th Electrochemical Society Meeting.

  7. Characterization of Bond Strength of U-Mo Fuel Plates Using the Laser Shockwave Technique: Capabilities and Preliminary Results

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    J. A. Smith; D. L. Cottle; B. H. Rabin

    2013-09-01

    This report summarizes work conducted to-date on the implementation of new laser-based capabilities for characterization of bond strength in nuclear fuel plates, and presents preliminary results obtained from fresh fuel studies on as-fabricated monolithic fuel consisting of uranium-10 wt.% molybdenum alloys clad in 6061 aluminum by hot isostatic pressing. Characterization involves application of two complementary experimental methods, laser-shock testing and laser-ultrasonic imaging, collectively referred to as the Laser Shockwave Technique (LST), that allows the integrity, physical properties and interfacial bond strength in fuel plates to be evaluated. Example characterization results are provided, including measurement of layer thicknesses, elastic properties of the constituents, and the location and nature of generated debonds (including kissing bonds). LST provides spatially localized, non-contacting measurements with minimum specimen preparation, and is ideally suited for applications involving radioactive materials, including irradiated materials. The theoretical principles and experimental approaches employed in characterizing nuclear fuel plates are described, and preliminary bond strength measurement results are discussed, with emphasis on demonstrating the capabilities and limitations of these methods. These preliminary results demonstrate the ability to distinguish bond strength variations between different fuel plates. Although additional development work is necessary to validate and qualify the test methods, these results suggest LST is viable as a method to meet fuel qualification requirements to demonstrate acceptable bonding integrity.

  8. Used Nuclear Fuel Loading and Structural Performance Under Normal Conditions of Transport- Demonstration of Approach and Results on Used Fuel Performance Characterization

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Adkins, Harold; Geelhood, Ken; Koeppel, Brian; Coleman, Justin; Bignell, John; Flores, Gregg; Wang, Jy-An; Sanborn, Scott; Spears, Robert; Klymyshyn, Nick

    2013-09-30

    This document addresses Oak Ridge National Laboratory milestone M2FT-13OR0822015 Demonstration of Approach and Results on Used Nuclear Fuel Performance Characterization. This report provides results of the initial demonstration of the modeling capability developed to perform preliminary deterministic evaluations of moderate-to-high burnup used nuclear fuel (UNF) mechanical performance under normal conditions of storage (NCS) and normal conditions of transport (NCT) conditions. This report also provides results from the sensitivity studies that have been performed. Finally, discussion on the long-term goals and objectives of this initiative are provided.

  9. Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption and Expenditures 1995...

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

    fuel oil, and district heat consumption and expenditures for commercial buildings by building characteristics. Previous Page Arrow Separater Bar File Last Modified: January 29,...

  10. CBECS 1992 - Consumption & Expenditures, Detailed Tables

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

    consumption by major fuel, 1992 Divider Line To View andor Print Reports (requires Adobe Acrobat Reader) - Download Adobe Acrobat Reader If you experience any difficulties,...

  11. ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATION; GREENHOUSES...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    fuel-fired peak heating for geothermal greenhouses Rafferty, K. 32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATION; GREENHOUSES; AUXILIARY HEATING; CAPITALIZED COST; OPERATING...

  12. SRS 2010 Vegetation Inventory GeoStatistical Mapping Results for Custom Reaction Intensity and Total Dead Fuels.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Edwards, Lloyd A.; Paresol, Bernard

    2014-09-01

    This report of the geostatistical analysis results of the fire fuels response variables, custom reaction intensity and total dead fuels is but a part of an SRS 2010 vegetation inventory project. For detailed description of project, theory and background including sample design, methods, and results please refer to USDA Forest Service Savannah River Site internal report SRS 2010 Vegetation Inventory GeoStatistical Mapping Report, (Edwards & Parresol 2013).

  13. Survey Results and Analysis of the Cost and Efficiency of Various Operating Hydrogen Fueling Stations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cornish, John

    2011-03-05

    Existing Hydrogen Fueling Stations were surveyed to determine capital and operational costs. Recommendations for cost reduction in future stations and for research were developed.

  14. Fuels

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

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

  15. Alternative Fuel Transit Buses: DART's (Dallas Area Rapid Transit) LNG Bus Fleet Final Results

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chandler, K.; Norton, P.; Clark, N.

    2000-11-07

    In 1998, Dallas Area Rapid Transit, a public transit agency in Dallas, Texas, began operating a large fleet of heavy-duty buses powered by liquefied natural gas. As part of a $16 million commitment to alternative fuels, DART operates 139 LNG buses serviced by two new LNG fueling stations.

  16. Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle Fuel Use Reporting Methods and Results

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    James E. Francfort

    2009-07-01

    The Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV) Fuel Use Reporting Methods and Results report provides real world test results from PHEV operations and testing in 20 United States and Canada. Examples are given that demonstrate the significant variations operational parameters can have on PHEV petroleum use. In addition to other influences, PHEV mpg results are significantly impacted by driver aggressiveness, cold temperatures, and whether or not the vehicle operator has charged the PHEV battery pack. The U.S. Department of Energys (DOEs) Advanced Vehicle Testing Activity (AVTA) has been testing plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) for several years. The AVTA http://avt.inl.gov/), which is part of DOEs Vehicle Technology Program, also tests other advanced technology vehicles, with 12 million miles of total test vehicle and data collection experience. The Idaho National Laboratory is responsible for conducting the light-duty vehicle testing of PHEVs. Electric Transportation Engineering Corporation also supports the AVTA by conducting PHEV and other types of testing. To date, 12 different PHEV models have been tested, with more than 600,000 miles of PHEV operations data collected.

  17. Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    913,229 916,797 938,340 987,957 1,068,289 1,074,943 1983-2014 Alabama 10,460 10,163 10,367 12,389 12,456 10,055 1983-2014 Alaska 219,161 211,918 208,531 214,335 219,190 219,451 1983-2014 Arizona 17 19 17 12 4 3 1983-2014 Arkansas 4,091 5,340 6,173 6,599 6,605 6,452 1983-2014 California 63,127 64,931 44,379 51,154 49,846 54,288 1983-2014 Colorado 64,873 66,083 78,800 76,462 71,105 74,402 1983-2014 Florida 94 4,512 4,896 6,080 5,609 6,551 1983-2014 Gulf of Mexico 103,976 108,490 101,217 93,985

  18. Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    362,009 368,830 384,248 408,316 414,796 425,238 1983-2014 Alabama 6,470 6,441 6,939 6,616 6,804 6,462 1983-2014 Alaska 39,447 37,316 35,339 37,397 36,638 36,707 1983-2014 Arkansas 489 529 423 622 797 871 1983-2014 California 2,611 2,370 2,253 2,417 2,834 2,361 1983-2014 Colorado 21,288 25,090 28,265 29,383 25,806 30,873 1983-2014 Florida 0 0 0 0 0 272 1983-2014 Gulf of Mexico 0 2014-2014 Illinois 41 4,559 4,917 4,896 4,917 288 1983-2014 Kansas 2,126 2,102 2,246 2,268 2,189 1,983 1983-2014

  19. UPS CNG Truck Fleet Final Results: Alternative Fuel Truck Evaluation Project (Brochure)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    2002-08-01

    This report provides transportation professionals with quantitative, unbiased information on the cost, maintenance, operational and emissions characteristics of CNG as one alternative to conventional diesel fuel for heavy-duty trucking applications.

  20. Solution High-Energy Burst Assembly (SHEBA) results from subprompt critical experiments with uranyl fluoride fuel

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cappiello, C.C.; Butterfield, K.B.; Sanchez, R.G.; Bounds, J.A.; Kimpland, R.H.; Damjanovich, R.P.; Jaegers, P.J.

