Powered by Deep Web Technologies
Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


1

EIA Energy Efficiency-Table 3c. Capacity Adjusted Value of Production a by  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

c c Page Last Modified: May 2010 Table 3c. Capacity Adjusted Value of Production 1 by Selected Industries, 1998, 2002, and 2006 (Current Billion Dollars) MECS Survey Years NAICS Subsector and Industry 1998 2002 2006 311 Food Manufacturing 430 468 552 312 Beverage and Tobacco Product Manufacturing 98 120 131 313 Textile Mills 57 50 44 314 Textile Product Mills 31 34 36 315 Apparel Manufacturing 66 53 31 316 Leather and Allied Product Manufacturing 11 8 7 321 Wood Product Manufacturing 87 94 110 322 Paper Manufacturing 159 160 177 323 Printing and Related Support Activities 104 109 107 324 Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing 134 215 523 325 Chemical Manufacturing 415 470 657 326 Plastics and Rubber Products Manufacturing 158 183 212 327 Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing 85 97 134

2

TABLE 1. Nuclear Reactor, State, Type, Net Capacity, Generation...  

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

TABLE 1. Nuclear Reactor, State, Type, Net Capacity, Generation, and Capacity Factor " "PlantReactor Name","Generator ID","State","Type","2009 Summer Capacity"," 2010 Annual...

3

Table 1. U.S. Biodiesel Production Capacity and Production  

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

Biodiesel Production Capacity and Production Biodiesel Production Capacity and Production (million gallons) Period 2011 January 2,114 35 February 2,104 40 March 2,081 60 April 2,101 71 May 2,064 77 June 2,069 81

4

Table 39. Production Capacity of Operable Petroleum Refineries by State as of January 1, 2003  

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

State/Refiner/Location Alkylates Aromatics State/Refiner/Location Alkylates Aromatics Isobutane Lubricants Isomers Isopentane and Isohexane Asphalt and Road Oil Marketable Petroleum Coke Hydrogen (MMcfd) Sulfur (short tons per day) Table 4. Production Capacity of Operable Petroleum Refineries by State as of January 1, 2013 (Barrels per Stream Day, Except Where Noted) Isooctane a

5

EIA Energy Efficiency-Table 4c. Capacity Adjusted Value of Production a by  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

c c Page Last Modified: May 2010 Table 4c. Capacity Adjusted Value of Production 1 by Selected Industries, 1998, 2002, and 2006 (Billion 2000 Dollars 2) MECS Survey Years NAICS Subsector and Industry 1998 2002 2006 311 Food Manufacturing 432 459 487 312 Beverage and Tobacco Product Manufacturing 116 110 115 313 Textile Mills 55 52 42 314 Textile Product Mills 32 34 32 315 Apparel Manufacturing 67 53 31 316 Leather and Allied Product Manufacturing 11 8 6 321 Wood Product Manufacturing 88 95 98 322 Paper Manufacturing 172 163 160 323 Printing and Related Support Activities 107 106 99 324 Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing 221 241 254 325 Chemical Manufacturing 437 468 510 326 Plastics and Rubber Products Manufacturing 162 181 175

6

Table 4. Biodiesel Producers and Production Capacity by State, September 2013  

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

Biodiesel Producers and Production Capacity by State, September 2013" Biodiesel Producers and Production Capacity by State, September 2013" "State","Number of Producers","Annual Production Capacity (million gallons per year)" "Alabama",3,47 "Alaska",0,0 "Arizona",1,2 "Arkansas",3,85 "California",9,60.65 "Colorado",0,0 "Connecticut",2,3.05 "Delaware",0,0 "District of Columbia",0,0 "Florida",0,0 "Georgia",3,16 "Hawaii",1,5 "Idaho",1,1 "Illinois",5,166.5 "Indiana",2,104 "Iowa",8,249.5 "Kansas",1,1.2 "Kentucky",5,68.1 "Louisiana",1,12 "Maine",1,0.6 "Maryland",0,0 "Massachussetts",1,0.5 "Michigan",2,17.916

7

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

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

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

8

Refinery Capacity Report  

Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

Report --- Full report in PDF (1 MB) XLS --- Refinery Capacity Data by individual refinery as of January 1, 2006 Tables 1 Number and Capacity of Operable Petroleum...

9

Table Search (or Ranking Tables)  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

;Table Search #3 #12;Outline · Goals of table search · Table search #1: Deep Web · Table search #3 search Table search #1: Deep Web · Table search #3: (setup): Fusion Tables · Table search #2: WebTables ­Version 1: modify document search ­Version 2: recover table semantics #12;Searching the Deep Web store

Halevy, Alon

10

Table 11.6 Installed Nameplate Capacity of Fossil-Fuel Steam-Electric Generators With Environmental Equipment, 1985-2010 (Megawatts)  

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

Installed Nameplate Capacity of Fossil-Fuel Steam-Electric Generators With Environmental Equipment," Installed Nameplate Capacity of Fossil-Fuel Steam-Electric Generators With Environmental Equipment," " 1985-2010 (Megawatts)" "Year","Coal",,,,"Petroleum and Natural Gas",,,,"Total 1" ,,,"Flue Gas","Total 2",,,"Flue Gas","Total 2",,,"Flue Gas","Total 2" ,"Particulate","Cooling","Desulfurization",,"Particulate","Cooling","Desulfurization",,"Particulate","Cooling","Desulfurization" ,"Collectors","Towers","(Scrubbers)",,"Collectors","Towers","(Scrubbers)",,"Collectors","Towers","(Scrubbers)"

11

ARM - Datastreams - mwr3c  

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

Datastreamsmwr3c Datastreamsmwr3c Documentation Data Quality Plots Citation DOI: 10.5439/1025248 [ What is this? ] Generate Citation ARM Data Discovery Browse Data Comments? We would love to hear from you! Send us a note below or call us at 1-888-ARM-DATA. Send Datastream : MWR3C Microwave Radiometer, 3 Channel Active Dates 2011.01.11 - 2014.01.02 Measurement Categories Radiometric Originating Instrument Microwave Radiometer, 3 Channel (MWR3C) Measurements Only measurements considered scientifically relevant are shown below by default. Show all measurements Measurement Units Variable Altitude above mean sea level m alt Azimuth deg azimuth ( time ) Base time in Epoch seconds since 1970-1-1 0:00:00 0:00 base_time Elevation deg elevation ( time ) Hail accumulation hit/cm^2 hail_accumulation ( time )

12

EIA - Appendix H - Reference Case Projections for Electricity Capacity and  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

for Electricity Capacity and Generation by Fuel Tables (2006-2030) for Electricity Capacity and Generation by Fuel Tables (2006-2030) International Energy Outlook 2009 Reference Case Projections for Electricity Capacity and Generation by Fuel Tables (2006-2030) Formats Data Table Titles (1 to 18 complete) Reference Case Projections for Electricity Capacity and Generation by Fuel Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Reference Case Projections for Electricity Capacity and Generation by Fuel Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table H1 World Total Installed Generating Capacity by Region and Country Table H1. World Total Installed Generating Capacity by Region and Country. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

13

EIA - Appendix H - Reference Case Projections for Electricity Capacity and  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Reference Case Projections for Electricity Capacity and Generation by Fuel Tables (2005-2030) Reference Case Projections for Electricity Capacity and Generation by Fuel Tables (2005-2030) International Energy Outlook 2008 Reference Case Projections for Electricity Capacity and Generation by Fuel Tables (2005-2030) Formats Data Table Titles (1 to 12 complete) Reference Case Projections for Electricity Capacity and Generation by Fuel Data Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Reference Case Projections for Electricity Capacity and Generation by Fuel Data Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table H1 World Total Installed Generating Capacity by Region and Country Table H1. World Total Installed Generating Capacity by Region and Country. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

14

EIA - Appendix H - Reference Case Projections for Electricity Capacity and  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

for Electricity Capacity and Generation by Fuel Tables (2007-2035) for Electricity Capacity and Generation by Fuel Tables (2007-2035) International Energy Outlook 2010 Reference Case Projections for Electricity Capacity and Generation by Fuel Tables (2007-2035) Formats Data Table Titles (1 to 18 complete) Reference Case Projections for Electricity Capacity and Generation by Fuel Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Appendix H. Reference Case Projections for Electricity Capacity and Generation by Fuel Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table H1 World Total Installed Generating Capacity by Region and Country Table H1. World Total Installed Generating Capacity by Region and Country. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

15

Stage 3c: Developing and Assessing Low Emissions Development Scenarios |  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Stage 3c: Developing and Assessing Low Emissions Development Scenarios Stage 3c: Developing and Assessing Low Emissions Development Scenarios Jump to: navigation, search Stage 3 LEDS Home Introduction to Framework Assess current country plans, policies, practices, and capacities Develop_BAU Stage 4: Prioritizing and Planning for Actions Begin execution of implementation plans 1.0. Organizing the LEDS Process 1.1. Institutional Structure for LEDS 1.2. Workplan to Develop the LEDS 1.3. Roles and responsibilities to develop LEDS 2.1. Assess current country plans, policies, practices, and capacities 2.2. Compile lessons learned and good practices from ongoing and previous sustainable development efforts in the country 2.3. Assess public and private sector capacity to support initiatives 2.4. Assess and improve the national GHG inventory and other

16

Annual Energy Outlook 2007 - Low Price Case Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4-2030) 4-2030) Annual Energy Outlook 2007 with Projections to 2030 MS Excel Viewer Spreadsheets are provided in Excel Low Price Case Tables (2004-2030) Table Title Formats Summary Low Price Case Tables Low Price Case Tables Table 1. Total Energy Supply and Disposition Summary Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions Table 9. Electricity Generating Capacity Table 10. Electricity Trade Table 11. Petroleum Supply and Disposition Balance

17

Annual Energy Outlook 2007 - Low Economic Growth Case Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Low Macroeconomic Growth Case Tables (2004-2030) Low Macroeconomic Growth Case Tables (2004-2030) Annual Energy Outlook 2007 with Projections to 2030 MS Excel Viewer Spreadsheets are provided in Excel Low Economic Growth Case Tables (2004-2030) Table Title Formats Summary Low Economic Growth Case Tables Low Economic Growth Case Tables Table 1. Total Energy Supply and Disposition Summary Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions Table 9. Electricity Generating Capacity

18

capacity | OpenEI  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

capacity capacity Dataset Summary Description This dataset comes from the Energy Information Administration (EIA), and is part of the 2011 Annual Energy Outlook Report (AEO2011). This dataset is table 9, and contains only the reference case. The dataset uses gigawatts. The data is broken down into power only, combined heat and power, cumulative planned additions, cumulative unplanned conditions, and cumulative retirements and total electric power sector capacity . Source EIA Date Released April 26th, 2011 (3 years ago) Date Updated Unknown Keywords 2011 AEO capacity consumption EIA Electricity generating Data application/vnd.ms-excel icon AEO2011: Electricity Generating Capacity- Reference Case (xls, 130.1 KiB) Quality Metrics Level of Review Peer Reviewed Comment

19

Annual Energy Outlook 2009 - High Price Case Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6-2030) 6-2030) Annual Energy Outlook 2009 with Projections to 2030 XLS GIF Spreadsheets are provided in Excel High Price Case Tables (2006-2030) Table Title Formats Summary High Price Case Tables PDF GIF High Price Case Tables XLS GIF Table 1. Total Energy Supply and Disposition Summary XLS GIF Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source XLS GIF Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source XLS GIF Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption XLS GIF Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption XLS GIF Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption XLS GIF Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption XLS GIF Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions XLS GIF Table 9. Electricity Generating Capacity

20

3C Holding AG | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Holding AG Holding AG Jump to: navigation, search Name 3C Holding AG Place Bad Vilbel/Frankfurt am Main, Germany Zip 61118 Sector Services Product 3C Holding AG develops trading strategies for EU allowances, JI/CDM Projects and climate neutral events, products and services. Merged with Factor Consulting to form First Climate. References 3C Holding AG[1] LinkedIn Connections CrunchBase Profile No CrunchBase profile. Create one now! This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by expanding it. 3C Holding AG is a company located in Bad Vilbel/Frankfurt am Main, Germany . References ↑ "3C Holding AG" Retrieved from "http://en.openei.org/w/index.php?title=3C_Holding_AG&oldid=341624" Categories: Clean Energy Organizations Companies Organizations Stubs

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


21

Refinery Capacity Report  

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

Refinery Capacity Report Refinery Capacity Report June 2013 With Data as of January 1, 2013 Independent Statistics & Analysis www.eia.gov U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 This report was prepared by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the statistical and analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. By law, EIA's data, analyses, and forecasts are independent of approval by any other officer or employee of the United States Government. The views in this report therefore should not be construed as representing those of the Department of Energy or other Federal agencies. Table 1. Number and Capacity of Operable Petroleum Refineries by PAD District and State as of January 1, 2013

22

Conversion Tables  

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

Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center - Conversion Tables Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center - Conversion Tables Contents taken from Glossary: Carbon Dioxide and Climate, 1990. ORNL/CDIAC-39, Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Third Edition. Edited by: Fred O'Hara Jr. 1 - International System of Units (SI) Prefixes 2 - Useful Quantities in CO2 3 - Common Conversion Factors 4 - Common Energy Unit Conversion Factors 5 - Geologic Time Scales 6 - Factors and Units for Calculating Annual CO2 Emissions Using Global Fuel Production Data Table 1. International System of Units (SI) Prefixes Prefix SI Symbol Multiplication Factor exa E 1018 peta P 1015 tera T 1012 giga G 109 mega M 106 kilo k 103 hecto h 102 deka da 10 deci d 10-1 centi c 10-2

23

COMMUNITY CAPACITY BUILDING THROUGH TECHNOLOGY  

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

COMMUNITY CAPACITY BUILDING THROUGH TECHNOLOGY COMMUNITY CAPACITY BUILDING THROUGH TECHNOLOGY Empowering Communities in the Age of E-Government Prepared by Melinda Downing, Environmental Justice Program Manager, U.S. Department of Energy MAR 06 MARCH 2006 Since 1999, the Department of Energy has worked with the National Urban Internet and others to create community capacity through technology.  Empowering Communities in the Age of E-Government Table of Contents Message from the Environmental Justice Program Manager . . . . . . . . 3 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Partnerships. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Process Chart: From Agency to Community. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Case Studies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

24

EIA-Annual Energy Outlook 2010 - Low Oil PriceTables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Oil Price Tables (2007-2035) Oil Price Tables (2007-2035) Annual Energy Outlook 2010 Main Low Oil Price Tables (2007- 2035) Table Title Formats Summary Low Oil Price Case Tables PDF Gif Year-by-Year Low Oil Price Case Tables Excel Gif Table 1. Total Energy Supply and Disposition Summary Excel Gif Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption Excel Gif Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions Excel Gif Table 9. Electricity Generating Capacity

25

Table 92  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2. Domestic Refinery Distillation Base Capacity, Expansion, and Utilization 2. Domestic Refinery Distillation Base Capacity, Expansion, and Utilization (million barrels per day) 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 PAD District I Base Capacity 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 Capacity Additions 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Capacity 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 PAD District II Base Capacity 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 Capacity Additions 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Capacity 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 PAD District III Base Capacity 7.9 8.1 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 Capacity Additions 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 Total Capacity 7.9 8.1 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.5 8.6 PAD District IV Base Capacity 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6

26

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Adobe Acrobat Reader Logo Adobe Acrobat Reader is required for PDF format Excel logo Spreadsheets are provided in excel 1 to117 - Complete set of Supplemental Tables PDF Energy Consumption by Sector (Census Division) Table 1. New England XLS PDF Table 2. Middle Atlantic XLS PDF Table 3. East North Central XLS PDF Table 4. West North Central XLS PDF Table 5. South Atlantic XLS PDF Table 6. East South Central XLS PDF Table 7. West South Central XLS PDF Table 8. Mountain XLS PDF Table 9. Pacific XLS PDF Table 10. Total United States XLS PDF Energy Prices by Sector (Census Division) Table 11. New England XLS PDF Table 12. Middle Atlantic XLS PDF Table 13. East North Central XLS PDF Table 14. West North Central XLS PDF Table 15. South Atlantic XLS PDF Table 16. East South Central

27

Fundamentals of Capacity Control  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Whereas capacity planning determines in advance the capacities required to implement a production program, capacity control determines the actual capacities implemented shortly beforehand. The capacity control...

Prof. Dr.-Ing. habil. Hermann Ldding

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

28

TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ...........................................................................................................................................II  

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

i i ii TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ...........................................................................................................................................II EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................................................... 4 COMPLIANCE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................... 6 COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA) .................... 6

29

EIA - Projections of Oil Production Capacity and Oil Production In three  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Projections of Oil Production Capacity and Oil Production in Three Cases (1990-2030) Projections of Oil Production Capacity and Oil Production in Three Cases (1990-2030) International Energy Outlook 2006 Projections of Oil Production Capacity and Oil Production In Three Cases Data Tables (1990-2030) Formats Table Data Titles (1 to 6 complete) Projections of Oil Production Capacity and Oil Production In Three Cases Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Projections of Oil Production Capacity and Oil Production In Three Cases Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table E1 World Oil Production Capacity by Region and Country, Reference Case Projections of Oil Production Capacity and Oil Production In Three Cases Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

30

Privacy Issues of the W3C Geolocation API  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Framework 5 W3C Geolocation API Speci?cation 5.1 User Agentof the W3C Geolocation API Introduction With the advent ofIssues of the W3C Geolocation API What does it do? Google

Doty, Nick; Mulligan, Deirdre K.; Wilde, Erik

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

31

1992 CBECS Detailed Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Detailed Tables Detailed Tables To download all 1992 detailed tables: Download Acrobat Reader for viewing PDF files. Yellow Arrow Buildings Characteristics Tables (PDF format) (70 tables, 230 pages, file size 1.39 MB) Yellow Arrow Energy Consumption and Expenditures Tables (PDF format) (47 tables, 208 pages, file size 1.28 MB) Yellow Arrow Energy End-Use Tables (PDF format) (6 tables, 6 pages, file size 31.7 KB) Detailed tables for other years: Yellow Arrow 1999 CBECS Yellow Arrow 1995 CBECS Background information on detailed tables: Yellow Arrow Description of Detailed Tables and Categories of Data Yellow Arrow Statistical Significance of Data 1992 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) Detailed Tables Data from the 1992 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) are presented in three groups of detailed tables:

32

Table 25  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

89 89 Table 25 Created on: 1/3/2014 3:10:33 PM Table 25. Natural gas home customer-weighted heating degree days, New England Middle Atlantic East North Central West North Central South Atlantic Month/Year/Type of data CT, ME, MA, NH, RI, VT NJ, NY, PA IL, IN, MI, OH, WI IA, KS, MN, MO, ND, NE, SD DE, FL, GA, MD, DC, NC, SC, VA, WV November Normal 702 665 758 841 442 2012 751 738 772 748 527 2013 756 730 823 868 511 % Diff (normal to 2013) 7.7 9.8 8.6 3.2 15.6 % Diff (2012 to 2013) 0.7 -1.1 6.6 16.0 -3.0 November to November Normal 702 665 758 841 442 2012 751 738 772 748 527 2013 756 730 823 868 511 % Diff (normal to 2013) 7.7 9.8 8.6 3.2 15.6 % Diff (2012 to 2013) 0.7 -1.1 6.6 16.0 -3.0

33

Climate Zone 3C | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

C C Jump to: navigation, search A type of climate defined in the ASHRAE 169-2006 standard consisting of Climate Zone Number 3 and Climate Zone Subtype C. Climate Zone 3C is defined as Warm - Marine with IP Units CDD50ºF ≤ 4500 AND HDD65ºF ≤ 3600 and SI Units CDD10ºC ≤ 2500 AND HDD18ºC ≤ 2000 . The following places are categorized as class 3C climate zones: Alameda County, California Marin County, California Mendocino County, California Monterey County, California Napa County, California San Benito County, California San Francisco County, California San Luis Obispo County, California San Mateo County, California Santa Barbara County, California Santa Clara County, California Santa Cruz County, California Sonoma County, California Ventura County, California

34

chapter 5. Detailed Tables  

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

5. Detailed Tables 5. Detailed Tables Chapter 5. Detailed Tables The following tables present detailed characteristics of vehicles in the residential sector. Data are from the 1994 Residential Transportation Energy Consumption Survey. Table Organization The "Detailed Tables" section consists of three types of tables: (1) Tables of totals such as number of vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) or gallons consumed; (2) tables of per household statistics such as VMT per household; and (3) tables of per-vehicle statistics, such as vehicle fuel consumption per vehicle. The tables have been grouped together by specific topics such as model-year data or family-income data to facilitate finding related information. The Quick-Reference Guide to the detailed tables indicates major topics of each table.