    1997-08-01

    Experiments were performed to measure a variety of parameters for SHEBA: behavior of the facility during transient and steady-state operation; characteristics of the SHEBA fuel; delayed-critical solution height vs solution temperature; initial reactor period and reactivity vs solution height; calibration of power level vs reactor power instrumentation readings; flux profile in SHEBA; radiation levels and neutron spectra outside the assembly for code verification and criticality alarm and dosimetry purposes; and effect on reactivity of voids in the fuel.

  1. Spent nuclear fuel project, Cold Vacuum Drying Facility human factors engineering (HFE) analysis: Results and findings

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Garvin, L.J.

    1998-07-17

    This report presents the background, methodology, and findings of a human factors engineering (HFE) analysis performed in May, 1998, of the Spent Nuclear Fuels (SNF) Project Cold Vacuum Drying Facility (CVDF), to support its Preliminary Safety Analysis Report (PSAR), in responding to the requirements of Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5480.23 (DOE 1992a) and drafted to DOE-STD-3009-94 format. This HFE analysis focused on general environment, physical and computer workstations, and handling devices involved in or directly supporting the technical operations of the facility. This report makes no attempt to interpret or evaluate the safety significance of the HFE analysis findings. The HFE findings presented in this report, along with the results of the CVDF PSAR Chapter 3, Hazards and Accident Analyses, provide the technical basis for preparing the CVDF PSAR Chapter 13, Human Factors Engineering, including interpretation and disposition of findings. The findings presented in this report allow the PSAR Chapter 13 to fully respond to HFE requirements established in DOE Order 5480.23. DOE 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports, Section 8b(3)(n) and Attachment 1, Section-M, require that HFE be analyzed in the PSAR for the adequacy of the current design and planned construction for internal and external communications, operational aids, instrumentation and controls, environmental factors such as heat, light, and noise and that an assessment of human performance under abnormal and emergency conditions be performed (DOE 1992a).

  2. Development of Radio Frequency Diesel Particulate Filter Sensor and Controls for Advanced Low-Pressure Drop Systems to Reduce Engine Fuel Consumption

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    2013 DOE Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program and Vehicle Technologies Program Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting

  3. Full Consumption Report.indd

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

    214(2013) July 2015 State Energy Consumption Estimates 1960 Through 2013 2013 Consumption Summary Tables S U M M A R I E S U.S. Energy Information Administration | State Energy Data 2013: Consumption 3 Table C1. Energy Consumption Overview: Estimates by Energy Source and End-Use Sector, 2013 (Trillion Btu) State Total Energy b Sources End-Use Sectors a Fossil Fuels Nuclear Electric Power Renewable Energy e Net Interstate Flow of Electricity f Net Electricity Imports g Residential Commercial

  4. Results of emissions testing while burning densified refuse derived fuel, Dordt College, Sioux Center, Iowa

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1989-10-01

    Pacific Environmental Services, Inc. provided engineering and source testing services to the Council of Great Lake Governors to support their efforts in promoting the development and utilization of densified refuse derived fuels (d-RDF) and pelletized wastepaper fuels in small steam generating facilities. The emissions monitoring program was designed to provide a complete air emissions profile while burning various refuse derived fuels. The specific goal of this test program was to conduct air emissions tests at Dordt College located in Sioux Center, Iowa and to identify a relationship between fuel types and emission characteristics. The sampling protocol was carried out June 12 through June 20, 1989 on boiler {number sign}4. This unit had been previously modified to burn d-RDF. The boiler was not equipped with any type of air pollution control device so the emissions samples were collected from the boiler exhaust stack on the roof of the boilerhouse. The emissions that were sampled included: particulates; PM{sub 10} particulates; hydrochloric acid; dioxins; furans; polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB); metals and continuous monitors for CO, CO{sub 2}O{sub 2}SO{sub x}NO{sub x} and total hydrocarbons. Grab samples of the fuels were collected, composited and analyzed for heating value, moisture content, proximate and ultimate analysis, ash fusion temperature, bulk density and elemental ash analysis. Grab samples of the boiler ash were also collected and analyzed for total hydrocarbons total dioxins, total furans, total PCBs and heavy metals. 77 figs., 20 tabs.

  5. Fleet Compliance Results for MY 2010/FY 2011, EPAct Alternative Fuel Transportation Program: State and Alternative Fuel Provider Fleet Compliance Annual Report (Brochure)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    2012-03-01

    This annual report summarizes the compliance results of state and alternative fuel provider fleets covered by the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct) for model year 2010/fiscal year 2011. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) regulates covered state and alternative fuel provider (SFP) fleets under the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct), as amended. For model year (MY) 2010, the compliance rate for the 2911 covered SFP fleets was 100%. Fleets used either Standard Compliance or Alternative Compliance. The 279 fleets that used Standard Compliance exceeded their aggregate MY 2010 acquisition requirements by 61%. The 12 covered fleets that complied using Alternative Compliance exceeded their aggregate MY 2010 petroleum-use-reduction requirements by 89%. Overall, DOE saw modest decreases from MY 2009 in biodiesel fuel use credits earned and in the number of light-duty vehicles (LDVs) acquired. Compared to years before MY 2009, these rates were far lower. Because covered fleets acquired fewer new vehicles overall in MY 2010, the requirement for alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs), which is proportional to new acquisitions, also dropped.

  6. Statistical Analysis of Transient Cycle Test Results in a 40...

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

    System for Transient Particulate Matter Emissions The Impact of Using Derived Fuel Consumption Maps to Predict Fuel Consumption Medium and Heavy Duty Vehicle and Engine Testing...

  7. Technical Approach and Results from the Fuels Pathway on an Alternative Selection Case Study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bob Youngblood; Curtis Smith

    2013-09-01

    The report presents a detailed plan for conducting case studies to characterize probabilistic safety margins associated with different fuel cladding types in a way that supports a valid comparison of different fuels' performance. Recent work performed in other programs is described briefly and used to illustrate the challenges posed by characterization of margin in a probabilistic way. It is additionally pointed out that consistency of evaluation of performance across different cladding types is not easy to assure; a process for achieving the needed consistency is described.

  8. Search results | Department of Energy

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

    (2) Water (2) Alternative Fuel Vehicles (1) Biofuels (1) Clean Cities (1) Consumption (1) Energy Economy (1) Environmental Cleanup (1) Environmental Science (1) Fuel Economy (1)...

  9. Search results | Department of Energy

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

    (2) Water (2) Alternative Fuel Vehicles (1) Biofuels (1) Clean Cities (1) Consumption (1) Energy Economy (1) Environmental Science (1) Fuel Economy (1) Homes (1) Hydrogen (1)...

  10. Vehicle Technologies Office Merit Review 2015: Development of Radio Frequency Diesel Particulate Filter Sensor and Controls for Advanced Low-Pressure Drop Systems to Reduce Engine Fuel Consumption

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Presentation given by Filter Sensing Technologies, Inc. at 2015 DOE Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program and Vehicle Technologies Office Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting about development...

  11. Vehicle Technologies Office Merit Review 2014: Development of Radio Frequency Diesel Particulate Filter Sensor and Controls for Advanced Low-Pressure Drop Systems to Reduce Engine Fuel Consumption

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Presentation given by Filter Sensing Technologies, Inc. at 2014 DOE Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program and Vehicle Technologies Office Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting about development...

  12. AGR-1 Fuel Compact 6-3-2 Post-Irradiation Examination Results

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Paul demkowicz; jason Harp; Scott Ploger

    2012-12-01

    Destructive post-irradiation examination was performed on fuel Compact 6-3-2, which was irradiated in the AGR-1 experiment to a final compact average burnup of 11.3% FIMA and a time-average, volume-average temperature of 1070C. The analysis of this compact was focused on characterizing the extent of fission product release from the particles and examining particles to determine the condition of the kernels and coating layers. The work included deconsolidation of the compact and leach-burn-leach analysis, visual inspection and gamma counting of individual particles, measurement of fuel burnup by several methods, metallurgical preparation of selected particles, and examination of particle cross-sections with optical microscopy. A single particle with a defective SiC layer was identified during deconsolidation-leach-burn-leach analysis, which is in agreement with previous measurements showing elevated cesium in the Capsule 6 graphite fuel holder associated with this fuel compact. The fraction of the compact europium inventory released from the particles and retained in the matrix was relatively high (approximately 6E-3), indicating release from intact particle coatings. The Ag-110m inventory in individual particles exhibited a very broad distribution, with some particles retaining =80% of the predicted inventory and others retaining less than 25%. The average degree of Ag-110m retention in 60 gamma counted particles was approximately 50%. This elevated silver release is in agreement with analysis of silver on the Capsule 6 components, which indicated an average release of 38% of the Capsule 6 inventory from the fuel compacts. In spite of the relatively high degree of silver release from the particles, virtually none of the Ag-110m released was found in the compact matrix, and presumably migrated out of the compact and was deposited on the irradiation capsule components. Release of all other fission products from the particles appears to be less than a single particle equivalent inventory. Burnup measurements based on gamma spectrometry of individual particles and mass spectrometry of dissolved fuel kernels were in very good agreement (11.0% and 10.9% FIMA, respectively), and were also in good agreement with measurements based on previous gamma spectrometry measurements of the whole compact (11.0% FIMA) and the predicted burnup based on physics simulations of the AGR-1 irradiation (11.3% FIMA).

  13. Results of studies on application of CCMHD to advanced fossil fuel power plant cycles

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Foote, J.P.; Wu, Y.C.L.S.; Lineberry, J.T.

    1998-07-01

    A study was conducted to assess the potential for application of a Closed Cycle MHD disk generator (CCMHD) in advanced fossil fuel power generation systems. Cycle analyses were conducted for a variety of candidate power cycles, including simple cycle CCMHD (MHD); a cycle combining CCMHD and gas turbines (MHD/GT); and a triple combined cycle including CCMHD, gas turbines, and steam turbines (MHD/GT/ST). The above cycles were previously considered in cycle studies reported by Japanese researchers. Also considered was a CCMHD cycle incorporating thermochemical heat recovery through reforming of the fuel stream (MHD/REF), which is the first consideration of this approach. A gas turbine/steam turbine combined cycle (GT/ST) was also analyzed for baseline comparison. The only fuel considered in the study was CH4. Component heat and pressure losses were neglected, and the potential for NOx emission due to high combustion temperatures was not considered. Likewise, engineering limitations for cycle components, particularly the high temperature argon heater, were not considered. This approach was adopted to simplify the analysis for preliminary screening of candidate cycles. Cycle calculations were performed using in-house code. Ideal gas thermodynamic properties were calculated using the NASA SP- 273 data base, and thermodynamic properties for steam were calculated using the computerized ASME Steam Tables. High temperature equilibrium compositions for combustion gas were calculated using tabulated values of the equilibrium constants for the important reactions.

  14. Natural gas cofiring in a refuse derived fuel incinerator: Results of a field evaluation. Topical report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Beshai, R.Z.; Hong, C.C.

    1993-10-01

    An evaluation of emissions reduction and improved operation of a municipal solid waste incinerator through natural gas cofiring is presented. A natural gas cofiring system was retrofitted on a refuse derived fuel combustor of the Columbis Solid Waste Reduction Facility in Columbus, Ohio. The field evaluation, conducted between July 6 and August 5, 1992, showed significant improvements in emissions and boiler operations. Carbon monoxide emissions were reduced from the baseline operations range of 530 to 1,950 parts per million to less than 50 ppm. Emissions of carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, hydrocarbons, and polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and furans were also reduced.

  15. Zero Emission Bay Area (ZEBA) Fuel Cell Bus Demonstration: First Results Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chandler, K.; Eudy, L.

    2011-08-01

    This report documents the early implementation experience for the Zero Emission Bay Area (ZEBA) Demonstration, the largest fleet of fuel cell buses in the United States. The ZEBA Demonstration group includes five participating transit agencies: AC Transit (lead transit agency), Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), Golden Gate Transit (GGT), San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans), and San Francisco Municipal Railway (Muni). The ZEBA partners are collaborating with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and DOE's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to evaluate the buses in revenue service.

  16. US ENC IL Site Consumption

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

    IL Site Consumption million Btu $0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 US ENC IL Expenditures dollars ALL ENERGY average per household (excl. transportation) 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 US ENC IL Site Consumption kilowatthours $0 $250 $500 $750 $1,000 $1,250 $1,500 US ENC IL Expenditures dollars ELECTRICITY ONLY average per household * Illinois households use 129 million Btu of energy per home, 44% more than the U.S. average. * High consumption, combined with low costs for heating fuels

  17. US ENC MI Site Consumption

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

    MI Site Consumption million Btu $0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 US ENC MI Expenditures dollars ALL ENERGY average per household (excl. transportation) 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 US ENC MI Site Consumption kilowatthours $0 $250 $500 $750 $1,000 $1,250 $1,500 US ENC MI Expenditures dollars ELECTRICITY ONLY average per household * Michigan households use 123 million Btu of energy per home, 38% more than the U.S. average. * High consumption, combined with low costs for heating fuels

  18. EPAct Alternative Fuel Transportation Program: State and Alternative Fuel Provider Fleet Compliance Annual Report; Fleet Compliance Results for MY 2013/FY 2014

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2015-09-01

    Compliance rates for covered state government and alternative fuel provider fleets under the Alternative Fuel Transportation Program (pursuant to the Energy Policy Act or EPAct) are reported for MY 2013/FY 2014 in this publication.

  19. Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority and San Mateo County Transit District -- Fuel Cell Transit Buses: Evaluation Results

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy National Renewable Energy Laboratory Innovation for Our Energy Future Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority and San Mateo County Transit District Fuel Cell Transit Buses: Evaluation Results Kevin Chandler Battelle Leslie Eudy National Renewable Energy Laboratory Technical Report NREL/TP-560-40615 November 2006 NREL is operated by Midwest Research Institute ● Battelle Contract No.

  20. Preliminary results of post-irradiation examination of the AGR-1 TRISO fuel compacts

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Paul Demkowicz; John Hunn; Robert Morris; Jason Harp; Philip Winston; Charles Baldwin; Fred Montgomery; Scott Ploger; Isabella van Rooyen

    2012-10-01

    Five irradiated fuel compacts from the AGR-1 experiment have been examined in detail in order to assess in-pile fission product release behavior. Compacts were electrolytically deconsolidated and analyzed using the leach-burn-leach technique to measure fission product inventory in the compact matrix and identify any particles with a defective SiC layer. Loose particles were then gamma counted to measure the fission product inventory. One particle with a defective SiC layer was found in the five compacts examined. The fractional release of Ag 110m from the particles was significant. The total fraction of silver released from all the particles within a compact ranged from 0-0.63 and individual particles within a single compact often exhibited a very wide range of silver release. The average fractional release of Eu-154 from all particles in a compact was 2.410-41.310-2, which is indicative of release through intact coatings. The fractional Cs-134 inventory in the compact matrix was <210-5 when all coatings remained intact, indicating good cesium retention. Approximately 1% of the palladium inventory was found in the compact matrix for two of the compacts, indicating significant release through intact coatings.

  1. Solutia: Massachusetts Chemical Manufacturer Uses SECURE Methodology to Identify Potential Reductions in Utility and Process Energy Consumption. Industrial Technologies Program (ITP) Chemicals BestPractices Plant-Wide Assessment Case Study (Brochure).