35

Notices TABLE  

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

7 Federal Register 7 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 160 / Thursday, August 18, 2011 / Notices TABLE 2-NET BURDEN CHANGE-Continued 2011-2012 2012-2013 Change % Change Burden disposition Total Applicants .................................... 23,611,500 24,705,864 +1,094,364 +4.63 Net decrease in burden. The increase in applicants is offset by the results of the Department's simplification changes. This has created an over- all decrease in burden of 8.94% or 2,881,475 hours. Total Applicant Burden ......................... 32,239,328 29,357,853 ¥2,881,475 ¥8.94 Total Annual Responses ....................... 32,239,328 46,447,024 +14,207,696 +44.07 Cost for All Applicants .......................... $159,370.20 $234,804.24 $75,434.04 +47.33 The Department is proud that efforts to simplify the FAFSA submission

36

Table 4  

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

4. Mean Annual Electricity Expenditures for Lighting, by Number of 4. Mean Annual Electricity Expenditures for Lighting, by Number of Household Members by Number of Rooms, 1993 (Dollars) Number of Rooms Number of Household Members All Households One to Three Four Five Six Seven Eight or More RSE Column Factors: 0.5 1.8 1.1 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.2 RSE Row Factors All Households................................... 83 49 63 76 87 104 124 2.34 One..................................................... 55 44 51 54 69 78 87 5.33 Two..................................................... 80 56 63 77 82 96 107 3.38 Three.................................................. 92 60 73 82 95 97 131 4.75 Four.................................................... 106 64 78 93 96 124 134 4.53 Five or More....................................... 112 70 83 98 99 117 150 5.89 Notes: -- To obtain the RSE percentage for any table cell, multiply the

37

Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

38

1995 Detailed Tables  

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

Households, Buildings & Industry > Commercial Buildings Energy Households, Buildings & Industry > Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey > Detailed Tables 1995 Detailed Tables Data from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) are presented in three groups of detailed tables: Buildings Characteristics Tables, number of buildings and amount of floorspace for major building characteristics. Energy Consumption and Expenditures Tables, energy consumption and expenditures for major energy sources. Energy End-Use Data, total, electricity and natural gas consumption and energy intensities for nine specific end-uses. Summary Table—All Principal Buildings Activities (HTML Format) Background information on detailed tables: Description of Detailed Tables and Categories of Data Statistical Significance of Data

39

Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity  

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

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

40

Data:Fd677d3c-5c3c-4a0c-a499-9eac124aadbc | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

d3c-5c3c-4a0c-a499-9eac124aadbc d3c-5c3c-4a0c-a499-9eac124aadbc No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Entergy Louisiana Inc Effective date: 2006/01/31 End date if known: Rate name: RIDER TO SCHEDULE LIPS Sector: Industrial Description: This Rider Schedule is applicable, subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, to additional service in conjunction with Firm Power Service to Customer under Rate Schedule LIPS, when prearrangement has been made for the installation of facilities of adequate capacity and suitable phase and voltage adjacent to the premises to be served. All service is supplied at one location and at the voltage prescribed in Rate Schedule LIPS so as to permit delivery and metering of the total service at a single point of delivery and by a single metering installation

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


41

Capacity Markets for Electricity  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

ternative Approaches for Power Capacity Markets, Papers andprof id=pjoskow. Capacity Markets for Electricity [13]Utility Commission- Capacity Market Questions, available at

Creti, Anna; Fabra, Natalia

2004-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

42

Table 62  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2. Electric Power Projections for EMM Region 2. Electric Power Projections for EMM Region East Central Area Reliability Coordination Agreement - 01 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Electricity Generating Capacity 1/ (gigawatts) Electric Power Sector Coal Steam 84.89 85.17 84.80 84.45 84.45 84.45 84.45 84.33 83.07 82.48 82.13 82.13 82.09 Other Fossil Steam 2/ 3.96 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.71 2.09 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 Combined Cycle 11.66 11.66 11.66 12.92 12.92 12.92 12.92 12.92 12.92 12.92 12.92 12.92 12.92 Combustion Turbine/Diesel 20.38 20.73 20.71 20.71 20.71 20.71 20.71 20.71 18.34 18.34 18.34 18.34 18.34 Nuclear Power 7.73 7.74 7.74 7.74 7.74 7.84 7.84 7.84 7.84 7.84 7.84 7.84 7.84 Pumped Storage/Other 3/ 3.51 3.51 3.51 3.51 3.51 3.51 3.51 3.51 3.51 3.51 3.51 3.51 3.51 Fuel Cells 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

43

PROJECT REPORT HVAC EQUIPMENT DEMOGRAPHICS AND CAPACITY  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

PROJECT REPORT HVAC EQUIPMENT DEMOGRAPHICS AND CAPACITY ANALYSIS TOOLS APPLICABLE TO MULTI Commercial HVAC Design Process 12 5.0 Conclusion 18 6.0 References 19 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTIONS #12;MULTI performance by collectively improving the enve- lope, lighting and HVAC systems. The primary goals of the UC

California at Davis, University of

44

The Infrared Jet in 3C31  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

We report the detection of infrared emission from the jet of the nearby FR I radio galaxy 3C 31. The jet was detected with the IRAC instrument on Spitzer at 4.5 micron, 5.8 micron, and 8.0 micron out to 30" (13 kpc) from the nucleus. We measure radio, infrared, optical, and X-ray fluxes in three regions along the jet determined by the infrared and X-ray morphology. Radio through X-ray spectra in these regions demonstrate that the emission can be interpreted as synchrotron emission from a broken power-law distribution of electron energies. We find significant differences in the high energy spectra with increasing distance from the nucleus. Specifically, the high energy slope increases from 0.86 to 1.72 from 1 kpc to 12 kpc along the jet, and the spectral break likewise increases in frequency along the jet from 10-100's of GHz to ~20 THz. Thus the ratio of IR to X-ray flux in the jet increases by at least an order of magnitude with increasing distance from the nucleus. We argue that these changes cannot simply ...

Lanz, Lauranne; Kraft, Ralph P; Birkinshaw, Mark; Lal, Dharam V; Forman, William R; Jones, Christine; Worrall, Diana M

2015-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

45

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Adobe Acrobat Reader Logo Adobe Acrobat Reader is required for PDF format. Adobe Acrobat Reader Logo Adobe Acrobat Reader is required for PDF format. MS Excel Viewer Spreadsheets are provided in excel Errata - August 25, 2004 1 to117 - Complete set of of Supplemental Tables PDF Table 1. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (New England) XLS PDF Table 2. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (Middle Atlantic) XLS PDF Table 3. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (East North Central) XLS PDF Table 4. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (West North Central) XLS PDF Table 5. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (South Atlantic) XLS PDF Table 6. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (East South Central) XLS PDF Table 7. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (West South Central) XLS PDF Table 8. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (Mountain)

46

1999 CBECS Detailed Tables  

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

Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) > Detailed Tables Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) > Detailed Tables 1999 CBECS Detailed Tables Building Characteristics | Consumption & Expenditures Data from the 1999 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) are presented in the Building Characteristics tables, which include number of buildings and total floorspace for various Building Characteristics, and Consumption and Expenditures tables, which include energy usage figures for major energy sources. A table of Relative Standard Errors (RSEs) is included as a worksheet tab in each Excel tables. Complete sets of RSE tables are also available in .pdf format. (What is an RSE?) Preliminary End-Use Consumption Estimates for 1999 | Description of 1999 Detailed Tables and Categories of Data

47

1994 lubricating oil and wax capacities of U. S. and Canadian refineries  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The paper consists of several tables which list the names of US and Canadian refineries, their location, and their capacity for production of lubricating oil and waxes categorized by finishing operations and primary processing. A separate table lists US and Canadian re-refiners and their capacity for refining waste lubricating oils.

Not Available

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

48

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

December 22, 2000 (Next Release: December, 2001) Related Links Annual Energy Outlook 2001 Assumptions to the AEO2001 NEMS Conference Contacts Forecast Homepage EIA Homepage AEO Supplement Reference Case Forecast (1999-2020) (HTML) Table 1. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (New England) Table 2. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (Middle Atlantic) Table 3. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (East North Central) Table 4. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (West North Central) Table 5. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (South Atlantic) Table 6. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (East South Central) Table 7. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (West South Central) Table 8. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (Mountain)

49

FAQs about Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

50

THE ACCELERATING JET OF 3C 279  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Analysis of the proper motions of the subparsec scale jet of the quasar 3C 279 at 15 GHz with the Very Long Baseline Array shows significant accelerations in four of nine superluminal features. Analysis of these motions is combined with the analysis of flux density light curves to constrain values of Lorentz factor and viewing angle (and their derivatives) for each component. The data for each of these components are consistent with significant changes to the Lorentz factor, viewing angle, and azimuthal angle, suggesting jet bending with changes in speed. We see that for these observed components Lorentz factors are in the range {Gamma} = 10-41, viewing angles are in the range thetav = 0. Degree-Sign 1-5. Degree-Sign 0, and intrinsic (source frame) flux density is in the range, F{sub {nu},int} 1.5 Multiplication-Sign 10{sup -9}-1.5 Multiplication-Sign 10{sup -5} Jy. Considering individual components, the Lorentz factors vary from {Gamma} = 11-16 for C1, {Gamma} = 31-41 for C5, {Gamma} = 29-41 for C6, and {Gamma} = 9-12 for C8, indicating that there is no single underlying flow speed to the jet and likely we are seeing pattern speeds from shocks in the jet. The viewing angles vary in time from 0. Degree-Sign 6 to 1. Degree-Sign 5 in the case of C1 (the least extreme example), from 0. Degree-Sign 5 to 5. Degree-Sign 0 in the case of C8, and from 0. Degree-Sign 1 to 0. Degree-Sign 9 for C5 (the last two being the most extreme examples). The intrinsic flux density varies by factors from 1.4 for C8 and 430 for C5. Theoretical analysis of the accelerations also indicates potential jet bending. In addition, for one component, C5, polarization measurements also set limits to the trajectory of the jet.

Bloom, S. D. [Department of Physics and Astronomy, Hampden-Sydney College, Box 821, Hampden-Sydney, VA 23943 (United States); Fromm, C. M.; Ros, E., E-mail: sbloom@hsc.edu [Max-Planck-Institut fuer Radioastronomie, Auf dem Huegel 69, D-53121 Bonn (Germany)

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

51

FY 2005 Statistical Table  

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

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) Table of Contents Summary...................................................................................................... 1 Mandatory Funding....................................................................................... 3 Energy Supply.............................................................................................. 4 Non-Defense site acceleration completion................................................... 6 Uranium enrichment D&D fund.................................................................... 6 Non-Defense environmental services.......................................................... 6 Science.........................................................................................................

52

Microsoft Word - table_13.doc  

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

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Natural Gas Monthly 31 Table 13 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:28:44 PM Table 13. Activities of underground natural gas storage operators, by state, September 2013 (volumes in million cubic feet) State Field Count Total Storage Capacity Working Gas Storage Capacity Natural Gas in Underground Storage at End of Period Change in Working Gas from Same Period Previous Year Storage Activity Base Gas Working Gas Total Volume Percent Injections Withdrawals Alabama 2 35,400 27,350 8,050 21,262 29,312 2,852 15.5 1,743 450 Alaska a 5 83,592 67,915 14,197 20,455 34,652 NA NA 1,981 30 Arkansas 2 21,853 12,178 9,648 3,372 13,020 -1,050 -23.7 204 0 California 14 599,711 374,296

53

Monitoring Infrastructure Capacity Monitoring Infrastructure Capacity  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Levinson, D. (2000) Monitoring Infrastructure Capacity p. 165-181 in Land Market Monitoring for Smart Urban) task. Monitoring infrastructure capacity is at least as complex as monitoring urban land markets Levinson, D. (2000) Monitoring Infrastructure Capacity p. 165-181 in Land Market Monitoring for Smart Urban

Levinson, David M.

54

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

The AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the The AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2002 (AEO2002) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 1999 to 2020. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2002, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2002 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of one hundred and seven tables is presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO2002 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Forecasts for 2000-2002 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, which are the official EIA short-term forecasts and are based on more current

55

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Homepage Homepage Supplement Tables to the AEO2001 The AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2001 (AEO2001) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 1999 to 2020. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2001, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2001 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of ninety-five tables is presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO2001 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Forecasts for 1999 and 2000 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, which are the official EIA short-term forecasts and are based on more current information than the AEO.

56

Microsoft Word - table_A2.doc  

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

4 4 Figure A1. Natural gas processing plant capacity in the United States, 2013 2012 Table A2. Natural gas processing plant capacity, by state, 2013 (million cubic feet per day) Alabama 1,403 Arkansas 24 California 926 Colorado 5,450 Florida 90 Illinois 2,100 Kansas 1,818 Kentucky 240 Louisiana 10,737 Michigan 479 Mississippi 1,123 State Plant Capacity Notes: Coverage includes the Lower 48 States (excluding Alaska and Hawaii). Sources: Energy Information Administration (EIA), Form EIA-757, "Natural Gas Processing Plant Survey." State Plant Capacity Montana 161 New Mexico 3,149 North Dakota 660 Ohio 10 Oklahoma 4,976 Pennsylvania 369

57

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2000 (AEO2000) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 1998 to 2020. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2000, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2000 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of ninety-six tables are presented. AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2000 (AEO2000) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 1998 to 2020. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2000, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2000 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of ninety-six tables are presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO200 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Forecasts for 1998, and 2000 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, Fourth Quarter 1999 or Short Term Energy Outlook, First Quarter 2000, which are the official EIA short-term forecasts and are based on more current information than the AEO.

58

Table 2. Ten Largest Plants by Generation Capacity, 2010  

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

Oklahoma" Oklahoma" "1. Northeastern","Coal","Public Service Co of Oklahoma",1815 "2. Muskogee","Coal","Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co",1524 "3. Seminole","Gas","Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co",1504 "4. Kiamichi Energy Facility","Gas","Kiowa Power Partners LLC",1178 "5. Redbud Power Plant","Gas","Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co",1160 "6. Oneta Energy Center","Gas","Calpine Central L P",1086 "7. Riverside","Gas","Public Service Co of Oklahoma",1070 "8. Sooner","Coal","Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co",1046 "9. GRDA","Coal","Grand River Dam Authority",1010

59

Natural Gas Productive Capacity for the Lower-48 States  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

for the Lower-48 States for the Lower-48 States 6/4/01 Click here to start Table of Contents Natural Gas Productive Capacity for the Lower-48 States Natural Gas Productive Capacity for the Lower-48 States Natural Gas Productive Capacity for the Lower-48 States - Summary - Natural Gas Productive Capacity for the Lower-48 States - Summary - PPT Slide Natural Gas Productive Capacity for the Lower-48 States - Summary - Natural Gas Productive Capacity for the Lower-48 States - Methodology - Natural Gas Productive Capacity for the Lower-48 States - Methodology - Natural Gas Productive Capacity for the Lower-48 States - Methodology - PPT Slide PPT Slide PPT Slide PPT Slide PPT Slide PPT Slide PPT Slide PPT Slide PPT Slide PPT Slide PPT Slide Other Areas PPT Slide PPT Slide PPT Slide

60

renewable energy generating capacity | OpenEI  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

energy generating capacity energy generating capacity Dataset Summary Description This dataset comes from the Energy Information Administration (EIA), and is part of the 2011 Annual Energy Outlook Report (AEO2011). This dataset is table 16, and contains only the reference case. Source EIA Date Released April 26th, 2011 (3 years ago) Date Updated Unknown Keywords AEO generation renewable energy renewable energy generating capacity Data application/vnd.ms-excel icon AEO2011: Renewable Energy Generating Capacity and Generation- Reference Case (xls, 118.9 KiB) Quality Metrics Level of Review Peer Reviewed Comment Temporal and Spatial Coverage Frequency Annually Time Period 2008-2035 License License Open Data Commons Public Domain Dedication and Licence (PDDL) Comment Rate this dataset Usefulness of the metadata

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


61

Tables of thermodynamic properties of sodium  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The thermodynamic properties of saturated sodium, superheated sodium, and subcooled sodium are tabulated as a function of temperature. The temperature ranges are 380 to 2508 K for saturated sodium, 500 to 2500 K for subcooled sodium, and 400 to 1600 K for superheated sodium. Tabulated thermodynamic properties are enthalpy, heat capacity, pressure, entropy, density, instantaneous thermal expansion coefficient, compressibility, and thermal pressure coefficient. Tables are given in SI units and cgs units.

Fink, J.K.

1982-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

62

FY 2005 Laboratory Table  

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

Congressional Budget Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables Preliminary Department of Energy FY 2005 Congressional Budget Request Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2004 Laboratory Tables Preliminary Department of Energy Department of Energy FY 2005 Congressional Budget FY 2005 Congressional Budget Request Request Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2004 Laboratory Tables Laboratory Tables Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Preliminary Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropria ted as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress.

63

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2005 Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2005 EIA Glossary Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2005 Release date: February 2005 Next release date: February 2006 The AEO Supplemental tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2005 (AEO2005) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 2003 to 2025. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2005, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2005 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of one hundred and seventeen tables is presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO2005 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Forecasts for 2003-2005 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, which are the official EIA short-term forecasts and are based on more current information than the AEO.

64

Louisiana Block Grant Tables | Department of Energy  

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

Louisiana Block Grant Tables Louisiana Block Grant Tables This table details funding for state, city, and county governments in the state of Louisiana. Louisiana Block Grant Tables...

65

Mississippi Block Grant Tables | Department of Energy  

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

Mississippi Block Grant Tables Mississippi Block Grant Tables A table describing where state funding is being distributed Mississippi Block Grant Tables More Documents &...

66

2003 CBECS RSE Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

cbecs/cbecs2003/detailed_tables_2003/2003rsetables_files/plainlink.css" cbecs/cbecs2003/detailed_tables_2003/2003rsetables_files/plainlink.css" type=text/css rel=stylesheet> Home > Households, Buildings & Industry > Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) > 2003 Detailed Tables > RSE Tables 2003 CBECS Relative Standard Error (RSE) Tables Released: Dec 2006 Next CBECS will be conducted in 2007 Standard error is a measure of the reliability or precision of the survey statistic. The value for the standard error can be used to construct confidence intervals and to perform hypothesis tests by standard statistical methods. Relative Standard Error (RSE) is defined as the standard error (square root of the variance) of a survey estimate, divided by the survey estimate and multiplied by 100. (More information on RSEs)

67

Molecular Gas in the Powerful Radio Galaxies 3C~31 and 3C~264: Major or Minor Mergers?  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

We report the detection of $^{12}$CO~($1 \\to 0$) and $^{12}$CO~($2 \\to 1$) emission from the central regions ($\\lesssim 5$--$10 {\\rm kpc}$) of the two powerful radio galaxies 3C~31 and 3C~264. Their individual CO emission exhibits a double-horned line profile that is characteristic of an inclined rotating disk with a central depression at the rising part of its rotation curve. The inferred disk or ring distributions of the molecular gas is consistent with the observed presence of dust disks or rings detected optically in the cores of both galaxies. For a CO to H$_2$ conversion factor similar to that of our Galaxy, the corresponding total mass in molecular hydrogen gas is $(1.3 \\pm 0.2) \\times 10^9 {\\rm M_{\\odot}}$ in 3C~31 and $(0.31 \\pm 0.06) \\times 10^9 {\\rm M_{\\odot}}$ in 3C~264. Despite their relatively large molecular-gas masses and other peculiarities, both 3C~31 and 3C~264, as well as many other powerful radio galaxies in the (revised) 3C catalog, are known to lie within the fundamental plane of normal elliptical galaxies. We reason that if their gas originates from the mergers of two gas-rich disk galaxies, as has been invoked to explain the molecular gas in other radio galaxies, then both 3C~31 and 3C~264 must have merged a long time (a few billion years or more) ago but their remnant elliptical galaxies only recently (last tens of millions of years or less) become active in radio. Instead, we argue that the cannibalism of gas-rich galaxies provides a simpler explanation for the origin of molecular gas in the elliptical hosts of radio galaxies. Given the transient nature of their observed disturbances, these galaxies probably become active in radio soon after the accretion event when sufficient molecular gas agglomerates in their nuclei.

J. Lim; S. Leon; F. Combes; Dinh-V-Trung

2000-11-28T23:59:59.000Z

68

International energy indicators. [Statistical tables and graphs  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

International statistical tables and graphs are given for the following: (1) Iran - Crude Oil Capacity, Production and Shut-in, June 1974-April 1980; (2) Saudi Arabia - Crude Oil Capacity, Production, and Shut-in, March 1974-Apr 1980; (3) OPEC (Ex-Iran and Saudi Arabia) - Capacity, Production and Shut-in, June 1974-March 1980; (4) Non-OPEC Free World and US Production of Crude Oil, January 1973-February 1980; (5) Oil Stocks - Free World, US, Japan, and Europe (Landed, 1973-1st Quarter, 1980); (6) Petroleum Consumption by Industrial Countries, January 1973-December 1979; (7) USSR Crude Oil Production and Exports, January 1974-April 1980; and (8) Free World and US Nuclear Generation Capacity, January 1973-March 1980. Similar statistical tables and graphs included for the United States include: (1) Imports of Crude Oil and Products, January 1973-April 1980; (2) Landed Cost of Saudi Oil in Current and 1974 Dollars, April 1974-January 1980; (3) US Trade in Coal, January 1973-March 1980; (4) Summary of US Merchandise Trade, 1976-March 1980; and (5) US Energy/GNP Ratio, 1947 to 1979.

Bauer, E.K. (ed.)

1980-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

69

CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables  

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

Buildings Use Tables Buildings Use Tables (24 pages, 129 kb) CONTENTS PAGES Table 12. Employment Size Category, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 13. Employment Size Category, Floorspace, 1995 Table 14. Weekly Operating Hours, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 15. Weekly Operating Hours, Floorspace, 1995 Table 16. Occupancy of Nongovernment-Owned and Government-Owned Buildings, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 17. Occupancy of Nongovernment-Owned and Government-Owned Buildings, Floorspace, 1995 These data are from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), a national probability sample survey of commercial buildings sponsored by the Energy Information Administration, that provides information on the use of energy in commercial buildings in the

70

ARM - Instrument Location Table  

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

govInstrumentsLocation Table govInstrumentsLocation Table Instruments Location Table Contacts Comments? We would love to hear from you! Send us a note below or call us at 1-888-ARM-DATA. Send Instrument Locations Site abbreviations explained in the key. Instrument Name Abbreviation NSA SGP TWP AMF C1 C2 EF BF CF EF IF C1 C2 C3 EF IF Aerosol Chemical Speciation Monitor ACSM Atmospheric Emitted Radiance Interferometer AERI Aethalometer AETH Ameriflux Measurement Component AMC Aerosol Observing System AOS Meteorological Measurements associated with the Aerosol Observing System AOSMET Broadband Radiometer Station BRS

71

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 14. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity by State, December 31, 2006 (Capacity in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 1 8,300 0 0 1 11,000 2 19,300 0.23 Arkansas............................... 0 0 0 0 2 22,000 2 22,000 0.26 California .............................. 0 0 0 0 12 484,711 12 484,711 5.82 Colorado ............................... 0 0 0 0 8 98,068 8 98,068 1.18 Illinois.................................... 0 0 18 881,037 11 103,731 29 984,768 11.82 Indiana.................................. 0 0 12 81,490 10 32,804 22 114,294 1.37 Iowa ...................................... 0 0 4 275,200 0 0 4 275,200 3.30 Kansas.................................. 1 1,088 0 0 18 287,295 19 288,383 3.46 Kentucky............................... 0 0 3 9,567 20 208,827 23 218,394

72

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 14. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity by State, December 31, 2007 (Capacity in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 1 8,300 0 0 1 11,000 2 19,300 0.23 Arkansas............................... 0 0 0 0 2 22,000 2 22,000 0.26 California .............................. 0 0 0 0 12 487,711 12 487,711 5.80 Colorado ............................... 0 0 0 0 8 98,068 8 98,068 1.17 Illinois.................................... 0 0 18 876,960 11 103,731 29 980,691 11.67 Indiana.................................. 0 0 12 81,490 10 32,804 22 114,294 1.36 Iowa ...................................... 0 0 4 278,238 0 0 4 278,238 3.31 Kansas.................................. 1 931 0 0 18 287,996 19 288,926 3.44 Kentucky............................... 0 0 3 9,567 20 210,792 23 220,359

73

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 14. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity by State, December 31, 2008 (Capacity in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............. 1 11,900 15,900 0 0 0 1 9,000 11,000 2 20,900 26,900 Arkansas............. 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 14,500 22,000 2 14,500 22,000 California ............ 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 283,796 498,705 12 283,796 498,705 Colorado ............. 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 42,579 95,068 8 42,579 95,068 Illinois.................. 0 0 0 18 244,900 874,384 10 51,418 103,606 28 296,318 977,989 Indiana................ 0 0 0 12 19,978 81,991 10 12,791 32,946 22 32,769 114,937 Iowa .................... 0 0 0 4 87,350 284,747 0 0 0 4 87,350 284,747 Kansas................ 1 375 931 0 0 0 18 118,885 281,291 19 119,260 282,221 Kentucky............. 0 0 0 3 6,629 9,567 20 94,598 210,792 23 101,227 220,359 Louisiana ............