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

    Technologies Program BENEFITS * Identified potential annual cost savings of nearly $3.3 million from reduced resource consumption and improved productivity * Found ways to reduce annual electricity consumption by almost 9.6 million kWh and annual fuel consumption by 338,000 MMBtu * Identified ways to decrease fresh water consumption and wastewater generation * Resulted in short-term plans for immediate benefit, such as steam trap and lighting surveys, and long-term plans for optimizing the

  2. Major Fuels","Electricity",,"Natural Gas","Fuel Oil","District

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

    . Total Energy Consumption by Major Fuel for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003" ,"All Buildings*",,"Total Energy Consumption (trillion Btu)" ,"Number of Buildings (thousand)","Floorspace...

  3. Major Fuels","Site Electricity","Natural Gas","Fuel Oil","District...

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

    C1. Total Energy Consumption by Major Fuel, 1999" ,"All Buildings",,"Total Energy Consumption (trillion Btu)",,,,,"Primary Electricity (trillion Btu)" ,"Number of Buildings...

  4. Alternative fuel vehicles for the Federal fleet: Results of the 5-year planning process. Executive Order 12759, Section 11

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1992-08-01

    This report describes five-year plans for acquisition of alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) by the Federal agencies. These plans will be used to encourage Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) to expand the variety of AFVs produced, reduce the incremental cost of AFVs, and to encourage fuel suppliers to expand the alternative fuel infrastructure and alternative fuel availability. This effort supplements and extends the demonstration and testing of AFVs established by the Department of Energy under the alternative Motor Fuels Act of 1988.

  5. US MidAtl NY Site Consumption

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

    consumption in New York homes is much lower than the U.S. average, because many households use other fuels for major energy end uses like space heating, water heating, and cooking. ...

  6. Plutonium Consumption Program, CANDU Reactor Project final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-07-31

    DOE is investigating methods for long term dispositioning of weapons grade plutonium. One such method would be to utilize the plutonium in Mixed OXide (MOX) fuel assemblies in existing CANDU reactors. CANDU (Canadian Deuterium Uranium) reactors are designed, licensed, built, and supported by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL), and currently use natural uranium oxide as fuel. The MOX spent fuel assemblies removed from the reactor would be similar to the spent fuel currently produced using natural uranium fuel, thus rendering the plutonium as unattractive as that in the stockpiles of commercial spent fuel. This report presents the results of a study sponsored by the DOE for dispositioning the plutonium using CANDU technology. Ontario Hydro`s Bruce A was used as reference. The fuel design study defined the optimum parameters to disposition 50 tons of Pu in 25 years (or 100 tons). Two alternate fuel designs were studied. Safeguards, security, environment, safety, health, economics, etc. were considered. Options for complete destruction of the Pu were also studied briefly; CANDU has a superior ability for this. Alternative deployment options were explored and the potential impact on Pu dispositioning in the former Soviet Union was studied. An integrated system can be ready to begin Pu consumption in 4 years, with no changes required to the reactors other than for safe, secure storage of new fuel.

  7. New Methodology for Estimating Fuel Economy by Vehicle Class

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chin, Shih-Miao; Dabbs, Kathryn; Hwang, Ho-Ling

    2011-01-01

    Office of Highway Policy Information to develop a new methodology to generate annual estimates of average fuel efficiency and number of motor vehicles registered by vehicle class for Table VM-1 of the Highway Statistics annual publication. This paper describes the new methodology developed under this effort and compares the results of the existing manual method and the new systematic approach. The methodology developed under this study takes a two-step approach. First, the preliminary fuel efficiency rates are estimated based on vehicle stock models for different classes of vehicles. Then, a reconciliation model is used to adjust the initial fuel consumption rates from the vehicle stock models and match the VMT information for each vehicle class and the reported total fuel consumption. This reconciliation model utilizes a systematic approach that produces documentable and reproducible results. The basic framework utilizes a mathematical programming formulation to minimize the deviations between the fuel economy estimates published in the previous year s Highway Statistics and the results from the vehicle stock models, subject to the constraint that fuel consumptions for different vehicle classes must sum to the total fuel consumption estimate published in Table MF-21 of the current year Highway Statistics. The results generated from this new approach provide a smoother time series for the fuel economies by vehicle class. It also utilizes the most up-to-date and best available data with sound econometric models to generate MPG estimates by vehicle class.

  8. A Comparison of HCCI Engine Performance Data and Kinetic Modeling Results over a Wide Rangeof Gasoline Range Surrogate Fuel Blends

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Kinetic models of fuels are needed to allow the simulation of engine performance for research, design, or verification purposes.

  9. Search results | Department of Energy

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

    y-electricity-consumption-and-efficiency Current search Search found 2 items Water Remove Water filter Consumption Remove Consumption filter Filter by Resource Type All Results (2)...

  10. COMPARISON OF RESULTS FOR QUARTER 5 SURFACE WATER SPLIT SAMPLES COLLECTED AT THE NUCLEAR FUEL SERVICES SITE ERWIN TENNESSEE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2013-09-23

    Oak Ridge Associated Universities (ORAU), under the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) contract, collected split surface water samples with Nuclear Fuel Services (NFS) representatives on August 21, 2013. Representatives from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation were also in attendance. Samples were collected at four surface water stations, as required in the approved Request for Technical Assistance number 11-018. These stations included Nolichucky River upstream (NRU), Nolichucky River downstream (NRD), Martin Creek upstream (MCU), and Martin Creek downstream (MCD). Both ORAU and NFS performed gross alpha and gross beta analyses, and the comparison of results using the duplicate error ratio (DER), also known as the normalized absolute difference, are tabulated. All DER values were less than 3 and results are consistent with low (e.g., background) concentrations.

  11. Alternative Fuels Data Center

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2013-06-01

    Fact sheet describes the Alternative Fuels Data Center, which provides information, data, and tools to help fleets and other transportation decision makers find ways to reduce petroleum consumption through the use of alternative and renewable fuels, advanced vehicles, and other fuel-saving measures.

  12. Residential energy consumption across different population groups: Comparative analysis for Latino and non-Latino households in U.S.A.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Poyer, D.A.; Teotia, A.P.S.; Henderson, L.

    1998-05-01

    Residential energy cost, an important part of the household budget, varies significantly across different population groups. In the United States, researchers have conducted many studies of household fuel consumption by fuel type -- electricity, natural gas, fuel oil, and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) -- and by geographic areas. The results of past research have also demonstrated significant variation in residential energy use across various population groups, including white, black, and Latino. However, research shows that residential energy demand by fuel type for Latinos, the fastest-growing population group in the United States, has not been explained by economic and noneconomic factors in any available statistical model. This paper presents a discussion of energy demand and expenditure patterns for Latino and non-Latino households in the United States. The statistical model developed to explain fuel consumption and expenditures for Latino households is based on Stone and Geary`s linear expenditure system model. For comparison, the authors also developed models for energy consumption in non-Latino, black, and nonblack households. These models estimate consumption of and expenditures for electricity, natural gas, fuel oil, and LPG by various households at the national level. The study revealed significant variations in the patterns of fuel consumption for Latinos and non-Latinos. The model methodology and results of this research should be useful to energy policymakers in government and industry, researchers, and academicians who are concerned with economic and energy issues related to various population groups.

  13. COMPARISON OF RESULTS FOR QUARTER 4 SURFACE WATER SPLIT SAMPLES COLLECTED AT THE NUCLEAR FUELS SERVICES SITE, ERWIN, TN

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2013-08-15

    Oak Ridge Associated Universities (ORAU), under the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) contract, collected split surface water samples with Nuclear Fuel Services (NFS) representatives on June 12, 2013. Representatives from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation were also in attendance. Samples were collected at four surface water stations, as required in the approved Request for Technical Assistance number 11-018. These stations included Nolichucky River upstream (NRU), Nolichucky River downstream (NRD), Martin Creek upstream (MCU), and Martin Creek downstream (MCD). Both ORAU and NFS performed gross alpha and gross beta analyses, and Table 1 presents the comparison of results using the duplicate error ratio (DER), also known as the normalized absolute difference. A DER ≤ 3 indicates at a 99% confidence interval that split sample results do not differ significantly when compared to their respective one standard deviation (sigma) uncertainty (ANSI N42.22). The NFS split sample report specifies 95% confidence level of reported uncertainties (NFS 2013). Therefore, standard two sigma reporting values were divided by 1.96. In conclusion, most DER values were less than 3 and results are consistent with low (e.g., background) concentrations. The gross beta result for sample 5198W0014 was the exception. The ORAU gross beta result of 6.30 ± 0.65 pCi/L from location NRD is well above NFS's non-detected result of 1.56 ± 0.59 pCi/L. NFS's data package includes no detected result for any radionuclide at location NRD. At NRC's request, ORAU performed gamma spectroscopic analysis of sample 5198W0014 to identify analytes contributing to the relatively elevated gross beta results. This analysis identified detected amounts of naturally-occurring constituents, most notably Ac-228 from the thorium decay series, and does not suggest the presence of site-related contamination.

  14. Compare All CBECS Activities: Fuel Oil Use

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Fuel Oil Use Compare Activities by ... Fuel Oil Use Total Fuel Oil Consumption by Building Type Commercial buildings in the U.S. used a total of approximately 1.3 billion gallons...

  15. Optimally Controlled Flexible Fuel Powertrain System

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Duncan Sheppard; Bruce Woodrow; Paul Kilmurray; Simon Thwaite

    2011-06-30

    A multi phase program was undertaken with the stated goal of using advanced design and development tools to create a unique combination of existing technologies to create a powertrain system specification that allowed minimal increase of volumetric fuel consumption when operating on E85 relative to gasoline. Although on an energy basis gasoline / ethanol blends typically return similar fuel economy to straight gasoline, because of its lower energy density (gasoline ~ 31.8MJ/l and ethanol ~ 21.1MJ/l) the volume based fuel economy of gasoline / ethanol blends are typically considerably worse. This project was able to define an initial engine specification envelope, develop specific hardware for the application, and test that hardware in both single and multi-cylinder test engines to verify the ability of the specified powertrain to deliver reduced E85 fuel consumption. Finally, the results from the engine testing were used in a vehicle drive cycle analysis tool to define a final vehicle level fuel economy result. During the course of the project, it was identified that the technologies utilized to improve fuel economy on E85 also enabled improved fuel economy when operating on gasoline. However, the E85 fueled powertrain provided improved vehicle performance when compared to the gasoline fueled powertrain due to the improved high load performance of the E85 fuel. Relative to the baseline comparator engine and considering current market fuels, the volumetric fuel consumption penalty when running on E85 with the fully optimized project powertrain specification was reduced significantly. This result shows that alternative fuels can be utilized in high percentages while maintaining or improving vehicle performance and with minimal or positive impact on total cost of ownership to the end consumer. The justification for this project was two-fold. In order to reduce the US dependence on crude oil, much of which is imported, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) developed the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) under the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The RFS specifies targets for the amount of renewable fuel to be blended into petroleum based transportation fuels. The goal is to blend 36 billion gallons of renewable fuels into transportation fuels by 2022 (9 billion gallons were blended in 2008). The RFS also requires that the renewable fuels emit fewer greenhouse gasses than the petroleum fuels replaced. Thus the goal of the EPA is to have a more fuel efficient national fleet, less dependent on petroleum based fuels. The limit to the implementation of certain technologies employed was the requirement to run the developed powertrain on gasoline with minimal performance degradation. The addition of ethanol to gasoline fuels improves the fuels octane rating and increases the fuels evaporative cooling. Both of these fuel property enhancements make gasoline / ethanol blends more suitable than straight gasoline for use in downsized engines or engines with increased compression ratio. The use of engine downsizing and high compression ratios as well as direct injection (DI), dual independent cam phasing, external EGR, and downspeeding were fundamental to the fuel economy improvements targeted in this project. The developed powertrain specification utilized the MAHLE DI3 gasoline downsizing research engine. It was a turbocharged, intercooled, DI engine with dual independent cam phasing utilizing a compression ratio of 11.25 : 1 and a 15% reduction in final drive ratio. When compared to a gasoline fuelled 2.2L Ecotec engine in a Chevrolet HHR, vehicle drive cycle predictions indicate that the optimized powertrain operating on E85 would result in a reduced volume based drive cycle fuel economy penalty of 6% compared to an approximately 30% penalty for current technology engines.

  16. Alternatives to traditional transportation fuels 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1995-01-01

    In recent years, gasoline and diesel fuel have accounted for about 80 percent of total transportation fuel and nearly all of the fuel used in on-road vehicles. Growing concerns about the environmental effects of fossil fuel use and the Nation`s high level of dependence on foreign oil are providing impetus for the development of replacements or alternatives for these traditional transportation fuels. (The Energy Policy Act of 1992 definitions of {open_quotes}replacement{close_quotes} and {open_quotes}alternative{close_quotes} fuels are presented in the following box.) The Alternative Motor Fuels Act of 1988, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA90) and the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPACT) are significant legislative forces behind the growth of replacement fuel use. Alternatives to Traditional Transportation Fuels 1993 provides the number of on-road alternative fueled vehicles in use in the United States, alternative and replacement fuel consumption, and information on greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the production, delivery, and use of replacement fuels for 1992, 1993, and 1995.

  17. COMPARISON OF RESULTS FOR QUARTER 2 SURFACE WATER SPLIT SAMPLES COLLECTED AT THE NUCLEAR FUEL SERVICES SITE, ERWIN, TENNESSEE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2013-01-21

    Oak Ridge Associated Universities (ORAU), under the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) contract, collected split surface water samples with Nuclear Fuel Services (NFS) representatives on November 15, 2012. Representatives from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation were also in attendance. Samples were collected at four surface water stations, as required in the approved Request for Technical Assistance number 11-018. These stations included Nolichucky River upstream (NRU), Nolichucky River downstream (NRD), Martin Creek upstream (MCU), and Martin Creek downstream (MCD). Both ORAU and NFS performed gross alpha and gross beta analyses, and the results are compared using the duplicate error ratio (DER), also known as the normalized absolute difference. A DER {<=} 3 indicates that, at a 99% confidence interval, split sample results do not differ significantly when compared to their respective one standard deviation (sigma) uncertainty (ANSI N42.22). The NFS split sample report does not specify the confidence level of reported uncertainties (NFS 2012). Therefore, standard two sigma reporting is assumed and uncertainty values were divided by 1.96. In conclusion, all DER values were less than 3 and results are consistent with low (e.g., background) concentrations.

  18. Household energy consumption and expenditures 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-10-05

    This presents information about household end-use consumption of energy and expenditures for that energy. These data were collected in the 1993 Residential Energy Consumption Survey; more than 7,000 households were surveyed for information on their housing units, energy consumption and expenditures, stock of energy-consuming appliances, and energy-related behavior. The information represents all households nationwide (97 million). Key findings: National residential energy consumption was 10.0 quadrillion Btu in 1993, a 9% increase over 1990. Weather has a significant effect on energy consumption. Consumption of electricity for appliances is increasing. Houses that use electricity for space heating have lower overall energy expenditures than households that heat with other fuels. RECS collected data for the 4 most populous states: CA, FL, NY, TX.

  19. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Energy Sources; Column: Consumption Potential;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Nonswitchable Minimum and Maximum Consumption, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Energy Sources; Column: Consumption Potential; Unit: Physical Units. Actual Minimum Maximum Energy Sources Consumption Consumption(a) Consumption(b) Total United States Electricity Receipts(c) (million kilowatthour 745,247 727,194 770,790 Natural Gas (billion cubic feet) 5,064 4,331 5,298 Distillate Fuel Oil (thousand barrels) 22 20 82 Residual Fuel Oil (thousand barrels) 13 9 46 Coal (thousand short

  20. Search results | Department of Energy

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

    (4) Energy Efficiency (4) Bioenergy (3) Science & Technology (3) Hydrogen (2) Building Design (1) Climate Change (1) Consumption (1) Hydrogen & Fuel Cells (1) Research...