74

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 14. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity by State, December 31, 2010 (Capacity in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............. 1 16,150 21,900 0 0 0 1 9,000 11,000 2 25,150 32,900 Arkansas............. 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 13,898 21,760 2 13,898 21,760 California ............ 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 311,096 542,511 13 311,096 542,511 Colorado ............. 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 49,119 105,768 9 49,119 105,768 Illinois.................. 0 0 0 17 216,132 772,381 11 87,368 218,106 28 303,500 990,487 Indiana................ 0 0 0 13 19,437 81,268 9 13,545 30,003 22 32,982 111,271 Iowa .................... 0 0 0 4 90,613 288,010 0 0 0 4 90,613 288,010 Kansas................ 1 375 931 0 0 0 18 122,814 283,891 19 123,190 284,821 Kentucky............. 0 0 0 3 6,629 9,567 20 100,971 212,184 23 107,600 221,751 Louisiana ............

75

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 14. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity by State, December 31, 2009 (Capacity in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............. 1 11,900 15,900 0 0 0 1 9,000 11,000 2 20,900 26,900 Arkansas............. 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 13,898 21,760 2 13,898 21,760 California ............ 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 296,096 513,005 13 296,096 513,005 Colorado ............. 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 48,129 105,768 9 48,129 105,768 Illinois.................. 0 0 0 18 252,344 885,848 10 51,418 103,606 28 303,761 989,454 Indiana................ 0 0 0 12 19,367 81,328 10 12,791 32,946 22 32,157 114,274 Iowa .................... 0 0 0 4 87,414 284,811 0 0 0 4 87,414 284,811 Kansas................ 1 375 931 0 0 0 18 118,964 281,370 19 119,339 282,300 Kentucky............. 0 0 0 3 6,629 9,567 20 96,855 210,801 23 103,484 220,368 Louisiana ............

76

FY 2009 State Table  

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

State Tables State Tables Preliminary February 2008 Office of Chief Financial Officer Department of Energy FY 2009 Congressional Budget Request State Tables Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Printed with soy ink on recycled paper State Index Page Number FY 2009 Congressional Budget 1/30/2008 Department Of Energy (Dollars In Thousands) 9:01:45AM Page 1 of 2 FY 2007 Appropriation FY 2008 Appropriation FY 2009 Request State Table 1 1 $27,588

77

FY 2005 State Table  

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

Office of Management, Budget Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2004 State Tables State Tables Preliminary Preliminary Department of Energy Department of Energy FY 2005 Congressional Budget FY 2005 Congressional Budget Request Request Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2004 State Tables State Tables Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Preliminary Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. State Index Page Number

78

FY 2010 State Table  

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

State Tables State Tables Preliminary May 2009 Office of Chief Financial Officer FY 2010 Congressional Budget Request State Tables Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Printed with soy ink on recycled paper State Index Page Number FY 2010 Congressional Budget 5/4/2009 Department Of Energy (Dollars In Thousands) 2:13:22PM Page 1 of 2 FY 2008 Appropriation FY 2009 Appropriation FY 2010 Request State Table 1 1 $46,946 $48,781 $38,844 Alabama 2 $6,569

79

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Annual Energy Outlook 1999 Annual Energy Outlook 1999 bullet1.gif (843 bytes) Assumptions to the AEO99 bullet1.gif (843 bytes) NEMS Conference bullet1.gif (843 bytes) Contacts bullet1.gif (843 bytes) To Forecasting Home Page bullet1.gif (843 bytes) EIA Homepage supplemental.gif (7420 bytes) (Errata as of 9/13/99) The AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 1999 (AEO99) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 1997 to 2020. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO99, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO99 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of ninety-five tables are presented.

80

FY 2006 State Table  

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

State Tables State Tables Preliminary Department of Energy FY 2006 Congressional Budget Request Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2005 State Tables Preliminary Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. State Index Page Number FY 2006 Congressional Budget 1/27/2005 Department Of Energy (Dollars In Thousands) 3:32:58PM Page 1 of 2 FY 2004 Comp/Approp FY 2005 Comp/Approp FY 2006 Request State Table

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


81

FY 2010 Laboratory Table  

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

Laboratory Tables Laboratory Tables Preliminary May 2009 Office of Chief Financial Officer FY 2010 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2010 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 2:08:56PM Department Of Energy 5/4/2009 Page Number FY 2008 Appropriation FY 2009 Appropriation FY 2010 Request Laboratory Table 1 1 $1,200

82

Table of Contents  

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

E N N E E R R A A L L Semiannual Report toCongress DOEIG-0065 April 1 - September 30, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS From the Desk of the Inspector General ......

83

FY 2008 State Table  

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

State Table State Table Preliminary Department of Energy FY 2008 Congressional Budget Request February 2007 Office of Chief Financial Officer State Table Preliminary Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. State Index Page Number FY 2008 Congressional Budget 2/1/2007 Department Of Energy (Dollars In Thousands) 6:53:08AM Page 1 of 2 FY 2006 Appropriation FY 2007 Request FY 2008 Request State Table 1 1 $28,332 $30,341

84

ORISE: Capacity Building  

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

Capacity Building Capacity Building Because public health agencies must maintain the resources to respond to public health challenges, critical situations and emergencies, the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) helps government agencies and organizations develop a solid infrastructure through capacity building. Capacity building refers to activities that improve an organization's ability to achieve its mission or a person's ability do his or her job more effectively. For organizations, capacity building may relate to almost any aspect of its work-from leadership and administration to program development and implementation. Strengthening an organizational infrastructure can help agencies and community-based organizations more quickly identify targeted audiences for

85

STRUCTUREu DITERPENE ELUCIDATION FROM 1 3 C NMR  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

in natural product chemistry. There are many useful spectroscopic methods of getting information about pro- ducts chemistry. NMR spectroscopy is the best method for complete structure elucidation products (not proteins), only 1 H NMR and 1 3 C NMR spectroscopy, including combined methods such as 2D NMR

Dzeroski, Saso

86

Microwave Radiometer 3 Channel (MWR3C) Handbook  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The microwave radiometer 3-channel (MWR3C) provides time-series measurements of brightness temperatures from three channels centered at 23.834, 30, and 89 GHz. These three channels are sensitive to the presence of liquid water and precipitable water vapor.

Cadeddu, MP

2012-05-04T23:59:59.000Z

87

3, 871898, 2007 Changes in C3/C4  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

CPD 3, 871­898, 2007 Changes in C3/C4 vegetation in the Central Himalayas M. Mampuku et al. Title Printer-friendly Version Interactive Discussion EGU Clim. Past Discuss., 3, 871­898, 2007 www.clim-past-discuss.net/3/871/2007/ © Author(s) 2007. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License. Climate

Boyer, Edmond

88

The dynamics and environmental impact of 3C 452  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

......Papers The dynamics and environmental impact of 3C 452 D. L...because the current generation of X-ray telescopes...abundance fixed at solar. The two apec models...abundance fixed to 0.3 solar to the background-subtracted...2005a). 5.3 Environmental impact We can make a rough......

D. L. Shelton; M. J. Hardcastle; J. H. Croston

2011-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

89

EIA - Electricity Generating Capacity  

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

Electricity Generating Capacity Release Date: January 3, 2013 | Next Release: August 2013 Year Existing Units by Energy Source Unit Additions Unit Retirements 2011 XLS XLS XLS 2010...

90

FY 2011 State Table  

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

State Tables State Tables Department of Energy FY 2011 Congressional Budget Request DOE/CF-0054 March 2010 Office of Chief Financial Officer State Tables Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Department of Energy FY 2011 Congressional Budget Request DOE/CF-0054 State Index Page Number FY 2011 Congressional Budget 1/29/2010 Department Of Energy (Dollars In Thousands) 6:34:40AM Page 1 of 2 FY 2009 Appropriation

91

FY 2007 Laboratory Table  

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

Laboratory tables Laboratory tables preliminary Department of Energy FY 2007 Congressional Budget Request February 2006 Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Office of Chief Financial Officer Laboratory tables preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2007 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 12:10:40PM Department Of Energy 1/31/2006 Page Number FY 2005 Appropriation FY 2006 Appropriation FY 2007

92

FY 2011 Laboratory Table  

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

Laboratory Tables Laboratory Tables Department of Energy FY 2011 Congressional Budget Request DOE/CF-0055 March 2010 Office of Chief Financial Officer Laboratory Tables Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Department of Energy FY 2011 Congressional Budget Request DOE/CF-0055 Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2011 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 6:24:57AM Department Of Energy 1/29/2010 Page

93

FY 2008 Laboratory Table  

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

Laboratory Table Laboratory Table Preliminary Department of Energy FY 2008 Congressional Budget Request February 2007 Office of Chief Financial Officer Laboratory Table Preliminary Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2008 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 6:51:02AM Department Of Energy 2/1/2007 Page Number FY 2006 Appropriation FY 2007 Request FY 2008 Request

94

FY 2006 Laboratory Table  

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

Laboratory Tables Laboratory Tables Preliminary Department of Energy FY 2006 Congressional Budget Request Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2005 Laboratory Tables Preliminary Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2006 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 3:43:16PM Department Of Energy 1/27/2005 Page Number FY 2004 Comp/Approp FY 2005 Comp/Approp

95

Fy 2009 Laboratory Table  

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

Laboratory Tables Laboratory Tables Preliminary February 2008 Office of Chief Financial Officer Department of Energy FY 2009 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2009 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 8:59:25AM Department Of Energy 1/30/2008 Page Number FY 2007 Appropriation FY 2008 Appropriation FY 2009

96

Structure of the compact radio component in 3C236  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

... GHz and -0.05 Jy at 8.085 GHz. The source was observed on December 26 and 28, 1974, between sidereal times 04 h 30 min and 15 h 20min ... (Fig. 26, c, d) and Table 2 (Fig. 2a). O, December 26; X December 28.

E. B. Fomalount; G. K. Miley

1975-09-11T23:59:59.000Z

97

FY 2013 Statistical Table  

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

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Current Enacted Congressional Approp. Approp. * Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy efficiency and renewable energy........................................ 1,771,721 1,809,638 2,337,000 +527,362 +29.1% Electricity delivery and energy reliability......................................... 138,170 139,103 143,015 +3,912 +2.8% Nuclear energy................................................................................ 717,817 765,391 770,445 +5,054 +0.7% Fossil energy programs Clean coal technology.................................................................. -16,500 -- --

98

FY 2009 Statistical Table  

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

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 Current Current Congressional Op. Plan Approp. Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy efficiency and renewable energy.......................... -- 1,722,407 1,255,393 -467,014 -27.1% Electricity delivery and energy reliability........................... -- 138,556 134,000 -4,556 -3.3% Nuclear energy................................................................. -- 961,665 853,644 -108,021 -11.2% Legacy management........................................................ -- 33,872 -- -33,872 -100.0% Energy supply and conservation Operation and maintenance..........................................

99

1992 Annual Capacity Report. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Standard Contract for Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and/or High-Level Radioactive Waste (10 CFR Part 961) requires the Department of Energy (DOE) to issue an Annual Capacity Report (ACR) for planning purposes. This report is the fifth in the series published by DOE. In May 1993, DOE published the 1992 Acceptance Priority Ranking (APR) that established the order in which DOE will allocate projected acceptance capacity. As required by the Standard Contract, the acceptance priority ranking is based on the date the spent nuclear fuel (SNF) was permanently discharged, with the owners of the oldest SNF, on an industry-wide basis, given the highest priority. The 1992 ACR applies the projected waste acceptance rates in Table 2.1 to the 1992 APR, resulting in individual allocations for the owners and generators of the SNF. These allocations are listed in detail in the Appendix, and summarized in Table 3.1. The projected waste acceptance rates for SNF presented in Table 2.1 are nominal and assume a site for a Monitored Retrievable Storage (MRS) facility will be obtained; the facility will initiate operations in 1998; and the statutory linkages between the MRS facility and the repository set forth in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended (NWPA), will be modified. During the first ten years following projected commencement of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management System (CRWMS) operation, the total quantity of SNF that could be accepted is projected to be 8,200 metric tons of uranium (MTU). This is consistent with the storage capacity licensing conditions imposed on an MRS facility by the NWPA. The annual acceptance rates provide an approximation of the system throughput and are subject to change as the program progresses.

Not Available

1993-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

100

Liquid heat capacity lasers  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

The heat capacity laser concept is extended to systems in which the heat capacity lasing media is a liquid. The laser active liquid is circulated from a reservoir (where the bulk of the media and hence waste heat resides) through a channel so configured for both optical pumping of the media for gain and for light amplification from the resulting gain.

Comaskey, Brian J. (Walnut Creek, CA); Scheibner, Karl F. (Tracy, CA); Ault, Earl R. (Livermore, CA)

2007-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


101

Nanofluid heat capacities  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Significant increases in the heat capacity of heat transfer fluids are needed not only to reduce the costs of liquid heating and cooling processes but also to bring clean energy producing technologies like concentrating solar power (CSP) to price parity with conventional energy generation. It has been postulated that nanofluids could have higher heat capacities than conventional fluids. In this work nano- and micron-sized particles were added to five base fluids (poly-? olefin mineral oil ethylene glycol a mixture of water and ethylene glycol and calcium nitrate tetrahydrate) and the resulting heat capacities were measured and compared with those of the neat base fluids and the weighted average of the heat capacities of the components. The particles used were inert metals and metal oxides that did not undergo any phase transitions over the temperature range studied. In the nanofluids studied here we found no increase in heat capacity upon the addition of the particles larger than the experimental error.

Anne K. Starace; Judith C. Gomez; Jun Wang; Sulolit Pradhan; Greg C. Glatzmaier

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

102

Table of Contents Page i Table of Contents  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Table of Contents Page i Table of Contents 4. Building HVAC Requirements ....................................................................................1 4.1.2 What's New for the 2013 Standards.............................................................................................3 4.1.4 California Appliance Standards and Equipment Certification

103

Response of Nanocrystalline 3C Silicon Carbide to Heavy-Ion Irradiatio...  

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

Nanocrystalline 3C Silicon Carbide to Heavy-Ion Irradiation. Response of Nanocrystalline 3C Silicon Carbide to Heavy-Ion Irradiation. Abstract: Nanostructured materials are...

104

Cost Recovery Charge (CRC) Calculation Tables  

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

Cost Recovery Charge (CRC) Calculation Table Updated: October 6, 2014 FY 2016 September 2014 CRC Calculation Table (pdf) Final FY 2015 CRC Letter & Table (pdf) Note: The Cost...

105

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

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

/2011 /2011 Decades of Discovery Decades of Discovery Page 2 6/1/2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 6 2 BASIC ENERGY SCIENCES .................................................................................................. 7 2.1 Adenosine Triphosphate: The Energy Currency of Life .............................................. 7 2.2 Making Better Catalysts .............................................................................................. 8 2.3 Understanding Chemical Reactions............................................................................ 9 2.4 New Types of Superconductors ................................................................................ 10

106

Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

; J a n u a r y 2 0 0 9 ; J a n u a r y 2 0 0 9 S u p p l e me mt a l T a b l e s Table 92. Domestic Refinery Distillation Base Capacity, and Expansion (million barrels per day) 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 PAD District I Base Capacity 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 Capacity Additions 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Capacity 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 PAD District II Base Capacity 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 Capacity Additions 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Total Capacity 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 PAD District III Base Capacity 8.1 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 Capacity Additions 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Total Capacity 8.1 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.6 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

107

AEO2011: Electricity Generating Capacity | OpenEI  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Generating Capacity Generating Capacity Dataset Summary Description This dataset comes from the Energy Information Administration (EIA), and is part of the 2011 Annual Energy Outlook Report (AEO2011). This dataset is table 9, and contains only the reference case. The dataset uses gigawatts. The data is broken down into power only, combined heat and power, cumulative planned additions, cumulative unplanned conditions, and cumulative retirements and total electric power sector capacity . Source EIA Date Released April 26th, 2011 (3 years ago) Date Updated Unknown Keywords 2011 AEO capacity consumption EIA Electricity generating Data application/vnd.ms-excel icon AEO2011: Electricity Generating Capacity- Reference Case (xls, 130.1 KiB) Quality Metrics Level of Review Peer Reviewed

108

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

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

4 4 Table 14. Underground natural gas storage capacity by state, December 31, 2012 (million cubic feet) Alabama 1 16,150 21,900 0 0 0 1 11,200 13,500 2 27,350 35,400 Arkansas 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12,178 21,853 2 12,178 21,853 California 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 349,296 592,411 14 349,296 592,411 Colorado 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 60,582 124,253 10 60,582 124,253 Illinois 0 0 0 17 215,594 779,862 11 87,368 220,070 28 302,962 999,931 Indiana 0 0 0 12 19,215 80,746 10 13,809 30,003 22 33,024 110,749 Iowa 0 0 0 4 90,313 288,210 0 0 0 4 90,313 288,210 Kansas 1 375 931 0 0 0 18 122,968 283,974 19 123,343 284,905 Kentucky 0 0 0 3 6,629 9,567 20 100,971 212,184 23 107,600 221,751 Louisiana 11 200,702 297,020 0 0 0 7 211,780 402,626 18 412,482

109

Data:0b37e540-ab3c-420e-882e-aec532313539 | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

e540-ab3c-420e-882e-aec532313539 e540-ab3c-420e-882e-aec532313539 No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Duke Energy Indiana Inc Effective date: 2009/09/14 End date if known: Rate name: High Load Factor - Primary Direct Sector: Industrial Description: Availability Available to any customer contracting for a specified capacity of not less than 25 kW. Applicant must be located adjacent to an electric transmission or distribution line of Company that is adequate and suitable for supplying the service requested. Character of Service Alternating current having a frequency of sixty Hertz and furnished in accordance with the provisions set forth hereunder.

110

WINDExchange: Wind Potential Capacity  

Wind Powering America (EERE)

area with a gross capacity factor1 of 35% and higher, which may be suitable for wind energy development. AWS Truepower LLC produced the wind resource data with a spatial...

111

Panama Canal capacity analysis  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Predicting the transit capacities of the various Panama Canal alternatives required analyzing data on present Canal operations, adapting and extending an existing computer simulation model, performing simulation runs for each of the alternatives, and using the simulation model outputs to develop capacity estimates. These activities are summarized in this paper. A more complete account may be found in the project final report (TAMS 1993). Some of the material in this paper also appeared in a previously published paper (Rosselli, Bronzini, and Weekly 1994).

Bronzini, M.S. [Oak Ridge National Lab., Knoxville, TN (United States). Center for Transportation Analysis

1995-04-27T23:59:59.000Z

112

Combined photoelectron spectroscopy and ab initio study of the hypermetallic Al3C molecule  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Combined photoelectron spectroscopy and ab initio study of the hypermetallic Al3C molecule February 1999 The chemical structure and bonding of the hypermetallic Al3C and Al3C species have been studied by photoelectron spectroscopy and ab initio calculations. Al3C is found to have a planar

Simons, Jack

113

THERMODYNAMIC TABLES FOR NUCLEAR WASTE ISOLATION, V.1: AQUEOUSSOLUTIONS DATABASE  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Tables of consistent thermodynamic property values for nuclear waste isolation are given. The tables include critically assessed values for Gibbs energy of formation. enthalpy of formation, entropy and heat capacity for minerals; solids; aqueous ions; ion pairs and complex ions of selected actinide and fission decay products at 25{sup o}C and zero ionic strength. These intrinsic data are used to calculate equilibrium constants and standard potentials which are compared with typical experimental measurements and other work. Recommendations for additional research are given.

Phillips, S.L.; Hale, F.V.; Silvester, L.F.

1988-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

114

FY 2006 Statistical Table  

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

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 Comparable Comparable Request to FY 2006 vs. FY 2005 Approp Approp Congress Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy supply Operation and maintenance................................................. 787,941 909,903 862,499 -47,404 -5.2% Construction......................................................................... 6,956 22,416 40,175 17,759 +79.2% Total, Energy supply................................................................ 794,897 932,319 902,674 -29,645 -3.2% Non-Defense site acceleration completion............................. 167,272 157,316 172,400 15,084 +9.6%

115

FY 2013 Laboratory Table  

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

8 8 Department of Energy FY 2013 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables y Preliminary February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer DOE/CF-0078 Department of Energy FY 2013 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables P li i Preliminary h b d i d i hi d h l l f b d h i f h The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2013 Congressional Budget

116

FY 2010 Statistical Table  

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

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2009 FY 2010 Current Current Current Congressional Approp. Approp. Recovery Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy efficiency and renewable energy....................................... 1,704,112 2,178,540 16,800,000 2,318,602 +140,062 +6.4% Electricity delivery and energy reliability........................................ 136,170 137,000 4,500,000 208,008 +71,008 +51.8% Nuclear energy.............................................................................. 960,903 792,000 -- 761,274 -30,726 -3.9% Legacy management..................................................................... 33,872 -- -- --

117

FY 2012 State Table  

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

6 6 Department of Energy FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request State Tables P li i Preliminary February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer DOE/CF-0066 Department of Energy FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request State Tables P li i Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer Printed with soy ink on recycled

118

FY 2012 Statistical Table  

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

2Statistical Table by Appropriation 2Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2011 FY 2012 Current Congressional Annualized Congressional Approp. Request CR Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy efficiency and renewable energy....................................... 2,216,392 2,355,473 2,242,500 3,200,053 +983,661 +44.4% Electricity delivery and energy reliability........................................ 168,484 185,930 171,982 237,717 +69,233 +41.1% Nuclear energy............................................................................. 774,578 824,052 786,637 754,028 -20,550 -2.7% Fossil energy programs Fossil energy research and development................................... 659,770 586,583 672,383 452,975

119

FY 2007 Statistical Table  

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

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 Current Current Congressional Approp. Approp. Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy supply and conservation Operation and maintenance............................................ 1,779,399 1,791,372 1,917,331 +125,959 +7.0% Construction................................................................... 22,416 21,255 6,030 -15,225 -71.6% Total, Energy supply and conservation.............................. 1,801,815 1,812,627 1,923,361 +110,734 +6.1% Fossil energy programs Clean coal technology..................................................... -160,000 -20,000 -- +20,000 +100.0% Fossil energy research and development.......................