  1. Search results | Department of Energy

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

    (4) Energy Economy (4) Science & Technology (4) Hydrogen (2) Biofuels (1) Building Design (1) Climate Change (1) Consumption (1) Hydrogen & Fuel Cells (1) Research...

  2. Search results | Department of Energy

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

    Vehicles (2) Consumption (2) Electricity (2) Energy Economy (2) Fuel Economy (2) Clean Cities (1) Emergency Response & Procedures (1) Environmental Science (1) Homes (1) Hydrogen &...

  3. Search results | Department of Energy

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

    -plug-introduction-energy-electricity-consumption-and-efficiency Download Green Fuel This activity allows students the opportunity to explore different methods for collecting solar...

  4. CSV File Documentation: Consumption

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Consumption Estimates The State Energy Data System (SEDS) comma-separated value (CSV) files contain consumption estimates shown in the tables located on the SEDS website. There are four files that contain estimates for all states and years. Consumption in Physical Units contains the consumption estimates in physical units for all states; Consumption in Btu contains the consumption estimates in billion British thermal units (Btu) for all states. There are two data files for thermal conversion

  5. Volatility of Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Blends for Supercritical Fuel

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

    Injection | Department of Energy Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Blends for Supercritical Fuel Injection Volatility of Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Blends for Supercritical Fuel Injection Supercritical dieseline could be used in diesel engines having efficient fuel systems and combustion chamber designs that decrease fuel consumption and mitigate emissions. PDF icon p-02_anitescu.pdf More Documents & Publications Preparation, Injection and Combustion of Supercritical Fluids Evaluation of Biodiesel

  6. Federal Government's Energy Consumption Lowest in Almost 40 Years |

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

    Department of Energy Government's Energy Consumption Lowest in Almost 40 Years Federal Government's Energy Consumption Lowest in Almost 40 Years February 11, 2015 - 3:49am Addthis Energy consumption by the federal government has been steadily declining for nearly four decades. Much of the decline in recent years can be attributed to a decrease in the use of jet fuel at agencies like the Air Force. | Air Force photo Energy consumption by the federal government has been steadily declining for

  7. COMPARISON OF RESULTS FOR QUARTER 3 SURFACE WATER SPLIT SAMPLES COLLECTED AT THE NUCLEAR FUEL SERVICES SITE, ERWIN, TENNESSEE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2013-05-28

    Oak Ridge Associated Universities (ORAU), under the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) contract, collected split surface water samples with Nuclear Fuel Services (NFS) representatives on March 20, 2013. Representatives from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation were also in attendance. Samples were collected at four surface water stations, as required in the approved Request for Technical Assistance number 11-018. These stations included Nolichucky River upstream (NRU), Nolichucky River downstream (NRD), Martin Creek upstream (MCU), and Martin Creek downstream (MCD). Both ORAU and NFS performed gross alpha and gross beta analyses, and Table 1 presents the comparison of results using the duplicate error ratio (DER), also known as the normalized absolute difference. A DER {<=} 3 indicates that at a 99% confidence interval, split sample results do not differ significantly when compared to their respective one standard deviation (sigma) uncertainty (ANSI N42.22). The NFS split sample report does not specify the confidence level of reported uncertainties (NFS 2013). Therefore, standard two sigma reporting is assumed and uncertainty values were divided by 1.96. In conclusion, most DER values were less than 3 and results are consistent with low (e.g., background) concentrations. The gross beta result for sample 5198W0012 was the exception. The ORAU result of 9.23 ± 0.73 pCi/L from location MCD is well above NFS's result of -0.567 ± 0.63 pCi/L (non-detected). NFS's data package included a detected result for U-233/234, but no other uranium or plutonium detection, and nothing that would suggest the presence of beta-emitting radionuclides. The ORAU laboratory reanalyzed sample 5198W0012 using the remaining portion of the sample volume and a result of 11.3 ± 1.1 pCi/L was determined. As directed, the laboratory also counted the filtrate using gamma spectrometry analysis and identified only naturally occurring or ubiquitous man-made constituents, including beta emitters that are presumably responsible for the elevated gross beta values.

  8. Fuel-Flexible Microturbine and Gasifier System for Combined Heat...

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

    and demonstrate a prototype microturbine combined heat and power system fueled by synthesis gas and integrated with a biomass gasifier, enabling reduced fossil fuel consumption...

  9. Fuel-Flexible Combustion System for Refinery and Chemical Plant...

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

    low-emission operation across a broad range of fuel compositions, including syngas, biogas, natural gas, and refinery fuel gas. PDF icon Displacing Natural Gas Consumption and...

  10. Performance assessment of the direct disposal in unsaturated tuff or spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste owned by USDOE: Volume 2, Methodology and results

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rechard, R.P.

    1995-03-01

    This assessment studied the performance of high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel in a hypothetical repository in unsaturated tuff. The results of this 10-month study are intended to help guide the Office of Environment Management of the US Department of Energy (DOE) on how to prepare its wastes for eventual permanent disposal. The waste forms comprised spent fuel and high-level waste currently stored at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) and the Hanford reservations. About 700 metric tons heavy metal (MTHM) of the waste under study is stored at INEL, including graphite spent nuclear fuel, highly enriched uranium spent fuel, low enriched uranium spent fuel, and calcined high-level waste. About 2100 MTHM of weapons production fuel, currently stored on the Hanford reservation, was also included. The behavior of the waste was analyzed by waste form and also as a group of waste forms in the hypothetical tuff repository. When the waste forms were studied together, the repository was assumed also to contain about 9200 MTHM high-level waste in borosilicate glass from three DOE sites. The addition of the borosilicate glass, which has already been proposed as a final waste form, brought the total to about 12,000 MTHM.

  11. Alternative Fuels Data Center

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Tax Exemption The retail sale, use, storage, and consumption of alternative fuels is exempt from the state retail sales and use tax. (Reference North Carolina General Statutes 105-164.13(11)

  12. 2002 Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey - User Needs Survey

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

    2002 Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey: User-Needs Survey View current results. We need your help in designing the next Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) As our valued...

  13. Effect of Fuel Wobbe Number on Pollutant Emissions from Advanced Technology Residential Water Heaters: Results of Controlled Experiments

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rapp, Vi H.; Singer, Brett C.

    2014-03-01

    The research summarized in this report is part of a larger effort to evaluate the potential air quality impacts of using liquefied natural gas in California. A difference of potential importance between many liquefied natural gas blends and the natural gas blends that have been distributed in California in recent years is the higher Wobbe number of liquefied natural gas. Wobbe number is a measure of the energy delivery rate for appliances that use orifice- or pressure-based fuel metering. The effect of Wobbe number on pollutant emissions from residential water heaters was evaluated in controlled experiments. Experiments were conducted on eight storage water heaters, including five with “ultra low-NO{sub X}” burners, and four on-demand (tankless) water heaters, all of which featured ultra low-NO{sub X} burners. Pollutant emissions were quantified as air-free concentrations in the appliance flue and fuel-based emission factors in units of nanogram of pollutant emitter per joule of fuel energy consumed. Emissions were measured for carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NO{sub X}), nitrogen oxide (NO), formaldehyde and acetaldehyde as the water heaters were operated through defined operating cycles using fuels with varying Wobbe number. The reference fuel was Northern California line gas with Wobbe number ranging from 1344 to 1365. Test fuels had Wobbe numbers of 1360, 1390 and 1420. The most prominent finding was an increase in NO{sub X} emissions with increasing Wobbe number: all five of the ultra low-NO{sub X} storage water heaters and two of the four ultra low-NO{sub X} on-demand water heaters had statistically discernible (p<0.10) increases in NO{sub X} with fuel Wobbe number. The largest percentage increases occurred for the ultra low-NO{sub X} water heaters. There was a discernible change in CO emissions with Wobbe number for all four of the on-demand devices tested. The on-demand water heater with the highest CO emissions also had the largest CO increase with increasing fuel Wobbe number.