120

FY 2012 Laboratory Table  

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

5 5 Department of Energy FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables y Preliminary February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer DOE/CF-0065 Department of Energy FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables P li i Preliminary h b d i d i hi d h l l f b d h i f h The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2012 Congressional Budget

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


121

FY 2008 Statistical Table  

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

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 Current Congressional Congressional Approp. Request Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy supply and conservation Operation and maintenance........................................... 1,781,242 1,917,331 2,187,943 +270,612 +14.1% Construction.................................................................... 31,155 6,030 -- -6,030 -100.0% Total, Energy supply and conservation............................. 1,812,397 1,923,361 2,187,943 +264,582 +13.8% Fossil energy programs Clean coal technology.................................................... -20,000 -- -58,000 -58,000 N/A Fossil energy research and development......................

122

Table of Contents  

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

COMMUNICATIONS REQUIREMENTS COMMUNICATIONS REQUIREMENTS OF SMART GRID TECHNOLOGIES October 5, 2010 i Table of Contents I. Introduction and Executive Summary.......................................................... 1 a. Overview of Smart Grid Benefits and Communications Needs................. 2 b. Summary of Recommendations .................................................................... 5 II. Federal Government Smart Grid Initiatives ................................................ 7 a. DOE Request for Information ....................................................................... 7 b. Other Federal Government Smart Grid Initiatives .................................... 9 III. Communications Requirements of Smart Grid Applications .................. 11 a. Advanced Metering Infrastructure ............................................................12

123

CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables  

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

Geographic Location Tables Geographic Location Tables (24 pages, 136kb) CONTENTS PAGES Table 3. Census Region, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1995 Table 4. Census Region and Division, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 5. Census Region and Division, Floorspace, 1995 Table 6. Climate Zone, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1995 Table 7. Metropolitan Status, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1995 These data are from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), a national probability sample survey of commercial buildings sponsored by the Energy Information Administration, that provides information on the use of energy in commercial buildings in the United States. The 1995 CBECS was the sixth survey in a series begun in 1979. The data were collected from a sample of 6,639 buildings representing 4.6 million commercial buildings

124

2003 CBECS Detailed Tables: Summary  

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

2003 Detailed Tables 2003 Detailed Tables 2003 CBECS Detailed Tables most recent available Released: September 2008 Building Characteristics | Consumption & Expenditures | End-Use Consumption In the 2003 CBECS, the survey procedures for strip shopping centers and enclosed malls ("mall buildings") were changed from those used in previous surveys, and, as a result, mall buildings are now excluded from most of the 2003 CBECS tables. Therefore, some data in the majority of the tables are not directly comparable with previous CBECS tables, all of which included mall buildings. Some numbers in the 2003 tables will be slightly lower than earlier surveys since the 2003 figures do not include mall buildings. See "Change in Data Collection Procedures for Malls" for a more detailed explanation.

125

Dual capacity reciprocating compressor  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

A multi-cylinder compressor particularly useful in connection with northern climate heat pumps and in which different capacities are available in accordance with reversing motor rotation is provided with an eccentric cam on a crank pin under a fraction of the connecting rods, and arranged for rotation upon the crank pin between opposite positions 180[degree] apart so that with cam rotation on the crank pin such that the crank throw is at its normal maximum value all pistons pump at full capacity, and with rotation of the crank shaft in the opposite direction the cam moves to a circumferential position on the crank pin such that the overall crank throw is zero. Pistons whose connecting rods ride on a crank pin without a cam pump their normal rate with either crank rotational direction. Thus a small clearance volume is provided for any piston that moves when in either capacity mode of operation. 6 figs.

Wolfe, R.W.

1984-10-30T23:59:59.000Z

126

Dual capacity reciprocating compressor  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

A multi-cylinder compressor 10 particularly useful in connection with northern climate heat pumps and in which different capacities are available in accordance with reversing motor 16 rotation is provided with an eccentric cam 38 on a crank pin 34 under a fraction of the connecting rods, and arranged for rotation upon the crank pin between opposite positions 180.degree. apart so that with cam rotation on the crank pin such that the crank throw is at its normal maximum value all pistons pump at full capacity, and with rotation of the crank shaft in the opposite direction the cam moves to a circumferential position on the crank pin such that the overall crank throw is zero. Pistons 24 whose connecting rods 30 ride on a crank pin 36 without a cam pump their normal rate with either crank rotational direction. Thus a small clearance volume is provided for any piston that moves when in either capacity mode of operation.

Wolfe, Robert W. (Wilkinsburg, PA)

1984-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

127

Refinery Capacity Report  

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

Refinery Capacity Report Refinery Capacity Report With Data as of January 1, 2013 | Release Date: June 21, 2013 | Next Release Date: June 20, 2014 Previous Issues Year: 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1997 1995 1994 Go Data series include fuel, electricity, and steam purchased for consumption at the refinery; refinery receipts of crude oil by method of transportation; and current and projected atmospheric crude oil distillation, downstream charge, and production capacities. Respondents are operators of all operating and idle petroleum refineries (including new refineries under construction) and refineries shut down during the previous year, located in the 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and other U.S. possessions.

128

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

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

129

Renewable energy capacity and generation | OpenEI  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

21 21 Varnish cache server Browse Upload data GDR 429 Throttled (bot load) Error 429 Throttled (bot load) Throttled (bot load) Guru Meditation: XID: 2142281521 Varnish cache server Renewable energy capacity and generation Dataset Summary Description This dataset comes from the Energy Information Administration (EIA), and is part of the 2011 Annual Energy Outlook Report (AEO2011). This dataset is table 16, and contains only the reference case. The dataset uses gigawatts. The data is broken down into electric power capacity and generation. Source EIA Date Released April 26th, 2011 (3 years ago) Date Updated Unknown Keywords 2011 AEO EIA Renewable energy capacity and generation Data application/vnd.ms-excel icon AEO2011: Renewable Energy Generating Capacity and Generation- Reference Case (xls, 118.9 KiB)

130

AEOP2011:Electricity Generation Capacity by Electricity Market Module  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

AEOP2011:Electricity Generation Capacity by Electricity Market Module AEOP2011:Electricity Generation Capacity by Electricity Market Module Region and Source Dataset Summary Description This dataset comes from the Energy Information Administration (EIA), and is part of the 2011 Annual Energy Outlook Report (AEO2011). This dataset is table 97, and contains only the reference case. The dataset uses billion kilowatthours. The data is broken down into Texas regional entity, Florida reliability coordinating council, Midwest reliability council and Northeast power coordination council. Source EIA Date Released April 26th, 2011 (3 years ago) Date Updated Unknown Keywords AEO Electricity electricity market module region generation capacity Data application/vnd.ms-excel icon AEO2011: Electricity Generation Capacity by Electricity Market Module Region and Source- Reference Case (xls, 10.6 KiB)

131

Table of Contents  

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

NT0005638 NT0005638 Cruise Report 1-19 July 2009 HYFLUX Sea Truth Cruise Northern Gulf of Mexico Submitted by: Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi 6300 Ocean Dr. Corpus Christi, TX 78412 Principal Authors: Ian R. MacDonald and Thomas Naehr Prepared for: United States Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory October 30, 2009 Office of Fossil Energy HYFLUX Seatruth Cruise Report -1- Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi Table of Contents Summary ............................................................................................................................. 2 Participating Organizations ................................................................................................. 3 Major Equipment ................................................................................................................ 4

132

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation - Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation Table 2. Total Energy Consumption, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 3. Total Petroleum Consumption, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 4. Total Natural Gas Consumption, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 5. Total Coal Consumption, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 6. Total Electricity Sales, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 7. Crude Oil Production, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 8. Natural Gas Production, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 9. Coal Production, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 10. Net Petroleum Imports, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 11. Net Natural Gas Imports, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 12. Net Coal Exports, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 13. World Oil Prices, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 14. Natural Gas Wellhead Prices, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 15. Coal Prices to Electric Utilities, Actual vs. Forecasts

133

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation - Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Analysis Papers > Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation>Tables Analysis Papers > Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation>Tables Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation Download Adobe Acrobat Reader Printer friendly version on our site are provided in Adobe Acrobat Spreadsheets are provided in Excel Actual vs. Forecasts Formats Table 2. Total Energy Consumption Excel, PDF Table 3. Total Petroleum Consumption Excel, PDF Table 4. Total Natural Gas Consumption Excel, PDF Table 5. Total Coal Consumption Excel, PDF Table 6. Total Electricity Sales Excel, PDF Table 7. Crude Oil Production Excel, PDF Table 8. Natural Gas Production Excel, PDF Table 9. Coal Production Excel, PDF Table 10. Net Petroleum Imports Excel, PDF Table 11. Net Natural Gas Imports Excel, PDF Table 12. World Oil Prices Excel, PDF Table 13. Natural Gas Wellhead Prices

134

Help:Tables | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Tables Tables Jump to: navigation, search Tables may be authored in wiki pages using either XHTML table elements directly, or using wikicode formatting to define the table. XHTML table elements and their use are well described on various web pages and will not be discussed here. The benefit of wikicode is that the table is constructed of character symbols which tend to make it easier to perceive the table structure in the article editing view compared to XHTML table elements. As a general rule, it is best to avoid using a table unless you need one. Table markup often complicates page editing. Contents 1 Wiki table markup summary 2 Basics 2.1 Table headers 2.2 Caption 3 XHTML attributes 3.1 Attributes on tables 3.2 Attributes on cells 3.3 Attributes on rows 3.4 HTML colspan and rowspan

135

CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables  

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

Conservation Tables Conservation Tables (16 pages, 86 kb) CONTENTS PAGES Table 41. Energy Conservation Features, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1995 Table 42. Building Shell Conservation Features, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 43. Building Shell Conservation Features, Floorspace, 1995 Table 44. Reduction in Equipment Use During Off Hours, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1995 These data are from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), a national probability sample survey of commercial buildings sponsored by the Energy Information Administration, that provides information on the use of energy in commercial buildings in the United States. The 1995 CBECS was the sixth survey in a series begun in 1979. The data were collected from a sample of 6,639 buildings representing 4.6 million commercial buildings

136

CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables  

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

Structure Tables Structure Tables (16 pages, 93 kb) CONTENTS PAGES Table 8. Building Size, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 9. Building Size, Floorspace, 1995 Table 10. Year Constructed, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 11. Year Constructed, Floorspace, 1995 These data are from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), a national probability sample survey of commercial buildings sponsored by the Energy Information Administration, that provides information on the use of energy in commercial buildings in the United States. The 1995 CBECS was the sixth survey in a series begun in 1979. The data were collected from a sample of 6,639 buildings representing 4.6 million commercial buildings and 58.8 billion square feet of commercial floorspace in the U.S. The 1995 data are available for the four Census

137

Development of potent inhibitors of the coxsackievirus 3C protease  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Coxsackievirus B3 (CVB3) 3C protease (3CP) plays essential roles in the viral replication cycle, and therefore, provides an attractive therapeutic target for treatment of human diseases caused by CVB3 infection. CVB3 3CP and human rhinovirus (HRV) 3CP have a high degree of amino acid sequence similarity. Comparative modeling of these two 3CPs revealed one prominent distinction; an Asn residue delineating the S2' pocket in HRV 3CP is replaced by a Tyr residue in CVB3 3CP. AG7088, a potent inhibitor of HRV 3CP, was modified by substitution of the ethyl group at the P2' position with various hydrophobic aromatic rings that are predicted to interact preferentially with the Tyr residue in the S2' pocket of CVB3 3CP. The resulting derivatives showed dramatically increased inhibitory activities against CVB3 3CP. In addition, one of the derivatives effectively inhibited the CVB3 proliferation in vitro.

Lee, Eui Seung [Department of Life Science, Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology, 1 Oryong-dong, Buk-gu, Gwangju 500-712 (Korea, Republic of); Lee, Won Gil [Department of Life Science, Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology, 1 Oryong-dong, Buk-gu, Gwangju 500-712 (Korea, Republic of); Yun, Soo-Hyeon [Department of Medicine, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Cardiac and Vascular Center, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul 135-710 (Korea, Republic of); Rho, Seong Hwan [Department of Life Science, Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology, 1 Oryong-dong, Buk-gu, Gwangju 500-712 (Korea, Republic of); Im, Isak [Department of Life Science, Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology, 1 Oryong-dong, Buk-gu, Gwangju 500-712 (Korea, Republic of); Yang, Sung Tae [Department of Life Science, Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology, 1 Oryong-dong, Buk-gu, Gwangju 500-712 (Korea, Republic of); Sellamuthu, Saravanan [Department of Life Science, Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology, 1 Oryong-dong, Buk-gu, Gwangju 500-712 (Korea, Republic of); Lee, Yong Jae [Department of Life Science, Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology, 1 Oryong-dong, Buk-gu, Gwangju 500-712 (Korea, Republic of); Kwon, Sun Jae [School of Life Science and Biotechnology, Korea University, Seoul 136-701 (Korea, Republic of); Park, Ohkmae K. [School of Life Science and Biotechnology, Korea University, Seoul 136-701 (Korea, Republic of); Jeon, Eun-Seok [Department of Medicine, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Cardiac and Vascular Center, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul 135-710 (Korea, Republic of); Park, Woo Jin [Department of Life Science, Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology, 1 Oryong-dong, Buk-gu, Gwangju 500-712 (Korea, Republic of)]. E-mail: wjpark@gist.ac.kr; Kim, Yong-Chul [Department of Life Science, Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology, 1 Oryong-dong, Buk-gu, Gwangju 500-712 (Korea, Republic of)]. E-mail: yongchul@gist.ac.kr

2007-06-22T23:59:59.000Z

138

Data:2144b30d-9241-4396-b86a-3c8652781070 | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

0d-9241-4396-b86a-3c8652781070 0d-9241-4396-b86a-3c8652781070 No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Eastern Illinois Elec Coop Effective date: 2013/04/15 End date if known: Rate name: (RATE SCHEDULE 8: ELECTRIC HEAT)OPTIONAL SERVICE - THREE-PHASE Sector: Commercial Description: This rate schedule is available upon application to any member/owner who has permanently installed facilities using electricity either as the primary source of energy for space and water heating, or as electric resistance, low-temperature grain drying and for all other uses, including lighting and power, subject to the established rules and regulations of the Cooperative. A premises may qualify for this rate if the electric heating system is used for over 75 percent of the heating load at the premises. This rate is applicable to loads requiring 225 kVA or less of transformer capacity. Three-phase service requiring more than 225 kVA of transformer capacity shall be provided under the Cooperative's Rate Schedule for Large Power Service. The Cooperative shall be the sole and final authority in determining applicability of this rate to an account. The availability of this rate is extended to all member/owners previously served under Rate Schedule 6.

139

Capacity of steganographic channels  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

An information-theoretic approach is used to determine the amount of information that may be safely transferred over a steganographic channel with a passive adversary. A steganographic channel, or stego-channel is a pair consisting of the channel transition ... Keywords: information spectrum, information theory, steganalysis, steganographic capacity, steganography, stego-channel

Jeremiah J. Harmsen; William A. Pearlman

2005-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

140

CARINA Data Table  

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

Cruise Summary Table and Data Cruise Summary Table and Data Users are requested to report any data or metadata errors in the CARINA cruise files to CDIAC. Parameter units in all CARINA data files are in CCHDO exchange format. No Cruise Namea (Alias) Areab Number of Stations Datec Ship Chief Scientist Carbon PI Oxygen Nutrients TCO2d TALK pCO2e pHf CFC Other Measurements Data Files 1 06AQ19920929g (06ANTX_6) (See map) 2 118 9/29-11/30/1992 Polarstern V. Smetacek M. Stoll, J. Rommets, H. De Baar, D. Bakker 62 114h 53 54i U C 0 Choloroa,b Fluorescence, NH4 Data Files (Metadata) 2 06AQ19930806 (06ARKIX_4) (See map) 4 64 8/6-10/5/1993 Polarstern D.K. Fütterer L. Anderson 64 63 63j, bb 0 0 0 59he 3H, 3He, 18O, 14C, 85Kr, Bak Data Files

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


141

Supplement Tables - Contact  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Supplement Tables to the AEO99 Supplement Tables to the AEO99 bullet1.gif (843 bytes) Annual Energy Outlook 1999 bullet1.gif (843 bytes) Assumptions to the AEO99 bullet1.gif (843 bytes) NEMS Conference bullet1.gif (843 bytes) To Forecasting Home Page bullet1.gif (843 bytes) EIA Homepage furtherinfo.gif (5474 bytes) The Annual Energy Outlook 1999 (AEO99) was prepared by the Energy Information Administration (EIA), Office of Integrated Analysis and Forecasting, under the direction of Mary J. Hutzler (mhutzler@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-2222). General questions may be addressed to Arthur T. Andersen (aanderse@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-1441), Director of the International, Economic, and Greenhouse Gas Division; Susan H. Holte (sholte@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-4838), Director of the Demand and Integration Division; James M. Kendell (jkendell@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-9646), Director of the Oil and Gas Division; Scott Sitzer (ssitzer@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-2308), Director of the Coal and Electric Power Division; or Andy S. Kydes (akydes@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-2222), Senior Modeling Analyst. Detailed questions about the forecasts and related model components may be addressed to the following analysts:

142

Appendix B: Summary Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Analysis of Impacts of a Clean Energy Standard as requested by Chairman Bingaman U.S. Energy Information Administration | Analysis of Impacts of a Clean Energy Standard as requested by Chairman Bingaman Appendix B: Summary Tables Table B1. The BCES and alternative cases compared to the Reference case, 2025 2009 2025 Ref Ref BCES All Clean Partial Credit Revised Baseline Small Utilities Credit Cap 2.1 Credit Cap 3.0 Stnds + Cds Generation (billion kilowatthours) Coal 1,772 2,049 1,431 1,305 1,387 1,180 1,767 1,714 1,571 1,358 Petroleum 41 45 43 44 44 44 45 45 45 43 Natural Gas 931 1,002 1,341 1,342 1,269 1,486 1,164 1,193 1,243 1,314 Nuclear 799 871 859 906 942 889 878 857 843 826 Conventional Hydropower 274 306 322 319 300 321 316 298 312 322 Geothermal 15 25 28 25 31 24 27 22 23 24 Municipal Waste 18 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 Wood and Other Biomass 38 162 303 289 295 301 241 266

143

Capacity Value of Solar Power  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Evaluating the capacity value of renewable energy sources can pose significant challenges due to their variable and uncertain nature. In this paper the capacity value of solar power is investigated. Solar capacity value metrics and their associated calculation methodologies are reviewed and several solar capacity studies are summarized. The differences between wind and solar power are examined, the economic importance of solar capacity value is discussed and other assessments and recommendations are presented.

Duignan, Roisin; Dent, Chris; Mills, Andrew; Samaan, Nader A.; Milligan, Michael; Keane, Andrew; O'Malley, Mark

2012-11-10T23:59:59.000Z

144

Atomic Computer Simulations of Defect Migration in 3C and 4H...  

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

Computer Simulations of Defect Migration in 3C and 4H-SiC. Atomic Computer Simulations of Defect Migration in 3C and 4H-SiC. Abstract: Knowledge of the migration of intrinsic point...

145

CBECS 1992 - Consumption & Expenditures, Detailed Tables  

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

Detailed Tables Detailed Tables Detailed Tables Figure on Energy Consumption in Commercial Buildings by Energy Source, 1992 Divider Line The 49 tables present detailed energy consumption and expenditure data for buildings in the commercial sector. This section provides assistance in reading the tables by explaining some of the headings for the data categories. It will also explain the use of row and column factors to compute both the confidence levels of the estimates given in the tables and the statistical significance of differences between the data in two or more categories. The section concludes with a "Quick-Reference Guide" to the statistics in the different tables. Categories of Data in the Tables After Table 3.1, which is a summary table, the tables are grouped into the major fuel tables (Tables 3.2 through 3.13) and the specific fuel tables (Tables 3.14 through 3.29 for electricity, Tables 3.30 through 3.40 for natural gas, Tables 3.41 through 3.45 for fuel oil, and Tables 3.46 through 3.47 for district heat). Table 3.48 presents energy management and DSM data as reported by the building respondent. Table 3.49 presents data on participation in electric utility-sponsored DSM programs as reported by both the building respondent and the electricity supplier.

146

Refinery Capacity Report  

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

1 1 Idle Operating Total Stream Day Barrels per Idle Operating Total Calendar Day Barrels per Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Capacity Idle Operating Total Operable Refineries Number of State and PAD District a b b 14 10 4 1,617,500 1,205,000 412,500 1,708,500 1,273,500 435,000 ............................................................................................................................................... PAD District I 1 0 1 182,200 0 182,200 190,200 0 190,200 ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ Delaware......................................

147

Microsoft Word - table_87  

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

5 5 Table 6. Natural gas processed, liquids extracted, and natural gas plant liquids production, by state, 2012 Alabama 87,269 5,309 7,110 Alabama Onshore Alabama 33,921 2,614 3,132 Alabama Offshore Alabama 53,348 2,695 3,978 Alaska 2,788,997 18,339 21,470 Alaska 2,788,997 18,339 21,470 Arkansas 6,872 336 424 Arkansas 6,872 336 424 California 169,203 9,923 12,755 California Onshore California 169,203 9,923 12,755 California Offshore California NA NA NA Federal Offshore California NA NA NA

148

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

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

2 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A. Project Summary 1. Technical Progress 3 2. Cost Reporting 5 B. Detailed Reports 1.1 Magnets & Supports 8 1.2 Vacuum System 12 1.3 Power Supplies 14 1.4 RF System 16 1.5 Instrumentation & Controls 17 1.6 Cable Plant 18 1.7 Beam Line Front Ends 19 1.8 Facilities 19 1.9 Installation 20 2.1 Accelerator Physics 21 2 A. SPEAR 3 PROJECT SUMMARY 1. Technical Progress The progress and highlights of each major technical system are summarized below. Additional details are provided in Section B. Magnets - As of the end of this quarter (March 31, 2002), the status of magnet fabrication is as follows: Magnet Type Number Received % of Total Received Dipoles 40 100% Quadrupoles 102 100% Sextupoles 76 100%

149

Reviews, Tables, and Plots  

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

4 Review of Particle Physics 4 Review of Particle Physics Please use this CITATION: S. Eidelman et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Lett. B 592, 1 (2004) (bibtex) Standalone figures are now available for these reviews. Categories: * Constants, Units, Atomic and Nuclear Properties * Standard Model and Related Topics * Particle Properties * Hypothetical Particles * Astrophysics and Cosmology * Experimental Methods and Colliders * Mathematical Tools * Kinematics, Cross-Section Formulae, and Plots * Authors, Introductory Text, History plots PostScript help file PDF help file Constants, Units, Atomic and Nuclear Properties Physical constants (Rev.) PS PDF (1 page) Astrophysical constants (Rev.) PS PDF (2 pages) International System of units (SI) PS PDF (2 pages) Periodic table of the elements (Rev.) errata PS PDF (1 page)

150

Table G3  

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

1905-0194 1905-0194 Expiration Date: 07/31/2013 May 28, 2010 Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases 14 Table G3. Decision Chart for a Start Year Report for a Large Emitter Intending To Register Reductions Report Characteristics Reporting Requirements Schedule I Schedule II (For Each Subentity) Schedule III Schedule IV Sec. 1 Sec. 2 Sec. 3 Sec. 4 Sec. 1 Sec. 2 & Add. A Sec. 3 Sec. 1 Sec. 2 Sec. 1 Sec. 2 Part A Part B Part C Part D Part E Part A Part B Part C Independent Verification? All A- or B-Rated Methods? Foreign Emissions? Entity-Wide Reductions Only? Entity Statement Aggregated Emissions by Gas (Domestic and Foreign) † Emissions Inventory by Source

151

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

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

through June 2001 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A. Project Summary 1. Technical Progress 3 2. Cost Reporting 4 B. Detailed Reports 1.1 Magnets & Supports 9 1.2 Vacuum System 16 1.3 Power Supplies 21 1.4 RF System 25 1.5 Instrumentation & Controls 26 1.6 Cable Plant 28 1.8 Facilities 28 2.0 Accelerator Physics 29 2.1 ES&H 31 3 A. SPEAR 3 PROJECT SUMMARY 1. Technical Progress Magnet System - The project has received three shipments of magnets from IHEP. A total of 55 dipole, quadrupole and sextupole magnets out of 218 have arrived. All main magnets will arrive by December. The additional mechanical and electrical checks of the magnets at SSRL have been successful. Only minor mechanical problems were found and corrected. The prototype

152

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

AC05-00OR22800 AC05-00OR22800 TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents Page # TOC - i SECTION A - SOLICITATION/OFFER AND AWARD ......................................................................... A-i SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS ........................................................ B-i B.1 SERVICES BEING ACQUIRED ....................................................................................B-2 B.2 TRANSITION COST, ESTIMATED COST, MAXIMUM AVAILABLE FEE, AND AVAILABLE FEE (Modification 295, 290, 284, 280, 270, 257, 239, 238, 219, M201, M180, M162, M153, M150, M141, M132, M103, M092, M080, M055, M051, M049, M034, M022, M003, A002) ..........................................................B-2 SECTION C - DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATION/WORK STATEMENT DESCRIPTION OF

153

Table of Contents  

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

U U U . . S S . . D D E E P P A A R R T T M M E E N N T T O O F F E E N N E E R R G G Y Y O O F F F F I I C C E E O O F F I I N N S S P P E E C C T T O O R R G G E E N N E E R R A A L L Semiannual Report toCongress DOE/IG-0065 April 1 - September 30, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS From the Desk of the Inspector General ..................................................... 2 Impacts Key Accomplishments ............................................................................................... 3 Positive Outcomes ...................................................................................................... 3 Reports Investigative Outcomes .............................................................................................. 6 Audits ......................................................................................................................... 8

154

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

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

October October through December 2001 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A. Project Summary 1. Technical Progress 3 2. Cost Reporting 4 B. Detailed Reports 1.1 Magnets & Supports 7 1.2 Vacuum System 9 1.3 Power Supplies 13 1.4 RF System 16 1.5 Instrumentation & Controls 17 1.6 Cable Plant 18 1.9 Installation 19 2.0 Accelerator Physics 20 3 A. SPEAR 3 PROJECT SUMMARY 1. Technical Progress In the magnet area, the production of all major components (dipoles, quadrupoles, and sextupoles) has been completed on schedule. This results from a highly successful collaboration with our colleagues at the Institute of High Energy Physics (IHEP) in Beijing. The production of corrector magnets is still in progress with completion scheduled for May 2002.

155

2003 CBECS Detailed Tables: Summary  

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

Energy Expenditures by Major Fuel c2-pdf c2.xls c2.html Table C3. Consumption and Gross Energy Intensity for Sum of Major Fuels c3.pdf c3.xls c3.html Table C4. Expenditures for...

156

2014 Headquarters Facilities Master Security Plan - Table of...  

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

Table of Contents 2014 Headquarters Facilities Master Security Plan - Table of Contents June 2014 2014 Headquarters Facilities Master Security Plan - Table of Contents The Table of...

157

FY 2014 Budget Request Summary Table | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Summary Table FY 2014 Budget Request Summary Table Summary Table by Appropriations Summary Table by Organization More Documents & Publications FY 2014 Budget Request Statistical...

158

ARM - Instrument - s-table  

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

govInstrumentss-table govInstrumentss-table Documentation S-TABLE : Instrument Mentor Monthly Summary (IMMS) reports S-TABLE : Data Quality Assessment (DQA) reports ARM Data Discovery Browse Data Comments? We would love to hear from you! Send us a note below or call us at 1-888-ARM-DATA. Send Instrument : Stabilized Platform (S-TABLE) Instrument Categories Ocean Observations For ship-based deployments, some instruments require actively stabilized platforms to compensate for the ship's motion, especially rotations around the long axis of the ship (roll), short axis (pitch), and, for some instruments, vertical axis (yaw). ARM currently employs two types of stabilized platforms: one electrically controlled for lighter instruments that includes yaw control (dubbed RPY for Roll, Pitch, Yaw) and one

159

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation - Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Modeling and Analysis Papers> Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation>Tables Modeling and Analysis Papers> Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation>Tables Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation Actual vs. Forecasts Available formats Excel (.xls) for printable spreadsheet data (Microsoft Excel required) MS Excel Viewer PDF (Acrobat Reader required Download Acrobat Reader ) Adobe Acrobat Reader Logo Table 2. Total Energy Consumption Excel, PDF Table 3. Total Petroleum Consumption Excel, PDF Table 4. Total Natural Gas Consumption Excel, PDF Table 5. Total Coal Consumption Excel, PDF Table 6. Total Electricity Sales Excel, PDF Table 7. Crude Oil Production Excel, PDF Table 8. Natural Gas Production Excel, PDF Table 9. Coal Production Excel, PDF Table 10. Net Petroleum Imports Excel, PDF Table 11. Net Natural Gas Imports Excel, PDF

160

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation - Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation Actual vs. Forecasts Available formats Excel (.xls) for printable spreadsheet data (Microsoft Excel required) PDF (Acrobat Reader required) Table 2. Total Energy Consumption HTML, Excel, PDF Table 3. Total Petroleum Consumption HTML, Excel, PDF Table 4. Total Natural Gas Consumption HTML, Excel, PDF Table 5. Total Coal Consumption HTML, Excel, PDF Table 6. Total Electricity Sales HTML, Excel, PDF Table 7. Crude Oil Production HTML, Excel, PDF Table 8. Natural Gas Production HTML, Excel, PDF Table 9. Coal Production HTML, Excel, PDF Table 10. Net Petroleum Imports HTML, Excel, PDF Table 11. Net Natural Gas Imports HTML, Excel, PDF Table 12. Net Coal Exports HTML, Excel, PDF Table 13. World Oil Prices HTML, Excel, PDF

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


161

table14.xls  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 14. Natural Gas Wellhead Prices, Actual vs. Reference Case Projections Table 14. Natural Gas Wellhead Prices, Actual vs. Reference Case Projections (current dollars per thousand cubic feet) 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 AEO 1982 4.32 5.47 6.67 7.51 8.04 8.57 AEO 1983 2.93 3.11 3.46 3.93 4.56 5.26 12.74 AEO 1984 2.77 2.90 3.21 3.63 4.13 4.79 9.33 AEO 1985 2.60 2.61 2.66 2.71 2.94 3.35 3.85 4.46 5.10 5.83 6.67 AEO 1986 1.73 1.96 2.29 2.54 2.81 3.15 3.73 4.34 5.06 5.90 6.79 7.70 8.62 9.68 10.80 AEO 1987 1.83 1.95 2.11 2.28 2.49 2.72 3.08 3.51 4.07 7.54 AEO 1989* 1.62 1.70 1.91 2.13 2.58 3.04 3.48 3.93 4.76 5.23 5.80 6.43 6.98 AEO 1990 1.78 1.88 2.93 5.36 AEO 1991 1.77 1.90 2.11 2.30 2.42 2.51 2.60 2.74 2.91 3.29 3.75 4.31 5.07 5.77 6.45 AEO 1992 1.69 1.85 2.03 2.15 2.35 2.51 2.74 3.01 3.40 3.81 4.24 4.74 5.25 5.78 AEO 1993 1.85 1.94 2.09 2.30 2.44 2.60 2.85 3.12 3.47 3.84 4.31 4.81 5.28

162

TABLE 1. Structure of brucite ) 40.20* 35.16* 41.78 36.36 23.34  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

; z y x a a' b c b' c' 1' 3' 2' 3 1 2 TABLE 1. Structure of brucite V (?3 ) 40.20* 35.16* 41'), and linear moduli (Ka, Kc) of brucite at ambient pressure Vo (?3 ) c/a Ko(GPa) Ko' Ka(GPa) Kc(GPa) Method

Stixrude, Lars

163

Code Tables | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

System NMMSS Information, Reports & Forms Code Tables Code Tables U.S. Department of Energy U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nuclear Materials Management & Safeguards...

164

MECS Fuel Oil Tables  

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

: Actual, Minimum and Maximum Use Values for Fuel Oils and Natural Gas : Actual, Minimum and Maximum Use Values for Fuel Oils and Natural Gas Year Distillate Fuel Oil (TBtu) Actual Minimum Maximum Discretionary Rate 1985 185 148 1224 3.4% 1994 152 125 1020 3.1% Residual Fuel Oil (TBtu) Actual Minimum Maximum Discretionary Rate 1985 505 290 1577 16.7% 1994 441 241 1249 19.8% Natural Gas (TBtu) Actual Minimum Maximum Discretionary Rate 1985 4656 2702 5233 77.2% 1994 6141 4435 6758 73.4% Source: Energy Information Administration, Office of Energy Markets and End Use, 1985 and 1994 Manufacturing Energy Consumption Surveys. Table 2: Establishments That Actually Switched Between Natural Gas and Residual Fuel Oil Type of Switch Number of Establishments in Population Number That Use Original Fuel Percentage That Use Original Fuel Number That Can Switch to Another Fuel Percentage That Can Switch to Another Fuel Number That Actually Made a Switch Percentage That Actually Made a Switch

165

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

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

Turbines The Gas Turbine Handbook The Gas Turbine Handbook TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements Updated Author Contact Information Introduction - Rich Dennis, Turbines Technology Manager 1.1 Simple and Combined Cycles - Claire Soares 1.1-1 Introduction 1.1-2 Applications 1.1-3 Applications versatility 1.1-4 The History of the Gas Turbine 1.1-5 Gas Turbine, Major Components, Modules, and systems 1.1-6 Design development with Gas Turbines 1.1-7 Gas Turbine Performance 1.1-8 Combined Cycles 1.1-9 Notes 1.2 Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) - Massod Ramezan and Gary Stiegel 1.2-1 Introduction 1.2-2 The Gasification Process 1.2-3 IGCC Systems 1.2-4 Gasifier Improvements 1.2-5 Gas Separation Improvements 1.2-6 Conclusions 1.2-7 Notes 1.2.1 Different Types of Gasifiers and Their Integration with Gas Turbines - Jeffrey Phillips

166

EIA - Annual Energy Outlook 2009 - chapter Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Chapter Tables Chapter Tables Annual Energy Outlook 2009 with Projections to 2030 Chapter Tables Table 1. Estimated fuel economy for light-duty vehicles, based on proposed CAFE standards, 2010-2015 Table 2. State appliance efficiency standards and potential future actions Table 3. State renewable portfolio standards Table 4. Key analyses from "issues in Focus" in recent AEOs Table 5. Liquid fuels production in three cases, 2007 and 2030 Table 6. Assumptions used in comparing conventional and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles Table 7. Conventional vehicle and plug-in hybrid system component costs for mid-size vehicles at volume production Table 8. Technically recoverable resources of crude oil and natural gas in the Outer Continental Shelf, as of January 1, 2007

167

MECS 1991 Publications and Tables  

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

Publication and Tables Publication and Tables Publication and Tables Figure showing the Largest Energy Consumers in the Manufacturing Sector You have the option of downloading the entire report or selected sections of the report. Full Report - Manufacturing Consumption of Energy 1991 (file size 17.2 MB) pages:566 Selected Sections Main Text (file size 380,153 bytes) pages: 33, includes the following: Contacts Contents Executive Summary Introduction Energy Consumption in the Manufacturing Sector: An Overview Energy Consumption in the Manufacturing Sector, 1991 Manufacturing Capability To Switch Fuels Appendices Appendix A. Detailed Tables Appendix B. Survey Design, Implementation, and Estimates (file size 141,211 bytes) pages: 22. Appendix C. Quality of the Data (file size 135,511 bytes) pages: 8.

168

TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

............................................... 12 Water-Source Heat Pump Performance ............................ 18 Air-Source Heat Pump OF PERFORMANCE OF WATER-SOURCE HEAT PUMP .............................. ................. 23 FIGURE 2. NODAL. MONTHLY HEAT GAIN/LOSS FACTORS ........................... 5 TABLE 2. BASE TEMPERATURES

Oak Ridge National Laboratory

169

Figure A1. Natural gas processing plant capacity in the United States, 2013 2012  

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

5 5 Figure A1. Natural gas processing plant capacity in the United States, 2013 2012 Table A2. Natural gas processing plant capacity, by state, 2013 (million cubic feet per day) Alabama 1,403 Arkansas 24 California 926 Colorado 5,450 Florida 90 Illinois 2,100 Kansas 1,818 Kentucky 240 Louisiana 10,737 Michigan 479 Mississippi 1,123

170

An Analysis of the Nonprofit and Volunteer Capacity-Building Industries in Central Texas  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

organizations, and academic institutions? 3. How do capacity-building programs and services lead to nonprofit organizational change or improvement? 4. What role does the funding community play in promoting organizational change through capacity building? 5... of The LBJ School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin & The Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M University April 26, 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...

Aldape, Nichole; Barker, Carolyn; Beekley, Taja; Brown, Angela Faye; Brown, Erin; Cross, Staci; Ekwurzel, Erica; Garner, Lindsey; Hart, Alison; Jones, Alexis; Juckett, Karen; Kennedy, Chris; Larson, Esther; Lee, Grace; Nedderman, Leah; Pesti, Ilona; Schwartz, Michele; Shaw, Joseph; Sigler, Rodney; Sinatra, Christine; Teleki, Katherine; Terrazas, Erica; Wagner, Elizabeth

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

171

Data:B54b21de-3c63-405a-9ea9-f152c09b3c13 | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

b21de-3c63-405a-9ea9-f152c09b3c13 b21de-3c63-405a-9ea9-f152c09b3c13 No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: City of Rockwood, Tennessee (Utility Company) Effective date: 2012/12/01 End date if known: Rate name: Residential Sector: Residential Description: "applies only to electric service to a single-family dwelling and its appurtenances, where the major use of electricity is for domestic purposes such as lighting, household appliances, and the personal comfort and convenience of those residing therein..." Source or reference: http://www.rockwoodelectric.com/rates.asp

172

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

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

173

V-010: 3Com, HP, and H3C Switches SNMP Configuration Lets Remote Users Take  

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

10: 3Com, HP, and H3C Switches SNMP Configuration Lets Remote 10: 3Com, HP, and H3C Switches SNMP Configuration Lets Remote Users Take Administrative Actions V-010: 3Com, HP, and H3C Switches SNMP Configuration Lets Remote Users Take Administrative Actions October 25, 2012 - 6:00am Addthis PROBLEM: 3Com, HP, and H3C Switches SNMP Configuration Lets Remote Users Take Administrative Actions PLATFORM: 3COM, and H3C Routers & Switches Specific products and model numbers is provided in the vendor's advisory. ABSTRACT: A vulnerability was reported in 3Com, HP, and H3C Switches. REFERENCE LINKS: HP Support document ID: c03515685 SecurityTracker Alert ID: 1027694 CVE-2012-3268 IMPACT ASSESSMENT: High DISCUSSION: A remote user with knowledge of the SNMP public community string can access potentially sensitive data (e.g., user names, passwords) in the

174

EIA - Appendix A - Reference Case Projection Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Tables (2005-2035) Tables (2005-2035) International Energy Outlook 2010 Reference Case Projections Tables (2005-2035) Formats Data Table Titles (1 to 14 complete) Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030). Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Appendix A. Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A1 World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region Table A1. World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A2 World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel Table A2. World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

175

First mideast capacity planned  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Kuwait catalyst Co.`s (KCC) plans to build a hydrodesulfurization (HDS) catalysts plant in Kuwait will mark the startup of the first refining catalysts production in the Persian Gulf region. KCC, owned by a conglomerate of Kuwait companies and governmental agencies, has licensed catalyst manufacturing technology from Japan Energy in a deal estimated at more than 7 billion ($62 million). Plant design will be based on technology from Orient Catalyst, Japan Energy`s catalysts division. Construction is expected to begin in January 1997 for production startup by January 1998. A source close to the deal says the new plant will eventually reach a capacity of 5,000 m.t./year of HDS catalysts to supply most of Kuwait`s estimated 3,500-m.t./year demand, driven primarily by Kuwait National Petroleum refineries. KCC also expects to supply demand from other catalyst consumers in the region. Alumina supply will be acquired on the open market. KCC will take all production from the plant and will be responsible for marketing.

Fattah, H.

1996-11-06T23:59:59.000Z

176

EIA - Supplement Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2009  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

10 10 Regional Energy Consumption and Prices by Sector Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Table 1. New England Excel Gif Table 2. Middle Atlantic Excel Gif Table 3. East North Central Excel Gif Table 4. West North Central Excel Gif Table 5. South Atlantic Excel Gif Table 6. East South Central Excel Gif Table 7. West South Central Excel Gif Table 8. Mountain Excel Gif Table 9. Pacific Excel Gif Table 10. Total United States Excel Gif Energy Prices by Sector and Source Table 11. New England Excel Gif Table 12. Middle Atlantic Excel Gif Table 13. East North Central Excel Gif Table 14. West North Central Excel Gif Table 15. South Atlantic Excel Gif Table 16. East South Central Excel Gif Table 17. West South Central Excel Gif Table 18. Mountain Excel Gif Table 19. Pacific

177

EIA - Supplement Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2009  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

09 09 Regional Energy Consumption and Prices by Sector Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Table 1. New England Excel Gif Table 2. Middle Atlantic Excel Gif Table 3. East North Central Excel Gif Table 4. West North Central Excel Gif Table 5. South Atlantic Excel Gif Table 6. East South Central Excel Gif Table 7. West South Central Excel Gif Table 8. Mountain Excel Gif Table 9. Pacific Excel Gif Table 10. Total United States Excel Gif Energy Prices by Sector and Source Table 11. New England Excel Gif Table 12. Middle Atlantic Excel Gif Table 13. East North Central Excel Gif Table 14. West North Central Excel Gif Table 15. South Atlantic Excel Gif Table 16. East South Central Excel Gif Table 17. West South Central Excel Gif Table 18. Mountain Excel Gif Table 19. Pacific

178

Data:6f121b5e-2a0c-4777-9efe-3c5b44d7871d | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

1b5e-2a0c-4777-9efe-3c5b44d7871d 1b5e-2a0c-4777-9efe-3c5b44d7871d No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Edgecombe-Martin County E M C Effective date: 2006/08/01 End date if known: Rate name: GENERAL SERVICE Three Phase Sector: Commercial Description: AVAILABILITY: Electric service is available under this Schedule in the territory served by the Cooperative for nonresidential use with less than 100 kVA of transformer capacity. Resale and standby services are not permitted. Rates are subject to wholesale power cost adjustments, power factor adjustments,a North Carolina Sales Tax and Rider EE (Energy Efficiency Rider).

179

Data:408684f1-cc3e-4c8b-a3c2-e331c0e78277 | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

f1-cc3e-4c8b-a3c2-e331c0e78277 f1-cc3e-4c8b-a3c2-e331c0e78277 No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Little Ocmulgee El Member Corp Effective date: 2009/01/01 End date if known: Rate name: Schedule "R-7" Sector: Commercial Description: Applicable to permanent full-time consumers and use incidental thereto, and at one standard voltage. The capacity of individual motors served under the Schedule shall not exceed 10 horsepower. No service rendered hereunder may be resold or transmitted to other premises, either directly or indirectly, without expressed consent of the Cooperative.

180

Data:9520a388-400e-45e9-b645-8e3c83837b69 | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

8-400e-45e9-b645-8e3c83837b69 8-400e-45e9-b645-8e3c83837b69 No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Pearl River Valley El Pwr Assn Effective date: 2001/07/01 End date if known: Rate name: 60 TOU-2 Time of Use Sector: Description: Available to non-residential Consumers requiring three phase service with a transformer capacity of 1000kVA or more, subject to Association's established rules and regulations. This rate applies to electric service measured by one meter used exclusively by one Consumer in a single establishment on one premise utilizing a single delivery point, and not resold or shared with others.