  14. Development of a high-output dual-fuel engine

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Danyluk, P.R. . Fairbanks Morse Engineering Division)

    1993-10-01

    This paper presents the results of a new dual-fuel engine development program. The engine is the largest commercially available in terms of power output (650 hp/cyl) and features very low emissions (1 g/hp-hr NO[sub x]) and excellent fuel consumption (43 percent thermal efficiency). A two-cylinder turbocharged prototype was designed and built for the initial development. Results from testing on 18-cylinder production versions are also reported.

  15. Search results | Department of Energy

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

    Consumption Search results Search results Enter terms Search Showing 1 - 1 of 1 result. Download Power to the Plug: An Introduction to Energy, Electricity, Consumption, and...

  16. Hydrogen Fuel Quality - Focus: Analytical Methods Development...

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

    Fuel Quality - Focus: Analytical Methods Development & Hydrogen Fuel Quality Results Hydrogen Fuel Quality - Focus: Analytical Methods Development & Hydrogen Fuel Quality Results...

  17. Displacing Natural Gas Consumption and Lowering Emissions

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

    Combustion System for Refinery and Chemical Plant Process Heaters ADVANCED MANUFACTURING OFFICE Displacing Natural Gas Consumption and Lowering Emissions By enabling process heaters to utilize opportunity gaseous fuels with a fuel-flexible combustion system, this technol- ogy lowers carbon and nitrogen oxide (NO x ) emissions and reduces energy costs for industry. Introduction The refning and chemical sectors account for more than 40% of total industrial natural gas use. Prior to the completion

  18. Fuel Consumption per Vehicle.xls

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

    Selected Survey Years (Gallons) Survey Years Household Composition Households With Children... NA NA 609 597 625 665 Age of Oldest Child Under...

  19. Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    134,954 135,747 132,080 134,757 130,158 133,919 198

  20. Canada's Fuel Consumption Guide | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    from the LEDS Global Partnership. When to Use This Tool While building a low emission strategy for your country's transportation system, this tool is most useful during these...

  1. Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption

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

    1,285,627 1,322,588 1,396,273 1,483,085 1,500,181 1,580,997 1930-2015 Alabama 1967-1998 Alaska 1967-1998 Arizona 1967-1998 Arkansas 1967-1998 California 1967-1998 Colorado 1967-1998 Delaware 1967-1992 Florida 1967-1998 Idaho 1967-1992 Illinois 1967-1998 Indiana 1967-1998 Kansas 1967-1998 Kentucky 1967-1998 Louisiana 1967-1998 Maryland 1967-1998 Michigan 1967-1998 Mississippi 1967-1998 Missouri 1967-1998 Montana 1967-1998 Nebraska 1967-1998 Nevada 1967-1998 New Mexico 1967-1998 New York 1967-1998

  2. Vehicle Fuel Consumption of Natural Gas (Summary)

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

    28,664 29,974 29,970 30,044 35,280 34,459 1997-2015 Alabama 105 192 193 190 224 220 1988-2015 Alaska 20 11 11 9 10 11 1997-2015 Arizona 2,015 1,712 1,707 1,730 2,032 1,976 1988-2015 Arkansas 16 21 21 27 31 28 1988-2015 California 13,572 14,660 14,671 14,121 16,581 16,467 1988-2015 Colorado 249 282 281 269 316 314 1988-2015 Connecticut 41 27 27 46 54 44 1988-2015 Delaware 1 1 1 1 1 1 1988-2015 District of Columbia 883 879 870 861 1,011 993 1988-2015 Florida 60 84 84 175 206 159 1988-2015 Georgia

  3. Vehicle Fuel Consumption of Natural Gas (Summary)

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

    2,996 2,996 2,900 2,996 2,900 2,996 1997-2015 Alabama 19 19 18 19 18 19 2010-2015 Alaska 1 1 1 1 1 1 2010-2015 Arizona 173 173 167 173 167 173 2010-2015 Arkansas 3 3 3 3 3 3 2010-2015 California 1,408 1,408 1,363 1,408 1,363 1,408 2010-2015 Colorado 27 27 26 27 26 27 2010-2015 Connecticut 5 5 4 5 4 5 2010-2015 Delaware 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010-2015 District of Columbia 86 86 83 86 83 86 2010-2015 Florida 18 18 17 18 17 18 2010-2015 Georgia 99 99 96 99 96 99 2010-2015 Hawaii 1 1 1 1 1 1 2010-2015 Idaho

  4. Short-Term Energy Outlook Model Documentation: Motor Gasoline Consumption Model

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2011-01-01

    The motor gasoline consumption module of the Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO) model is designed to provide forecasts of total U.S. consumption of motor gasolien based on estimates of vehicle miles traveled and average vehicle fuel economy.

  5. National Lighting Energy Consumption

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

    Lighting Energy National Lighting Energy Consumption Consumption 390 Billion kWh used for lighting in all 390 Billion kWh used for lighting in all commercial buildings in commercial buildings in 2001 2001 LED (<.1% ) Incandescent 40% HID 22% Fluorescent 38% Lighting Energy Consumption by Lighting Energy Consumption by Breakdown of Lighting Energy Breakdown of Lighting Energy Major Sector and Light Source Type Major Sector and Light Source Type Source: Navigant Consulting, Inc., U.S. Lighting

  6. " Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios;"

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

    3 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2002;" " Level: National Data; " " Row: Values of Shipments within NAICS Codes;" " Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios;" " Unit: Varies." " "," ",,,"Consumption"," " " "," ",,"Consumption","per Dollar" " "," ","Consumption","per Dollar","of Value","RSE" "NAICS",,"per

  7. " Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios;"

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

    3 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2006;" " Level: National Data; " " Row: Values of Shipments within NAICS Codes;" " Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios;" " Unit: Varies." ,,,,"Consumption" ,,,"Consumption","per Dollar" ,,"Consumption","per Dollar","of Value" "NAICS",,"per Employee","of Value Added","of Shipments" "Code(a)","Economic

  8. " Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios;"

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

    3 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2010;" " Level: National Data; " " Row: Values of Shipments within NAICS Codes;" " Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios;" " Unit: Varies." ,,,,"Consumption" ,,,"Consumption","per Dollar" ,,"Consumption","per Dollar","of Value" "NAICS",,"per Employee","of Value Added","of Shipments" "Code(a)","Economic

  9. Progress and interim results of the INPRO joint study on assessment of INS based on closed nuclear fuel cycle with fast reactors

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Usanov, Vladimir; Raj, Baldev; Vasile, Alfredo

    2007-07-01

    The purpose of the work is to review interim results of the Joint Study on assessment of an Innovative Nuclear System based on a Closed Nuclear Fuel Cycle with Fast Reactors (INS CNFC-FR). This study is a part of the IAEA international project for innovative reactors and fuel cycle technologies (INPRO). Now it is being implemented by Canada, China, France, India, Japan, Republic of Korea, Russia, and Ukraine. A report on results of implementation of the first phase of the Joint Study was presented to the INPRO Steering Committee meeting in December 2006. It was also agreed by the Joint Study participants to reveal these results to broader discussion at scientific conferences and meetings. The authors' interpretation of the Joint Study findings and issues is presented in the paper. (authors)

  10. Initial performance assessment of the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste stored at Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. Volume 1, Methodology and results

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rechard, R.P.