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


181

Data:Fed3f322-10d8-41c2-9055-d2981c3c3d53 | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Fed3f322-10d8-41c2-9055-d2981c3c3d53 Fed3f322-10d8-41c2-9055-d2981c3c3d53 No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Algoma Utility Comm Effective date: 2008/05/28 End date if known: Rate name: Residential Service Three-Phase Sector: Residential Description: This rate will be applied to residential single-phase customers for ordinary household purposes. Single-phase motors may not exceed 5 horsepower individual-rated capacity without utility permission. Rg-1 Residential Service $1.00 per customer per month Source or reference: http://www.algomautilities.com/media/Electric_Rate_Tariff_Sheets.pdf

182

Data:Fe881325-eb71-45ad-a4cd-f2fe3c28f436 | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

325-eb71-45ad-a4cd-f2fe3c28f436 325-eb71-45ad-a4cd-f2fe3c28f436 No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Orange County Rural E M C Effective date: 2012/01/01 End date if known: Rate name: Rate 101- 2012 Rate Schedule for Standard Service Sector: Residential Description: Wholesale Power Cost Tracker changes quarterly. Available to any member of the REMC located on its lines for standard service whose installed capacity does not exceed 50KVA. Source or reference: http://www.orangecountyremc.org/electricrates.html Source Parent: Comments Applicability Demand (kW) Minimum (kW): Maximum (kW):

183

Data:Da62642a-729c-4c5c-9850-669cb6c3c4c5 | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Da62642a-729c-4c5c-9850-669cb6c3c4c5 Da62642a-729c-4c5c-9850-669cb6c3c4c5 No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Columbus Southern Power Co Effective date: 2012/03/09 End date if known: Rate name: Interruptible Power - Discretionary(primary voltage)-supplemental interruptions Sector: Industrial Description: Service pursuant to this schedule is available to customers that have provided reasonable evidence to the Company that their electric service can be interrupted within a 10-minute notice period. Customers shall contract for electrical capacity sufficient to meet normal maximum requirements but not

184

Data:1b2efb80-964b-4853-add3-c2cf5221b66f | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

efb80-964b-4853-add3-c2cf5221b66f efb80-964b-4853-add3-c2cf5221b66f No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Algoma Utility Comm Effective date: 2008/05/28 End date if known: Rate name: Residential Service Single-Phase Sector: Residential Description: This rate will be applied to residential single-phase customers for ordinary household purposes. Single-phase motors may not exceed 5 horsepower individual-rated capacity without utility permission. Rg-1 Residential Service $1.00 per customer per month Source or reference: http://www.algomautilities.com/media/Electric_Rate_Tariff_Sheets.pdf

185

Electric Capacity | OpenEI  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Capacity Capacity Dataset Summary Description The New Zealand Ministry of Economic Development publishes an annual Energy Outlook, which presents projections of New Zealand's future energy supply, demand, prices and greenhouse gas emissions. The principle aim of these projections is to inform the national energy debate. Included here are the model results for electricity and generation capacity. The spreadsheet provides an interactive tool for selecting which model results to view, and which scenarios to evaluate; full model results for each scenario are also included. Source New Zealand Ministry of Economic Development Date Released Unknown Date Updated December 15th, 2010 (3 years ago) Keywords Electric Capacity Electricity Generation New Zealand projections

186

Adaptive capacity and its assessment  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This paper reviews the concept of adaptive capacity and various approaches to assessing it, particularly with respect to climate variability and change. I find that adaptive capacity is a relatively under-researched topic within the sustainability science and global change communities, particularly since it is uniquely positioned to improve linkages between vulnerability and resilience research. I identify opportunities for advancing the measurement and characterization of adaptive capacity by combining insights from both vulnerability and resilience frameworks, and I suggest several assessment approaches for possible future development that draw from both frameworks and focus on analyzing the governance, institutions, and management that have helped foster adaptive capacity in light of recent climatic events.

Engle, Nathan L.

2011-04-20T23:59:59.000Z

187

Year/PAD District Cokers Catalytic Crackers Hydrocrackers Capacity  

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

Cokers Catalytic Crackers Hydrocrackers Capacity Inputs Capacity Inputs Capacity Inputs Table 8. Capacity and Fresh Feed Input to Selected Downstream Units at U.S. Refineries, 2011 - 2013 (Barrels per Calendar Day) Reformers Capacity Inputs 2011 2,396,787 5,794,214 1,687,745 2,093,849 4,952,455 1,466,627 2,570,970 3,346,457 93,700 673,300 41,500 37,932 490,729 18,030 PADD I 188,389 266,950 373,897 1,176,972 254,000 350,063 1,017,616 223,751 PADD II 664,852 812,244 1,318,440 2,933,842 841,285 1,183,318 2,570,348 744,638 PADD III 1,243,427 1,629,967 80,350 185,800 28,200 63,362 158,192 18,214 PADD IV 96,649 120,190 530,400 824,300 522,760 459,175 715,570 461,995 PADD V 377,652 517,106 2012 2,499,293 5,611,191 1,706,540 2,173,336 4,901,284 1,528,708 2,614,571 3,246,874 74,900 489,300 20,000

188

Table of Contents Preface vii  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

environmental public health areas: capacity building, research, leadership, communication and marketing Inspections · Groundwater Pollution Control · Vector Control · Environmental Emergency Response · Food Goal I. Build Capacity 15 Goal II. Support Research 18 Goal III. Foster Leadership 21 Goal IV

189

Nature Bulletin Table of Contents  

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

Table of Contents: Table of Contents: Here is our table of contents for the Forset Preserve District of Cook Country Nature Bulletins. To search, go to the Natuere Bulletin's Search Engine and type in your topic. You can also use your browser's "FIND" command to search the 750+ article titles here for a specific subject! Fish Smother Under Ice Coyotes in Cook County Tough Times for the Muskrats Wild Geese and Ducks Fly North Squirrels Spring Frogs Snapping Turtles A Phenomenal Spring Good People Do Not Pick Wildflowers Fire is the Enemy of Field and Forest Crows Earthworms Bees Crayfish Floods Handaxes and Knives in the Forest Preserves Ant Sanctuary Conservation Mosquitoes More About Mosquitoes Fishing in the Forest Preserve Our River Grasshoppers Chiggers Ticks Poison Ivy Fireflies

190

COST AND QUALITY TABLES 95  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 Tables 5 Tables July 1996 Energy Information Administration Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels U.S. Department of Energy Washington DC 20585 This report was prepared by the Energy Information Administration, the independent statistical and analytical agency within the Department of Energy. The information contained herein should not be construed as advocating or reflecting any policy position of the Department of Energy or any other organization. Contacts The annual publication Cost and Quality of Fuels for Electric Utility Plants (C&Q) will no longer be pub- lished by the EIA. The tables presented in this docu- ment are intended to replace that annual publication. Questions regarding the availability of these data should be directed to: Coal and Electric Data and Renewables Division

191

MTS Table Top Load frame  

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

MTS Table Top Load frame MTS Table Top Load frame The Non-destructive Evaluation group operates an MTS Table Top Load frame for ultimate strength and life cycle testing of various ceramic, ceramic-matrix (FGI), carbon, carbon fiber, cermet (CMC) and metal alloy engineering samples. The load frame is a servo-hydraulic type designed to function in a closed loop configuration under computer control. The system can perform non-cyclic, tension, compression and flexure testing and cyclic fatigue tests. The system is comprised of two parts: * The Load Frame and * The Control System. Load Frame The Load Frame (figure 1) is a cross-head assembly which includes a single moving grip, a stationary grip and LVDT position sensor. It can generate up to 25 kN (5.5 kip) of force in the sample under test and can

192

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

30 30 Salt Caverns Aquifers Depleted Fields Total State Number of Active Fields Capacity Number of Active Fields Capacity Number of Active Fields Capacity Number of Active Fields Capacity Percent of U.S. Capacity Aquifers Salt Caverns Depleted Fields Alabama ................. 1 8 0 0 1 3 2 11 0.13 Arkansas ................ 0 0 0 0 2 22 2 22 0.27 California ................ 0 0 0 0 11 478 11 478 5.79 Colorado................. 0 0 0 0 9 101 9 101 1.22 Illinois ..................... 0 0 17 767 12 216 29 982 11.90 Indiana ................... 0 0 12 81 10 32 22 113 1.37 Iowa ....................... 0 0 4 273 0 0 4 273 3.31 Kansas ................... 1 1 0 0 17 288 18 289 3.51 Kentucky ................ 0 0 3 10 20 211 23 221 2.68 Louisiana................ 6 63 0 0 8 530 14 594 7.19

193

CBECS 1992 - Building Characteristics, Detailed Tables  

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

Detailed Tables Detailed Tables Detailed Tables Percent of Buildings and Floorspace by Census Region, 1992 Percent of Buildings and Floorspace by Census Region, 1992 The following 70 tables present extensive cross-tabulations of commercial buildings characteristics. These data are from the Buildings Characteristics Survey portion of the 1992 CBECS. The "Quick-Reference Guide," indicates the major topics of each table. Directions for calculating an approximate relative standard error (RSE) for each estimate in the tables are presented in Figure A1, "Use of RSE Row and Column Factor." The Glossary contains the definitions of the terms used in the tables. See the preceding "At A Glance" section for highlights of the detailed tables. Table Organization

194

Energy Information Administration (EIA) - Supplement Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 1 to 116 Complete set of Supplemental Tables Complete set of Supplemental Tables. Need help, please contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Regional Energy Consumption and Prices by Sector Energy Consumption by Sector Table 1. New England Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 2. Middle Atlantic Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 3. East North Central Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 4. West North Central

195

FRAUD POLICY Table of Contents  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

FRAUD POLICY Table of Contents Section 1 - General Statement Section 2 - Management's Responsibility for Preventing Fraud Section 3 - Consequences for Fraudulent Acts Section 4 - Procedures for Reporting Fraud Section 5 - Procedures for the Investigation of Alleged Fraud Section 6 - Protection Under

Shihadeh, Alan

196

CHP NOTEBOOK Table of Contents  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

-Specific Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) Section 8 Employee Training Section 9 Inspections and Exposure1 CHP NOTEBOOK Table of Contents Section 1 Safety Program Key Personnel Section 2 Laboratory Protective Equipment (PPE) Assessment Section 18 Hazard Assessment Information and PPE Selection Information

Braun, Paul

197

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

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

2 Table 4. Offshore gross withdrawals of natural gas by state and the Gulf of Mexico, 2009-2013 (million cubic feet) 2009 Total 259,848 327,105 586,953 1,878,928 606,403 2,485,331...

198

PARENT HANDBOOK TABLE OF CONTENTS  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

PARENT HANDBOOK 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS The Parent's Role 3 Academics 7 Academic Advising 7 Academic Services 26 Athletics, Physical Education and Recreation 28 Campus Resources and Student Services 30 to seeing you in person and connecting with you online! PARENT HANDBOOK THEPARENT'SROLE PARENT HANDBOOK 3

Adali, Tulay

199

Automatic Construction of Diagnostic Tables  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

......more usual, at least in microbiology.) Keys and diagnostic tables...Mechanization and Data Handling in Microbiology, Society for Applied Bacteriology...by A. Baillie and R. J. Gilbert, London: Academic Press...cultures, Canadian Journal of Microbiology, Vol. 14, pp. 271-279......

W. R. Willcox; S. P. Lapage

1972-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

200

Seismic Capacity of Threaded, Brazed, and Grooved Pipe Joints  

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

SEISMIC CAPACITY OF THREADED, SEISMIC CAPACITY OF THREADED, BRAZED AND GROOVED PIPE JOINTS Brent Gutierrez, PhD, PE George Antaki, PE, F.ASME DOE NPH Conference October 25-26, 2011 Motivation * Understand the behavior and failure mode of common joints under extreme lateral loads * Static and shake table tests conducted of pressurized - Threaded, - Brazed, - Mechanical joints Static Testing o Pressurized spool to 150 psi o Steady downward force applied while recording deflections o Grooved clamped mech. joints * 16 tests performed o Threaded joints * 4 tests o Brazed (copper) * 4 tests Grooved Couplings o Catalog items o ASTM A106 Grade B piping o ASTM A 536 couplings o Lateral deflections imposed well above manufacturer's angular installation tolerance

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


201

An optimal filtering algorithm for table constraints  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Filtering algorithms for table constraints are constraint-based, which means that the propagation queue only contains information on the constraints that must be reconsidered. This paper proposes four efficient value-based algorithms for table constraints, ...

Jean-Baptiste Mairy; Pascal Van Hentenryck; Yves Deville

2012-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

202

Table Name query? | OpenEI Community  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Table Name query? Home > Groups > Databus Is there an API feature which returns the names of tables? Submitted by Hopcroft on 28 October, 2013 - 15:37 1 answer Points: 0 if you are...

203

Data:34702ed8-2f91-4f3c-af4a-a423d3c483ad | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

ed8-2f91-4f3c-af4a-a423d3c483ad ed8-2f91-4f3c-af4a-a423d3c483ad No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Wheat Belt Public Power Dist Effective date: 2013/04/01 End date if known: Rate name: Large Power (C-1) Sector: Commercial Description: Source or reference: http://www.wheatbelt.com/uploaded/pdf/13572235352013RSC-1.pdf Source Parent: Comments Applicability Demand (kW) Minimum (kW): Maximum (kW): History (months): Energy (kWh) Minimum (kWh): Maximum (kWh): History (months): Service Voltage Minimum (V): Maximum (V): Character of Service Voltage Category: Phase Wiring: << Previous 1 2 3 Next >>

204

Data:4f8c086e-5380-4b3c-9de8-d3c40bec473c | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

e-5380-4b3c-9de8-d3c40bec473c e-5380-4b3c-9de8-d3c40bec473c No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Reedsburg Utility Comm Effective date: 2011/06/01 End date if known: Rate name: Gs-2 General Service Single Phase Optional Time-of-Day 8am-8pm with Parallel Generation(20kW or less) Sector: Commercial Description: Power Cost Adjustment Clause - All metered rates shall be subject to a positive or negative power cost adjustment charge equivalent to the amount by which the current cost of power (per kilowatt-hour of sales) is greater or lesser than the base cost of power purchased (per kilowatt-hour of sales). The base cost of power (U) is $0.0785 per kilowatt-hour.

205

Data:E91145e4-aad5-41d0-98ba-b697d3c3c52a | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

aad5-41d0-98ba-b697d3c3c52a aad5-41d0-98ba-b697d3c3c52a No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Hustisford Utilities Effective date: 2008/09/30 End date if known: Rate name: Cp-2 Large Power Service above 200kW Demand Time-of-Day Service with Parallel Generation(20kW or less) Sector: Industrial Description: Power Cost Adjustment Clause - All metered rates shall be subject to a positive or negative power cost adjustment charge equivalent to the amount by which the current cost of power (per kilowatt-hour of sales) is greater or lesser than the base cost of power purchased (per kilowatt-hour of sales). The base cost of power (U) is $0.0720 per kilowatt-hour.

206

Data:6424cc68-aa3c-42aa-ad29-b80ed6e62e3c | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

8-aa3c-42aa-ad29-b80ed6e62e3c 8-aa3c-42aa-ad29-b80ed6e62e3c No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Village of Prairie Du Sac, Wisconsin (Utility Company) Effective date: 2006/06/15 End date if known: Rate name: Cp-2 Large Power Time-of-Day Service Primary Metering & Transformer Ownership Discount with Parallel Generation(20kW or less) Sector: Industrial Description: Power Cost Adjustment Clause - All metered rates shall be subject to a positive or negative power cost adjustment charge equivalent to the amount by which the current cost of power (per kilowatt-hour of sales) is greater or lesser than the base cost of power purchased (per kilowatt-hour of sales). The base cost of power (U) is $0.0583 per kilowatt-hour.

207

U.S. Refinery Utilization and Capacity  

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

Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View History Gross Input to Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Units 15,283 15,709 16,327 16,490 16,306 16,162 1985-2013 Operable Capacity (Calendar Day) 17,814 17,815 17,815 17,815 17,815 17,818 1985-2013 Operating 17,005 17,228 17,239 17,450 17,439 17,623 1985-2013 Idle 809 587 576 365 376 195 1985-2013 Operable Utilization Rate (%) 85.8 88.2 91.7 92.6 91.5 90.7 1985-2013 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Notes: Totals may not equal sum of components due to independent rounding. See Definitions, Sources, and Notes link above for more information on this table. Release Date: 11/27/2013

208

Chemistry Department Assessment Table of Contents  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

0 Chemistry Department Assessment May, 2006 Table of Contents Page Executive Summary 1 Prelude 1 Mission Statement and Learning Goals 1 Facilities 2 Staffing 3 Students: Chemistry Majors and Student Taking Service Courses Table: 1997-2005 graduates profile Table: GRE Score for Chemistry Majors, 1993

Bogaerts, Steven

209

Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Operable Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

(Barrels per Calendar Day) (Barrels per Calendar Day) Data Series: Total Number of Operable Refineries Number of Operating Refineries Number of Idle Refineries Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Operable Capacity (B/CD) Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Operating Capacity (B/CD) Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Idle Capacity (B/CD) Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Operable Capacity (B/SD) Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Operating Capacity (B/SD) Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Idle Capacity (B/SD) Vacuum Distillation Downstream Charge Capacity (B/SD) Thermal Cracking Downstream Charge Capacity (B/SD) Thermal Cracking Total Coking Downstream Charge Capacity (B/SD) Thermal Cracking Delayed Coking Downstream Charge Capacity (B/SD Thermal Cracking Fluid Coking Downstream Charge Capacity (B/SD) Thermal Cracking Visbreaking Downstream Charge Capacity (B/SD) Thermal Cracking Other/Gas Oil Charge Capacity (B/SD) Catalytic Cracking Fresh Feed Charge Capacity (B/SD) Catalytic Cracking Recycle Charge Capacity (B/SD) Catalytic Hydro-Cracking Charge Capacity (B/SD) Catalytic Hydro-Cracking Distillate Charge Capacity (B/SD) Catalytic Hydro-Cracking Gas Oil Charge Capacity (B/SD) Catalytic Hydro-Cracking Residual Charge Capacity (B/SD) Catalytic Reforming Charge Capacity (B/SD) Catalytic Reforming Low Pressure Charge Capacity (B/SD) Catalytic Reforming High Pressure Charge Capacity (B/SD) Catalytic Hydrotreating/Desulfurization Charge Capacity (B/SD) Catalytic Hydrotreating Naphtha/Reformer Feed Charge Cap (B/SD) Catalytic Hydrotreating Gasoline Charge Capacity (B/SD) Catalytic Hydrotreating Heavy Gas Oil Charge Capacity (B/SD) Catalytic Hydrotreating Distillate Charge Capacity (B/SD) Catalytic Hydrotreating Kerosene/Jet Fuel Charge Capacity (B/SD) Catalytic Hydrotreating Diesel Fuel Charge Capacity (B/SD) Catalytic Hydrotreating Other Distillate Charge Capacity (B/SD) Catalytic Hydrotreating Residual/Other Charge Capacity (B/SD) Catalytic Hydrotreating Residual Charge Capacity (B/SD) Catalytic Hydrotreating Other Oils Charge Capacity (B/SD) Fuels Solvent Deasphalting Charge Capacity (B/SD) Catalytic Reforming Downstream Charge Capacity (B/CD) Total Coking Downstream Charge Capacity (B/CD) Catalytic Cracking Fresh Feed Downstream Charge Capacity (B/CD) Catalytic Hydro-Cracking Downstream Charge Capacity (B/CD) Period:

210

generation capacity | OpenEI  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

generation capacity generation capacity Dataset Summary Description This dataset comes from the Energy Information Administration (EIA), and is part of the 2011 Annual Energy Outlook Report (AEO2011). Source EIA Date Released April 26th, 2011 (3 years ago) Date Updated Unknown Keywords AEO Electricity electricity market module region generation capacity Data application/vnd.ms-excel icon AEO2011: Electricity Generation Capacity by Electricity Market Module Region and Source- Reference Case (xls, 10.6 KiB) Quality Metrics Level of Review Peer Reviewed Comment Temporal and Spatial Coverage Frequency Annually Time Period 2008-2035 License License Open Data Commons Public Domain Dedication and Licence (PDDL) Comment Rate this dataset Usefulness of the metadata Average vote Your vote

211

High Capacity Immobilized Amine Sorbents  

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

Capacity Immobilized Amine Sorbents Capacity Immobilized Amine Sorbents Opportunity The Department of Energy's National Energy Technology Laboratory is seeking licensing partners interested in implementing United States Patent Number 7,288,136 entitled "High Capacity Immobilized Amine Sorbents." Disclosed in this patent is the invention of a method that facilitates the production of low-cost carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) sorbents for use in large-scale gas-solid processes. This method treats an amine to increase the number of secondary amine groups and impregnates the amine in a porous solid support. As a result of this improvement, the method increases CO 2 capture capacity and decreases the cost of using an amine-enriched solid sorbent in CO 2 capture systems. Overview The U.S. Department of Energy has placed a high priority on the separation

212

Installed Geothermal Capacity/Data | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Installed Geothermal Capacity/Data Installed Geothermal Capacity/Data < Installed Geothermal Capacity Jump to: navigation, search Download a CSV file of the table below: CSV FacilityType Owner Developer EnergyPurchaser Place GeneratingCapacity NumberOfUnits CommercialOnlineDate HeatRate WindTurbineManufacturer FacilityStatus Aidlin Geothermal Facility Geothermal Steam Power Plant Calpine Geysers Geothermal Area 20 MW20,000 kW 20,000,000 W 20,000,000,000 mW 0.02 GW 2.0e-5 TW 2 1989 Amedee Geothermal Facility Binary Cycle Power Plant Amedee Geothermal Venture Honey Lake, California 1.6 MW1,600 kW 1,600,000 W 1,600,000,000 mW 0.0016 GW 1.6e-6 TW 2 1988 BLM Geothermal Facility Double Flash Coso Operating Co. Coso Junction, California, 90 MW90,000 kW 90,000,000 W

213

Archive Reference Buildings by Climate Zone: 3C San Francisco, California |  

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

C San Francisco, C San Francisco, California Archive Reference Buildings by Climate Zone: 3C San Francisco, California Here you will find past versions of the reference buildings for new construction commercial buildings, organized by building type and location. A summary of building types and climate zones is available for reference. Current versions are also available. You can download ZIP files that contain the following: An EnergyPlus software input file (.idf) An html file showing the results from the EnergyPlus simulation (.html) A spreadsheet that summarizes the inputs and results for each location (.xls) The EnergyPlus TMY2 weather file (.epw). benchmark-v1.0_3.0-3c_ca_san_francisco.zip benchmark-v1.1_3.1-3c_usa_ca_san_francisco.zip benchmark-new-v1.2_4.0-3c_usa_ca_san_francisco.zip

214

A 3D-3C Reflection Seismic Survey and Data Integration to Identify...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

to Identify the Seismic Response of Fractures and Permeable Zones Over a Known Geothermal Resource at Soda Lake, Churchhill Co., NV A 3D-3C Reflection Seismic Survey and Data...

215

Microsoft Word - table_11.doc  

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

25 25 Table 11 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:10:53 PM Table 11. Underground natural gas storage - storage fields other than salt caverns, 2008-2013 (volumes in billion cubic feet) Natural Gas in Underground Storage at End of Period Change in Working Gas from Same Period Previous Year Storage Activity Year and Month Base Gas Working Gas Total Volume Percent Injections Withdrawals Net Withdrawals a 2008 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 2,900 2,976 76 2009 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 2,856 2,563 -293 2010 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 2,781 2,822 41 2011 January 4,166 2,131 6,298 -63 -2.9 27 780 753 February 4,166 1,597 5,763 -10 -0.6 51 586 535 March 4,165 1,426 5,591 -114 -7.4 117 288 172

216

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

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

1 1 Table 8 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:07:39 PM Table 8. Underground natural gas storage - all operators, 2008-2013 (million cubic feet) Natural Gas in Underground Storage at End of Period Change in Working Gas from Same Period Previous Year Storage Activity Year and Month Base Gas Working Gas Total a Volume Percent Injections Withdrawals Net Withdrawals b 2008 Total c -- -- -- -- -- 3,340 3,374 34 2009 Total c -- -- -- -- -- 3,315 2,966 -349 2010 Total c -- -- -- -- -- 3,291 3,274 -17 2011 January 4,303 2,306 6,609 2 0.1 50 849 799 February 4,302 1,722 6,024 39 2.3 82 666 584 March 4,302 1,577 5,879 -75 -4.6 168 314 146 April 4,304 1,788 6,092 -223 -11.1 312 100

217

Action Codes Table | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Action Codes Table | National Nuclear Security Administration Action Codes Table | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Action Codes Table Home > About Us > Our Programs > Nuclear Security > Nuclear Materials Management & Safeguards System > NMMSS Information, Reports & Forms > Code Tables > Action Codes Table

218

Data:4feffd3c-faf7-4924-9e51-952fcbe9a4a1 | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

feffd3c-faf7-4924-9e51-952fcbe9a4a1 feffd3c-faf7-4924-9e51-952fcbe9a4a1 No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Shenandoah Valley Elec Coop Effective date: 2011/07/01 End date if known: Rate name: SCHEDULE CQ GENERAL SERVICE Sector: Industrial Description: AVAILABILITY Available only at accounts served as of October 1, 1993 for single phase and three phase Service at standard Cooperative voltage. The standard voltage available depends upon the location, character and size of the consumer's load. This information can be furnished at any of the Cooperative's offices. Service shall not be available for Standby or Maintenance Service such as that required for alternative generation facilities. Available to all Member/Consumers of this class within the new service territory acquired from Potomac Edison Company. Voltage Discount (kw) (a)2kv to 15 kv @$0.25 per kw RKVA Charge: (a)Reactive kilovolt-ampere charge is applied to the Consumer's rkva capacity requirement in excess of 25% of the Consumer's kilowatt capacity. Billing rkva @$0.40 per rkva

219

Data:55ca673e-8fba-4fc2-b8ec-108c9b3c0571 | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

ca673e-8fba-4fc2-b8ec-108c9b3c0571 ca673e-8fba-4fc2-b8ec-108c9b3c0571 No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Adams Electric Coop Effective date: 2011/04/01 End date if known: Rate name: Rate Schedule A-Tod-Grain Drying (General Purpose-Single Purpose) Sector: Commercial Description: Available to cooperative members for Grain Drying requiring single phase electric service and monthly demand less than one hundred kilowatts. The minimum monthly rate shall be $37.00 where KVA transformer capacity or less is required. For members requiring more than 15KVA transformer capacity, the minimum rate shall be increased $1.00 for each KVA or fraction above 15KVA.

220

Description of Energy Intensity Tables (12)  

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

3. Description of Energy Intensity Data Tables 3. Description of Energy Intensity Data Tables There are 12 data tables used as references for this report. Specifically, these tables are categorized as tables 1 and 2 present unadjusted energy-intensity ratios for Offsite-Produced Energy and Total Inputs of Energy for 1985, 1988, 1991, and 1994; along with the percentage changes between 1985 and the three subsequent years (1988, 1991, and 1994) tables 3 and 4 present 1988, 1991, and 1994 energy-intensity ratios that have been adjusted to the mix of products shipped from manufacturing establishments in 1985 tables 5 and 6 present unadjusted energy-intensity ratios for Offsite-Produced Energy and Total Inputs of Energy for 1988, 1991, and 1994; along with the percentage changes between 1988 and the two subsequent

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


221

Sandia National Labs: PCNSC: IBA Table  

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

Home Home About Us Departments Radiation, Nano Materials, & Interface Sciences > Radiation & Solid Interactions > Nanomaterials Sciences > Surface & Interface Sciences Semiconductor & Optical Sciences Energy Sciences Small Science Cluster Business Office News Partnering Research Ion Beam Analysis (IBA) Periodic Table (HTML) IBA Table (HTML) | IBA Table (135KB GIF) | IBA Table (1.2MB PDF) | IBA Table (33MB TIF) | Heavy Ion Backscattering Spectrometry (HIBS) | Virtual Lab Tour (6MB) The purpose of this table is to quickly give the visitor to this site information on the sensitivity, depth of analysis and depth resolution of most of the modern ion beam analysis techniques in a single easy to use format: a periodic table. Note that you can click on each panel of this

222

Energy Information Administration (EIA) - Supplement Tables - Supplemental  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2006 The AEO Supplemental tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2006 (AEO2006) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 2003 to 2030. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2006, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2006 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of one hundred and seventeen tables is presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO2006 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Forecasts for 2004-2006 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, which are the official EIA short-term forecasts and are based on more current information than the AEO.

223

Energy Information Administration (EIA) - Supplement Tables - Supplemental  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2007 The AEO Supplemental tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2007 (AEO2007) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 2005 to 2030. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2007, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2007 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of one hundred and eighteen tables is presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO2007 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Projections for 2006 and 2007 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, which are the official EIA short-term projections and are based on more current information than the AEO.

224

Data:3c461b87-cdf8-4a2c-afbe-0021e556ef3c | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

c461b87-cdf8-4a2c-afbe-0021e556ef3c c461b87-cdf8-4a2c-afbe-0021e556ef3c No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: City of Schuyler, Nebraska (Utility Company) Effective date: 2013/01/01 End date if known: Rate name: Irrigation Service- No Control (Less than 10 Hp) Sector: Commercial Description: The irrigation season is generally seven months, between March 15 and October 14. The Department of Utilities may disconnect the transformers between October 15 and March 14 to reduce power loss. At locations where the Department has provided facilities for irrigation service, the Customer may use the

225

Data:1189a3c9-6707-4a3c-88f1-d325851b41eb | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

c9-6707-4a3c-88f1-d325851b41eb c9-6707-4a3c-88f1-d325851b41eb No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Village of Bethel, Ohio (Utility Company) Effective date: 2012/02/01 End date if known: Rate name: Commercial- Three Phase Sector: Commercial Description: Source or reference: Binder #5B (Illinois State University) Source Parent: Comments Applicability Demand (kW) Minimum (kW): Maximum (kW): History (months): Energy (kWh) Minimum (kWh): Maximum (kWh): History (months): Service Voltage Minimum (V): Maximum (V): Character of Service Voltage Category: Phase Wiring: << Previous 1 2 3 Next >>

226

California Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) California Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

227

California Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ...  

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

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

228

Economic Dispatch of Electric Generation Capacity | Department...  

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

Economic Dispatch of Electric Generation Capacity Economic Dispatch of Electric Generation Capacity A report to congress and the states pursuant to sections 1234 and 1832 of the...

229

Table  

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

Muons Muons in B-100 Bone-equivalent plastic Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.52740 1.450 85.9 0.05268 3.7365 0.1252 3.0420 3.4528 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.435 7.435 7.443 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.803 5.803 1.360 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.535 4.535 2.543 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.521 3.521 5.080 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.008 3.008 8.173 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.256 2.256 2.401 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.115 2.115 3.319 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.971 1.971 5.287 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.889 1.889 8.408 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.859 0.000 1.859 1.376 × 10 2 314. MeV 4.065 × 10 2 1.859 0.000 1.859 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.866 0.000 1.866 1.913 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.940 0.000 0.000 1.940 4.016 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.973 0.000 0.000 1.974 5.037 × 10 2 1.40

230

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Sodium monoxide Na 2 O Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.48404 2.270 148.8 0.07501 3.6943 0.1652 2.9793 4.1892 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.330 6.330 8.793 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 4.955 4.956 1.601 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.883 3.884 2.984 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.024 3.024 5.943 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.588 2.588 9.541 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.954 1.954 2.789 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.840 1.840 3.846 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.725 1.725 6.102 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.663 1.664 9.656 × 10 1 283. MeV 3.738 × 10 2 1.646 0.000 1.647 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.647 0.000 1.647 1.571 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.659 0.000 1.660 2.177 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.738 0.000 0.000 1.738 4.531 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.771 0.000 0.000 1.772 5.670 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

231

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Tissue-equivalent gas (Propane based) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.55027 1.826 × 10 -3 59.5 0.09802 3.5159 1.5139 3.9916 9.3529 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 8.132 8.132 6.782 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.337 6.337 1.241 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.943 4.944 2.326 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.831 3.831 4.656 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.269 3.269 7.500 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.450 2.450 2.209 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.303 2.303 3.053 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.158 2.158 4.855 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.084 2.084 7.695 × 10 1 263. MeV 3.527 × 10 2 2.068 0.000 2.069 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 2.071 0.000 2.072 1.252 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 2.097 0.000 2.097 1.732 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.232 0.000 0.000 2.232 3.580 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.289 0.000 0.000 2.290

232

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Lead oxide (PbO) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.40323 9.530 766.7 0.19645 2.7299 0.0356 3.5456 6.2162 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.046 4.046 1.411 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.207 3.207 2.532 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.542 2.542 4.656 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.003 2.003 9.146 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.727 1.727 1.455 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.327 1.327 4.176 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.256 1.256 5.729 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.188 1.189 9.017 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.158 1.158 1.415 × 10 2 236. MeV 3.250 × 10 2 1.155 0.000 1.155 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.161 0.000 0.000 1.161 2.279 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.181 0.000 0.000 1.181 3.133 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.266 0.001 0.000 1.267 6.398 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.299 0.001 0.000 1.301 7.955 × 10 2 1.40

233

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Liquid argon (Ar) Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 18 (Ar) 39.948 (1) 1.396 188.0 0.19559 3.0000 0.2000 3.0000 5.2146 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 5.687 5.687 9.833 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 4.461 4.461 1.786 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.502 3.502 3.321 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.731 2.731 6.598 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.340 2.340 1.058 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.771 1.771 3.084 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.669 1.670 4.250 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.570 1.570 6.732 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.518 1.519 1.063 × 10 2 266. MeV 3.567 × 10 2 1.508 0.000 1.508 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.509 0.000 1.510 1.725 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.526 0.000 0.000 1.526 2.385 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.610 0.000 0.000 1.610 4.934 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.644 0.000 0.000 1.645 6.163

234

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Freon-13 (CF 3 Cl) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.47966 0.950 126.6 0.07238 3.5551 0.3659 3.2337 4.7483 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.416 6.416 8.659 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.019 5.019 1.578 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.930 3.930 2.945 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.057 3.057 5.870 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.615 2.615 9.430 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.971 1.971 2.760 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.857 1.857 3.809 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.745 1.745 6.041 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.685 1.685 9.551 × 10 1 283. MeV 3.738 × 10 2 1.668 0.000 1.668 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.668 0.000 1.668 1.553 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.681 0.000 1.681 2.151 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.762 0.000 0.000 1.763 4.473 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.796 0.000 0.000 1.797 5.596 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

235

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Lutetium silicon oxide [Lu 2 SiO 5 ] Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.42793 7.400 472.0 0.20623 3.0000 0.2732 3.0000 5.4394 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.679 4.679 1.209 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.692 3.693 2.181 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.916 2.916 4.029 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.287 2.287 7.953 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.968 1.968 1.270 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.503 1.503 3.666 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.421 1.422 5.038 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.344 1.344 7.944 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.308 1.308 1.248 × 10 2 242. MeV 3.316 × 10 2 1.304 1.304 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.309 0.000 0.000 1.309 2.014 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.329 0.000 0.000 1.329 2.773 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.415 0.001 0.000 1.416 5.684 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.449 0.001 0.000 1.450 7.080

236

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Boron oxide (B 2 O 3 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49839 1.812 99.6 0.11548 3.3832 0.1843 2.7379 3.6027 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.889 6.889 8.045 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.381 5.381 1.468 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.208 4.208 2.744 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.269 3.269 5.477 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.794 2.794 8.807 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.102 2.103 2.583 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.975 1.975 3.567 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.843 1.843 5.674 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.768 1.768 9.010 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.742 0.000 1.742 1.472 × 10 2 307. MeV 3.990 × 10 2 1.742 0.000 1.742 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.750 0.000 1.750 2.045 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.822 0.000 0.000 1.823 4.285 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.854 0.000 0.000 1.855 5.373 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

237

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Liquid H-note density shift (H 2 ) Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 1 (H) 1.00794 (7) 7.080 × 10 -2 21.8 0.32969 3.0000 0.1641 1.9641 2.6783 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 16.508 16.508 3.316 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 12.812 12.812 6.097 × 10 -1 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 9.956 9.956 1.147 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 7.684 7.684 2.307 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 6.539 6.539 3.727 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 4.870 4.870 1.105 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 4.550 4.550 1.531 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 4.217 4.217 2.448 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 4.018 0.000 4.018 3.912 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 3.926 0.000 3.926 6.438 × 10 1 356. MeV 4.497 × 10 2 3.919 0.000 3.919 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 3.922 0.000 3.922 8.988 × 10 1 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 4.029 0.000 4.030 1.906 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 4.084 0.001

238

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Cortical bone (ICRP) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.52130 1.850 106.4 0.06198 3.5919 0.1161 3.0919 3.6488 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.142 7.142 7.765 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.581 5.581 1.417 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.366 4.366 2.646 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.393 3.393 5.281 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.900 2.901 8.489 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.179 2.179 2.489 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.044 2.044 3.440 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.907 1.907 5.475 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.830 1.830 8.700 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.803 0.000 1.803 1.422 × 10 2 303. MeV 3.950 × 10 2 1.803 0.000 1.803 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.812 0.000 1.812 1.976 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.888 0.000 0.000 1.889 4.138 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.922 0.000 0.000 1.923 5.187 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

239

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Freon-13B1 (CF 3 Br) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.45665 1.500 210.5 0.03925 3.7194 0.3522 3.7554 5.3555 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 5.678 5.678 9.844 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 4.454 4.454 1.788 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.498 3.498 3.325 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.729 2.729 6.606 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.339 2.339 1.059 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.771 1.771 3.086 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.671 1.671 4.251 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.574 1.574 6.729 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.524 1.524 1.062 × 10 2 266. MeV 3.567 × 10 2 1.513 0.000 1.513 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.515 0.000 1.515 1.721 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.531 0.000 0.000 1.532 2.378 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.616 0.000 0.000 1.616 4.919 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.650 0.001 0.000 1.651 6.142 × 10 2 1.40 GeV

240

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Sodium carbonate (Na 2 CO 3 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49062 2.532 125.0 0.08715 3.5638 0.1287 2.8591 3.7178 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.575 6.575 8.449 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.142 5.142 1.540 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.026 4.026 2.874 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.131 3.131 5.729 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.679 2.679 9.204 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.017 2.017 2.695 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.895 1.895 3.721 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.771 1.772 5.914 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.703 1.703 9.381 × 10 1 298. MeV 3.894 × 10 2 1.681 0.000 1.681 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.681 0.000 1.681 1.531 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.690 0.000 1.691 2.125 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.764 0.000 0.000 1.764 4.440 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.796 0.000 0.000 1.797 5.563 × 10 2 1.40

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


241

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Tungsten hexafluoride (WF 6 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.42976 2.400 354.4 0.03658 3.5134 0.3020 4.2602 5.9881 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.928 4.928 1.143 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.880 3.880 2.067 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.057 3.057 3.828 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.393 2.393 7.574 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.056 2.056 1.211 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.565 1.565 3.509 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.479 1.479 4.827 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.396 1.396 7.623 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.353 1.353 1.200 × 10 2 253. MeV 3.431 × 10 2 1.346 0.000 1.346 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.349 0.000 0.000 1.349 1.942 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.367 0.000 0.000 1.367 2.679 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.451 0.001 0.000 1.452 5.516 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.485 0.001 0.000 1.486 6.877

242

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Standard rock Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.50000 2.650 136.4 0.08301 3.4120 0.0492 3.0549 3.7738 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.619 6.619 8.400 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.180 5.180 1.530 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.057 4.057 2.854 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.157 3.157 5.687 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.701 2.702 9.133 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.028 2.029 2.675 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.904 1.904 3.695 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.779 1.779 5.878 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.710 1.710 9.331 × 10 1 297. MeV 3.884 × 10 2 1.688 0.000 1.688 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.688 0.000 1.688 1.523 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.698 0.000 1.698 2.114 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.774 0.000 0.000 1.775 4.418 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.808 0.000 0.000 1.808 5.534 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502 × 10

243

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Ceric sulfate dosimeter solution Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.55279 1.030 76.7 0.07666 3.5607 0.2363 2.8769 3.5212 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.909 7.909 6.989 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.170 6.170 1.278 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.819 4.819 2.391 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.739 3.739 4.779 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.193 3.193 7.693 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.398 2.398 2.261 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.255 2.255 3.123 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.102 2.102 4.968 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.013 2.014 7.896 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.980 0.000 1.980 1.292 × 10 2 317. MeV 4.096 × 10 2 1.979 0.000 1.979 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.986 0.000 1.986 1.797 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.062 0.000 0.000 2.062 3.774 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.096 0.000 0.000 2.097 4.735 × 10

244

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Silicon Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 14 (Si) 28.0855 (3) 2.329 173.0 0.14921 3.2546 0.2015 2.8716 4.4355 0.14 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.363 6.363 8.779 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 4.987 4.987 1.595 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.912 3.912 2.969 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.047 3.047 5.905 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.608 2.608 9.476 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.965 1.965 2.770 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.849 1.849 3.822 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.737 1.737 6.064 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.678 1.678 9.590 × 10 1 273. MeV 3.633 × 10 2 1.664 0.000 1.664 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.665 0.000 1.666 1.559 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.681 0.000 1.681 2.157 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.767 0.000 0.000 1.768 4.475 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.803 0.000 0.000 1.804 5.595 × 10 2 1.40 GeV

245

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Polyethylene terephthalate (Mylar) (C 10 H 8 O 4 ) n Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.52037 1.400 78.7 0.12679 3.3076 0.1562 2.6507 3.3262 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.420 7.420 7.451 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.789 5.789 1.362 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.522 4.522 2.548 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.509 3.509 5.093 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.997 2.997 8.197 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.250 2.250 2.409 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.108 2.108 3.329 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.963 1.964 5.305 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.880 1.880 8.440 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.849 0.000 1.849 1.382 × 10 2 317. MeV 4.096 × 10 2 1.848 0.000 1.849 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.855 0.000 1.855 1.922 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.926 0.000 0.000 1.926 4.039 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.958 0.000 0.000 1.959

246

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Dichlorodiethyl ether C 4 Cl 2 H 8 O Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.51744 1.220 103.3 0.06799 3.5250 0.1773 3.1586 4.0135 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.117 7.117 7.789 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.561 5.561 1.421 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.349 4.349 2.655 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.380 3.380 5.300 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.889 2.889 8.521 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.174 2.174 2.499 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.042 2.042 3.450 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.907 1.907 5.486 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.832 1.832 8.708 × 10 1 298. MeV 3.894 × 10 2 1.807 0.000 1.807 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.807 0.000 1.807 1.422 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.817 0.000 1.817 1.974 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.895 0.000 0.000 1.896 4.129 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.930 0.000 0.000 1.931 5.174 × 10

247

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Lead Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 82 (Pb) 207.2 (1) 11.350 823.0 0.09359 3.1608 0.3776 3.8073 6.2018 0.14 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 3.823 3.823 1.524 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.054 3.054 2.705 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.436 2.436 4.927 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 1.928 1.928 9.600 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.666 1.666 1.521 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.283 1.283 4.338 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.215 1.215 5.943 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.151 1.152 9.339 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.124 1.124 1.463 × 10 2 226. MeV 3.145 × 10 2 1.122 0.000 1.123 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.130 0.000 0.000 1.131 2.352 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.151 0.000 0.000 1.152 3.228 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.237 0.001 0.000 1.238 6.572 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.270 0.001 0.000 1.272 8.165 × 10 2 1.40

248

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Sodium iodide (NaI) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.42697 3.667 452.0 0.12516 3.0398 0.1203 3.5920 6.0572 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.703 4.703 1.202 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.710 3.710 2.169 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.928 2.928 4.009 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.297 2.297 7.917 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.975 1.975 1.264 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.509 1.509 3.652 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.427 1.427 5.019 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.347 1.348 7.916 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.310 1.310 1.245 × 10 2 243. MeV 3.325 × 10 2 1.305 1.305 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.310 0.000 0.000 1.310 2.010 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.329 0.000 0.000 1.330 2.768 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.417 0.001 0.000 1.418 5.677 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.452 0.001 0.000 1.453 7.070 × 10 2 1.40 GeV

249

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Polyvinyl alcohol (C 2 H3-O-H) n Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.54480 1.300 69.7 0.11178 3.3893 0.1401 2.6315 3.1115 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.891 7.891 6.999 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.153 6.153 1.280 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.804 4.804 2.396 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.726 3.726 4.793 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.181 3.181 7.717 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.383 2.384 2.270 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.231 2.232 3.140 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.076 2.076 5.007 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.986 1.986 7.974 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.950 0.000 1.950 1.307 × 10 2 324. MeV 4.161 × 10 2 1.949 0.000 1.949 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.955 0.000 1.955 1.820 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.026 0.000 0.000 2.026 3.830 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.059 0.000 0.000 2.059 4.809 × 10 2 1.40