    1993-12-01

    This performance assessment characterized plausible treatment options conceived by the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) for its spent fuel and high-level radioactive waste and then modeled the performance of the resulting waste forms in two hypothetical, deep, geologic repositories: one in bedded salt and the other in granite. The results of the performance assessment are intended to help guide INEL in its study of how to prepare wastes and spent fuel for eventual permanent disposal. This assessment was part of the Waste Management Technology Development Program designed to help the US Department of Energy develop and demonstrate the capability to dispose of its nuclear waste. Although numerous caveats must be placed on the results, the general findings were as follows: Though the waste form behavior depended upon the repository type, all current and proposed waste forms provided acceptable behavior in the salt and granite repositories.

  11. End use energy consumption data base: transportation sector

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hooker, J.N.; Rose, A.B.; Greene, D.L.

    1980-02-01

    The transportation fuel and energy use estimates developed a Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) for the End Use Energy Consumption Data Base are documented. The total data base contains estimates of energy use in the United States broken down into many categories within all sectors of the economy: agriculture, mining, construction, manufacturing, commerce, the household, electric utilities, and transportation. The transportation data provided by ORNL generally cover each of the 10 years from 1967 through 1976 (occasionally 1977 and 1978), with omissions in some models. The estimtes are broken down by mode of transport, fuel, region and State, sector of the economy providing transportation, and by the use to which it is put, and, in the case of automobile and bus travel, by the income of the traveler. Fuel types include natural gas, motor and aviation gasoline, residual and diesel oil, liuqefied propane, liquefied butane, and naphtha- and kerosene-type jet engine fuels. Electricity use is also estimated. The mode, fuel, sector, and use categories themselves subsume one, two, or three levels of subcategories, resulting in a very detailed categorization and definitive accounting.

  12. All Consumption Tables.vp

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

    4) June 2007 State Energy Consumption Estimates 1960 Through 2004 2004 Consumption Summary Tables Table S1. Energy Consumption Estimates by Source and End-Use Sector, 2004...

  13. A natural-gas fuel processor for a residential fuel cell system.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Adachi, H.; Ahmed, S.; Lee, S. H. D.; Papadias, D.; Ahluwalia, R. K.; Bendert, J. C.; Kanner, S. A.; Yamazaki, Y.; Japan Institute of Energy

    2009-03-01

    A system model was used to develop an autothermal reforming fuel processor to meet the targets of 80% efficiency (higher heating value) and start-up energy consumption of less than 500 kJ when operated as part of a 1-kWe natural-gas fueled fuel cell system for cogeneration of heat and power. The key catalytic reactors of the fuel processor--namely the autothermal reformer, a two-stage water gas shift reactor and a preferential oxidation reactor--were configured and tested in a breadboard apparatus. Experimental results demonstrated a reformate containing {approx} 48% hydrogen (on a dry basis and with pure methane as fuel) and less than 5 ppm CO. The effects of steam-to-carbon and part load operations were explored.

  14. State energy data report 1996: Consumption estimates

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1999-02-01

    The State Energy Data Report (SEDR) provides annual time series estimates of State-level energy consumption by major economic sectors. The estimates are developed in the Combined State Energy Data System (CSEDS), which is maintained and operated by the Energy Information Administration (EIA). The goal in maintaining CSEDS is to create historical time series of energy consumption by State that are defined as consistently as possible over time and across sectors. CSEDS exists for two principal reasons: (1) to provide State energy consumption estimates to Members of Congress, Federal and State agencies, and the general public and (2) to provide the historical series necessary for EIA`s energy models. To the degree possible, energy consumption has been assigned to five sectors: residential, commercial, industrial, transportation, and electric utility sectors. Fuels covered are coal, natural gas, petroleum, nuclear electric power, hydroelectric power, biomass, and other, defined as electric power generated from geothermal, wind, photovoltaic, and solar thermal energy. 322 tabs.

  15. Fact #840: September 29, 2014 World Renewable Electricity Consumption is

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

    Growing | Department of Energy 40: September 29, 2014 World Renewable Electricity Consumption is Growing Fact #840: September 29, 2014 World Renewable Electricity Consumption is Growing Electricity generated from sources that are renewable - hydroelectric power, bio-fuels, geothermal, solar, wind, wood, waste - have grown 150% from 1980 to 2011 (latest year available). Of the selected countries/regions shown, Europe has consistently had the highest consumption of renewable electricity.

  16. Motor vehicle fuel economy, the forgotten HC control stragegy?

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Deluchi, M.; Wang, Quanlu; Greene, D.L.

    1992-06-01

    Emissions of hydrocarbons from motor vehicles are recognized as major contributors to ozone pollution in urban areas. Petroleum-based motor fuels contain volatile organic compounds (VOC) which, together with oxides of nitrogen, promote the formation of ozone in the troposphere via complex photochemical reactions. VOC emissions from the tailpipe and evaporation from the fuel and engine systems of highway vehicles are believed to account for about 40% of total VOC emissions in any region. But motor fuels also generate emissions throughout the fuel cycle, from crude oil production to refining, storage, transportation, and handling, that can make significant contributions to the total inventory of VOC emissions. Many of these sources of emissions are directly related to the quantity of fuel produced and handled throughout the fuel cycle. It is, therefore, reasonable to expect that a reduction in total fuel throughput might result in a reduction of VOC emissions. In particular, reducing vehicle fuel consumption by increasing vehicle fuel economy should reduce total fuel throughput, thereby cutting total emissions of VOCS. In this report we identify the sources of VOC emissions throughout the motor fuel cycle, quantify them to the extent possible, and describe their dependence on automobile and light truck fuel economy.

  17. Fuel-Flexible Microturbine and Gasifier System

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2009-12-01

    This factsheet describes a project that will develop and demonstrate a prototype microturbine combined heat and power system fueled by synthesis gas and integrated with a biomass gasifier, enabling reduced fossil fuel consumption and carbon dioxide emissions.

  18. Compressed natural gas and liquefied petroleum gas as alternative fuels

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Moussavi, M.; Al-Turk, M. . Civil Engineering Dept.)

    1993-12-01

    The use of alternative fuels in the transportation industry has gained a strong support in recent years. In this paper an attempt was made to evaluate the use of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and compressed natural gas (NG) by 25 LPG-bifuel and 14 NG-bifuel vehicles that are operated by 33 transit systems throughout Nebraska. A set of performance measures such as average fuel efficiency in kilometers per liter, average fuel cost per kilometer, average oil consumption, and average operation and maintenance cost for alternatively fueled vehicles were calculated and compared with similar performance measures of gasoline powered vehicles. The results of the study showed that the average fuel efficiency of gasoline is greater than those of LPG and NG, and the average fuel costs (dollars per kilometer) for LPG and NG are smaller than those for gasoline for most of the vehicles under this study.

  19. Microsoft PowerPoint - 2013_summer_fuels.pptx

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

    S F l O tl k 2013 Summer Fuels Outlook April 9, 2013 www.eia.gov U.S. Energy Information Administration Independent Statistics & Analysis Key factors driving the short-term outlook * World liquid fuels consumption growth driven by emerging economies, with continuing consumption declines in OECD economies, with continuing consumption declines in OECD countries. * Non-OPEC supply growth, particularly in North America, pp y g , p y , expected to keep pace with world liquid fuels consumption

  20. Fuel flexible fuel injector

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Tuthill, Richard S; Davis, Dustin W; Dai, Zhongtao

    2015-02-03

    A disclosed fuel injector provides mixing of fuel with airflow by surrounding a swirled fuel flow with first and second swirled airflows that ensures mixing prior to or upon entering the combustion chamber. Fuel tubes produce a central fuel flow along with a central airflow through a plurality of openings to generate the high velocity fuel/air mixture along the axis of the fuel injector in addition to the swirled fuel/air mixture.