250

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Cesium Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 55 (Cs)132.9054519 (2) 1.873 488.0 0.18233 2.8866 0.5473 3.5914 6.9135 0.14 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.464 4.464 1.277 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.532 3.532 2.294 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.794 2.794 4.224 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.195 2.195 8.315 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.890 1.890 1.325 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.444 1.444 3.820 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.366 1.366 5.248 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.291 1.291 8.274 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.257 1.257 1.300 × 10 2 236. MeV 3.250 × 10 2 1.254 1.254 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.261 0.000 0.000 1.261 2.096 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.284 0.000 0.000 1.285 2.882 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.378 0.001 0.000 1.380 5.881 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.415 0.001 0.000 1.417 7.311 × 10 2

251

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Propane (C 3 H 8 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.58962 1.868 × 10 -3 47.1 0.09916 3.5920 1.4339 3.8011 8.7939 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 8.969 8.969 6.137 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.982 6.982 1.125 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 5.441 5.441 2.109 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 4.212 4.213 4.228 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.592 3.592 6.815 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.688 2.688 2.010 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.525 2.526 2.780 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.365 2.365 4.424 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.281 2.281 7.018 × 10 1 267. MeV 3.577 × 10 2 2.262 0.000 2.263 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 2.265 0.000 2.265 1.143 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 2.291 0.000 2.291 1.582 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.434 0.000 0.000 2.435 3.275 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.495 0.000 0.000 2.496 4.086 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

252

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Polystyrene ([C 6 H 5 CHCH 2 ] n ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.53768 1.060 68.7 0.16454 3.2224 0.1647 2.5031 3.2999 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.803 7.803 7.077 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.084 6.084 1.294 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.749 4.749 2.424 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.683 3.683 4.848 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.144 3.144 7.806 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.359 2.359 2.296 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.210 2.211 3.174 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.058 2.058 5.059 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.970 1.971 8.049 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.937 0.000 1.937 1.318 × 10 2 318. MeV 4.105 × 10 2 1.936 0.000 1.936 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.942 0.000 1.943 1.834 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.015 0.000 0.000 2.015 3.856 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.048 0.000 0.000 2.049 4.841 × 10 2 1.40

253

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Air (dry, 1 atm) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49919 1.205 × 10 -3 85.7 0.10914 3.3994 1.7418 4.2759 10.5961 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.039 7.039 7.862 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.494 5.495 1.436 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.294 4.294 2.686 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.333 3.333 5.366 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.847 2.847 8.633 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.140 2.140 2.535 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.013 2.014 3.501 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.889 1.889 5.562 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.827 1.827 8.803 × 10 1 257. MeV 3.471 × 10 2 1.815 0.000 1.816 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.819 0.000 1.819 1.430 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.844 0.000 1.844 1.977 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.968 0.000 0.000 1.968 4.074 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.020 0.000 0.000 2.021 5.077 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

254

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Lead tungstate (PbWO 4 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.41315 8.300 600.7 0.22758 3.0000 0.4068 3.0023 5.8528 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.333 4.333 1.311 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.426 3.426 2.360 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.710 2.711 4.350 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.131 2.131 8.566 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.835 1.835 1.365 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.406 1.406 3.931 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.331 1.331 5.397 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.261 1.261 8.498 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.231 1.231 1.333 × 10 2 227. MeV 3.154 × 10 2 1.229 1.230 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.237 0.000 0.000 1.238 2.145 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.260 0.000 0.000 1.260 2.946 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.349 0.001 0.000 1.350 6.007 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.383 0.001 0.000 1.385 7.469 × 10 2 1.40

255

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Carbon (compact) Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 6 (C) [12.0107 (8)] 2.265 78.0 0.26142 2.8697 -0.0178 2.3415 2.8680 0.12 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.116 7.116 7.772 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.549 5.549 1.420 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.331 4.331 2.658 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.355 3.355 5.318 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.861 2.861 8.567 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.126 2.127 2.531 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.991 1.992 3.505 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.854 1.854 5.597 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.775 1.775 8.917 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.745 0.000 1.745 1.462 × 10 2 317. MeV 4.096 × 10 2 1.745 0.000 1.745 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.751 0.000 1.751 2.034 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.819 0.000 0.000 1.820 4.275 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.850 0.000 0.000 1.851 5.365 × 10

256

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Methanol (CH 3 OH) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.56176 0.791 67.6 0.08970 3.5477 0.2529 2.7639 3.5160 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 8.169 8.169 6.759 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.369 6.369 1.236 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.972 4.972 2.315 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.855 3.855 4.631 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.291 3.291 7.457 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.469 2.469 2.194 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.321 2.322 3.032 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.166 2.166 4.823 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.074 2.074 7.664 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 2.039 0.000 2.039 1.254 × 10 2 318. MeV 4.105 × 10 2 2.038 0.000 2.039 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 2.045 0.000 2.045 1.744 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.121 0.000 0.000 2.122 3.665 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.156 0.000 0.000 2.157 4.600 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502 ×

257

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Carbon (amorphous) Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 6 (C) 12.0107 (8) 2.000 78.0 0.20240 3.0036 -0.0351 2.4860 2.9925 0.10 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.117 7.117 7.771 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.550 5.551 1.420 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.332 4.332 2.658 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.357 3.357 5.317 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.862 2.862 8.564 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.129 2.129 2.529 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.994 1.994 3.502 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.857 1.857 5.591 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.778 1.779 8.905 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.749 0.000 1.749 1.459 × 10 2 313. MeV 4.055 × 10 2 1.749 0.000 1.749 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.755 0.000 1.756 2.030 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.824 0.000 0.000 1.825 4.266 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.855 0.000 0.000 1.856 5.353 × 10

258

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Mix D wax Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.56479 0.990 60.9 0.07490 3.6823 0.1371 2.7145 3.0780 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 8.322 8.322 6.628 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.485 6.486 1.213 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 5.060 5.060 2.273 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.922 3.922 4.549 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.347 3.347 7.327 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.505 2.506 2.158 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.346 2.346 2.985 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.182 2.182 4.761 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.087 2.087 7.584 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 2.049 0.000 2.049 1.243 × 10 2 328. MeV 4.201 × 10 2 2.048 0.000 2.048 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 2.053 0.000 2.053 1.731 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.125 0.000 0.000 2.125 3.647 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.158 0.000 0.000 2.159 4.581 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502 × 10 3 2.213

259

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Sodium nitrate NaNO 3 Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49415 2.261 114.6 0.09391 3.5097 0.1534 2.8221 3.6502 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.702 6.702 8.281 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.239 5.239 1.510 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.100 4.100 2.820 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.187 3.187 5.624 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.726 2.726 9.039 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.053 2.053 2.648 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.927 1.927 3.656 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.800 1.800 5.814 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.729 1.729 9.228 × 10 1 298. MeV 3.894 × 10 2 1.705 0.000 1.705 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.705 0.000 1.705 1.507 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.714 0.000 1.714 2.092 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.787 0.000 0.000 1.787 4.377 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.819 0.000 0.000 1.819 5.486 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

260

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Freon-12B2 (CF 2 Br 2 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.44901 1.800 284.9 0.05144 3.5565 0.3406 3.7956 5.7976 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 5.330 5.330 1.053 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 4.190 4.190 1.908 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.297 3.297 3.540 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.577 2.577 7.017 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.212 2.212 1.123 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.680 1.680 3.263 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.586 1.586 4.491 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.496 1.496 7.099 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.452 1.452 1.118 × 10 2 252. MeV 3.421 × 10 2 1.445 0.000 1.445 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.448 0.000 1.449 1.809 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.467 0.000 0.000 1.468 2.496 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.556 0.000 0.000 1.557 5.139 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.592 0.001 0.000 1.593 6.409 × 10 2 1.40 GeV

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


261

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Eye lens (ICRP) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.54977 1.100 73.3 0.09690 3.4550 0.2070 2.7446 3.3720 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.912 7.912 6.984 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.171 6.171 1.277 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.819 4.819 2.390 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.738 3.738 4.779 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.192 3.192 7.693 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.396 2.396 2.262 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.251 2.251 3.125 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.095 2.096 4.976 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.006 2.006 7.914 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.971 0.000 1.971 1.296 × 10 2 318. MeV 4.105 × 10 2 1.971 0.000 1.971 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.977 0.000 1.977 1.803 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.051 0.000 0.000 2.051 3.790 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.085 0.000 0.000 2.085 4.756 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502 × 10

262

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Compact bone (ICRU) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.53010 1.850 91.9 0.05822 3.6419 0.0944 3.0201 3.3390 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.406 7.406 7.477 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.783 5.783 1.365 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.521 4.521 2.552 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.511 3.511 5.097 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.000 3.000 8.199 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.247 2.247 2.408 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.106 2.106 3.330 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.962 1.962 5.307 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.880 1.880 8.444 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.849 0.000 1.850 1.382 × 10 2 314. MeV 4.065 × 10 2 1.849 0.000 1.849 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.856 0.000 1.857 1.922 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.930 0.000 0.000 1.930 4.036 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.963 0.000 0.000 1.964 5.063 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

263

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Polyimide film (C 22 H 10 N 2 O 5 ) n Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.51264 1.420 79.6 0.15972 3.1921 0.1509 2.5631 3.3497 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.299 7.299 7.576 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.695 5.695 1.385 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.449 4.449 2.590 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.453 3.453 5.177 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.949 2.949 8.332 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.214 2.214 2.448 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.074 2.074 3.384 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.932 1.932 5.392 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.851 1.851 8.577 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.820 0.000 1.820 1.404 × 10 2 314. MeV 4.065 × 10 2 1.820 0.000 1.820 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.826 0.000 1.827 1.953 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.897 0.000 0.000 1.898 4.102 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.929 0.000 0.000 1.930 5.147 × 10 2 1.40

264

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Silicon dioxide (fused quartz) (SiO 2 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49930 2.200 139.2 0.08408 3.5064 0.1500 3.0140 4.0560 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.591 6.591 8.438 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.158 5.158 1.537 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.041 4.041 2.866 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.145 3.145 5.710 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.691 2.691 9.170 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.030 2.030 2.682 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.908 1.908 3.701 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.786 1.786 5.878 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.719 1.719 9.315 × 10 1 288. MeV 3.788 × 10 2 1.699 0.000 1.699 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.699 0.000 1.699 1.518 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.711 0.000 1.711 2.105 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.789 0.000 0.000 1.790 4.391 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.823 0.000 0.000 1.824 5.497

265

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Radon Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 86 (Rn) [222.01758 (2)]9.066 × 10 -3 794.0 0.20798 2.7409 1.5368 4.9889 13.2839 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 3.782 3.782 1.535 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.018 3.018 2.730 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.405 2.405 4.980 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 1.902 1.902 9.715 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.644 1.644 1.540 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.267 1.267 4.394 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.201 1.201 6.019 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.140 1.140 9.452 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.116 1.117 1.479 × 10 2 216. MeV 3.039 × 10 2 1.116 1.116 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.127 0.000 0.000 1.128 2.372 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.154 0.000 0.000 1.154 3.249 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.258 0.001 0.000 1.260 6.559 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.300 0.001 0.000 1.302 8.119

266

Table  

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

Muons Muons in Solid carbon dioxide (dry ice; CO 2 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49989 1.563 85.0 0.43387 3.0000 0.2000 2.0000 3.4513 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.057 7.057 7.841 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.508 5.508 1.432 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.304 4.304 2.679 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.341 3.341 5.353 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.854 2.854 8.612 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.145 2.145 2.529 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.017 2.017 3.493 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.886 1.886 5.554 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.812 1.812 8.811 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.787 0.000 1.787 1.438 × 10 2 303. MeV 3.950 × 10 2 1.787 0.000 1.787 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.795 0.000 1.795 1.997 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.866 0.000 0.000 1.866 4.182 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.896 0.000 0.000 1.897 5.245 × 10

267

production capacity | OpenEI  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

production capacity production capacity Dataset Summary Description No description given. Source Oak Ridge National Laboratory Date Released November 30th, 2009 (4 years ago) Date Updated Unknown Keywords biodiesel ethanol location production capacity transportation Data application/zip icon Biorefineries.zip (zip, 7 MiB) Quality Metrics Level of Review Some Review Comment Temporal and Spatial Coverage Frequency Time Period License License Other or unspecified, see optional comment below Comment Rate this dataset Usefulness of the metadata Average vote Your vote Usefulness of the dataset Average vote Your vote Ease of access Average vote Your vote Overall rating Average vote Your vote Comments Login or register to post comments If you rate this dataset, your published comment will include your rating.

268

installed capacity | OpenEI  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

installed capacity installed capacity Dataset Summary Description Estimates for each of the 50 states and the entire United States show Source Wind Powering America Date Released February 04th, 2010 (4 years ago) Date Updated April 13th, 2011 (3 years ago) Keywords annual generation installed capacity usa wind Data application/vnd.ms-excel icon Wind potential data (xls, 102.4 KiB) Quality Metrics Level of Review Some Review Comment Temporal and Spatial Coverage Frequency Time Period License License Other or unspecified, see optional comment below Comment Work of the U.S. Federal Government. Rate this dataset Usefulness of the metadata Average vote Your vote Usefulness of the dataset Average vote Your vote Ease of access Average vote Your vote Overall rating Average vote Your vote Comments

269

Hybrid Zero-capacity Channels  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

There are only two known kinds of zero-capacity channels. The first kind produces entangled states that have positive partial transpose, and the second one - states that are cloneable. We consider the family of 'hybrid' quantum channels, which lies in the intersection of the above classes of channels and investigate its properties. It gives rise to the first explicit examples of the channels, which create bound entangled states that have the property of being cloneable to the arbitrary finite number of parties. Hybrid channels provide the first example of highly cloneable binding entanglement channels, for which known superactivation protocols must fail - superactivation is the effect where two channels each with zero quantum capacity having positive capacity when used together. We give two methods to construct a hybrid channel from any binding entanglement channel. We also find the low-dimensional counterparts of hybrid states - bipartite qubit states which are extendible and possess two-way key.

Sergii Strelchuk; Jonathan Oppenheim

2012-07-04T23:59:59.000Z

270

Building Regulatory Capacity for Change  

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

Regulatory Capacity for Regulatory Capacity for Change PRESENTED BY Sarah Spencer-Workman, LEED AP July 27, 2011 "How to identify and review laws relevant to buildings and find places and opportunities that can accept changes that would support building energy objectives" Presentation Highlights Rulemaking Community and Stakeholder Identification To Support Code Changes Engagement: Building Capacity for Change Pay It Forward RULEMAKING : Plan Development and Research of Laws Relevant to Buildings How is it conducted? 'Landscape' Review Key words or phrases to look for Identify "home rule" jurisdictions Update and review cycle built in 'Landscape' Review:

271

FIRST-PRINCIPLES CALCULATIONS OF CHARGE STATES AND FORMATION ENERGIES OF Mg TRANSMUTANT IN 3C-SIC  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

To investigate the thermodynamic and kinetic properties of various transmutants in 3C-SiC using density functional theory.

Hu, Shenyang Y.; Setyawan, Wahyu; Jiang, Weilin; Henager, Charles H.; Kurtz, Richard J.

2014-03-31T23:59:59.000Z

272

Data:Cf65bf55-2240-41dd-b96d-3c7e8d96e774 | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

bf55-2240-41dd-b96d-3c7e8d96e774 bf55-2240-41dd-b96d-3c7e8d96e774 No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Daviess Martin County R E M C Effective date: 2011/10/01 End date if known: Rate name: Security Lights-100W Sector: Lighting Description: *there is a charge of $150 to install. An REMC representative will meet with you for a security light pole-set consultation. If we set the pole, there will be an initial $150 fee, and a monthly fee that will be added to your electric bill, based on the rate table below. Upon payment of the fees, the REMC will be responsible for maintaining the pole and light.

273

Supplement Tables - 89 to 107  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9. Domestic Refinery Distillation Base Capacity, Expansion, and Utilization (1 of 1) 9. Domestic Refinery Distillation Base Capacity, Expansion, and Utilization (1 of 1) (Million Barrels per Day) 2000- 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 PAD District I Base Capacity 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 -0.5% Capacity Additions 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 N/A Total Capacity 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.8 0.2% Utilization 92.0 90.0 92.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.8 93.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.9 92.9 92.9 92.9 0.0% PAD Districts II to IV Base Capacity 11.7 11.8 11.8 11.8 11.8 11.8 11.8 11.8 11.8 11.8 11.8 11.8 11.8 11.8 11.8 11.8 11.8 11.8 11.8 11.8 11.8 0.1% Capacity Additions 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.7

274

Additions to Capacity on the U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Network: 2005  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

percent increase in capacity additions (see percent increase in capacity additions (see Box, "Capacity Measures," p. 4). Indeed, less new natural gas pipeline mileage was added in 2005 than in any year during the past decade. 1 Energy Information Administration, Office of Oil and Gas, August 2006 1 In 2005, at least 31 natural gas pipeline projects of varying profiles 2 were completed in the lower 48 States and the Gulf of Mexico (Figure 3, Table 1). Of these, 15 were expansions (increases in capacity) on existing natural gas pipelines while the other 16 were 9 system extensions or laterals associated with existing natural gas pipelines, 5 new natural gas pipeline systems, and 2 oil pipeline conversions. Expenditures for natural gas pipeline development amounted to less than $1.3

275

Variable White Dwarf Data Tables  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Below, I give a brief explanation of the information in these tables. In all cases, I list the WD {number_sign}, either from the catalog of McCook {ampersand} Sion (1987) or determined by me from the epoch 1950 coordinates. Next, I list the most commonly used name (or alias), then I list the variable star designation if it is available. If not, I list the constellation name and a V** or?? depending on what the last designated variable star for that constellation is. I present epoch 2000 coordinates for all of the stars, which I precessed from the 1950 ones in most cases. I do not include proper motion effects; this is negligible for all except the largest proper motion DAV stars, such as L 19-2, BPM 37093, B 808, and G 29-38. Even in these cases, the error is no more than 30` in declination and 2 s in right ascension. I culled effective temperatures from the latest work (listed under each table); they are now much more homogeneous than before. I pulled the magnitude estimates from the appropriate paper, and they are mean values integrated over several cycles. The amplitude given is for the height of a typical pulse in the light curve. The periods correspond the dominant ones found in the light curve. In some cases, there is a band of power in a given period range, or the light curve is very complex, and I indicate this in the table. In the references, I generally list the paper with the most comprehensive pulsation analysis for the star in question. In some cases, there is more than one good reference, and I list them as well.

Bradley, P. A.

1997-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

276

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2008 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ......................... 0 2 0 6,256 6,258 Delaware ........................ 0 2 0 0 2 Georgia........................... 0 * 0 0 * Hawaii............................. 2,554 5 0 0 2,559 Illinois.............................. 0 15 0 0 15 Indiana............................ 0 30 0 0 30 Iowa ................................ 0 24 3 0 27 Kentucky......................... 0 15 0 0 15 Maryland ......................... 0 181 0 0 181 Massachusetts................ 0 13 0 0 13 Minnesota ....................... 0 46 0 0 46 Missouri .......................... * 6 0 0 6 Nebraska ........................ 0 28 0 0 28 New Hampshire .............. 0 44 0 0 44 New Jersey ..................... 0 0 0 489 489 New York ........................

277

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2009 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ......................... 0 3 0 7,525 7,527 Connecticut..................... 0 * 0 0 * Delaware ........................ 0 2 0 0 2 Georgia........................... 0 0 52 * 52 Hawaii............................. 2,438 9 0 0 2,447 Illinois.............................. 0 20 0 0 20 Indiana............................ 0 * 0 0 * Iowa ................................ 0 3 0 0 3 Kentucky......................... 0 18 0 0 18 Maryland ......................... 0 170 0 0 170 Massachusetts................ 0 10 0 0 10 Minnesota ....................... 0 47 0 0 47 Missouri .......................... * 10 0 0 10 Nebraska ........................ 0 18 0 0 18 New Jersey ..................... 0 0 0 454 454 New York ........................

278

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2010 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ......................... 0 4 0 5,144 5,148 Delaware ........................ 0 1 0 0 1 Georgia........................... 0 0 732 0 732 Hawaii............................. 2,465 6 0 0 2,472 Illinois.............................. 0 17 0 0 17 Indiana............................ 0 1 0 0 1 Iowa ................................ 0 2 0 0 2 Kentucky......................... 0 5 0 0 5 Louisiana ........................ 0 0 249 0 249 Maryland ......................... 0 115 0 0 115 Massachusetts................ 0 * 0 0 * Minnesota ....................... 0 12 0 0 12 Missouri .......................... * 18 0 0 18 Nebraska ........................ 0 12 0 0 12 New Jersey ..................... 0 0 0 457 457 New York ........................

279

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2007 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ......................... 0 3 0 6,866 6,869 Delaware ........................ 0 5 0 0 5 Georgia........................... 0 2 0 0 2 Hawaii............................. 2,679 4 0 0 2,683 Illinois.............................. 0 11 0 0 11 Indiana............................ 0 81 0 554 635 Iowa ................................ 0 2 38 0 40 Kentucky......................... 0 124 0 0 124 Maryland ......................... 0 245 0 0 245 Massachusetts................ 0 15 0 0 15 Minnesota ....................... 0 54 0 0 54 Missouri .......................... 7 60 0 0 66 Nebraska ........................ 0 33 0 0 33 New Hampshire .............. 0 9 0 0 9 New Jersey ..................... 0 0 0 379 379 New York ........................

280

Table-top job analysis  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this Handbook is to establish general training program guidelines for training personnel in developing training for operation, maintenance, and technical support personnel at Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facilities. TTJA is not the only method of job analysis; however, when conducted properly TTJA can be cost effective, efficient, and self-validating, and represents an effective method of defining job requirements. The table-top job analysis is suggested in the DOE Training Accreditation Program manuals as an acceptable alternative to traditional methods of analyzing job requirements. DOE 5480-20A strongly endorses and recommends it as the preferred method for analyzing jobs for positions addressed by the Order.

Not Available

1994-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


281

EIA-Annual Energy Outlook 2010 - Low Economic Growth Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Economic Growth Tables (2007- 2035) Economic Growth Tables (2007- 2035) Annual Energy Outlook 2010 Main Low Economic Growth Tables (2007- 2035) Table Title Formats Summary Low Economic Growth Case Tables PDF Gif Year-by-Year Low Economic Growth Case Tables Excel Gif Table 1. Total Energy Supply, Disposition, and Price Summary Excel Gif Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption Excel Gif Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions

282

EIA-Annual Energy Outlook 2010 - High Economic Growth Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Economic Growth Tables (2007-2035) Economic Growth Tables (2007-2035) Annual Energy Outlook 2010 Main High Economic Growth Tables (2007- 2035) Table Title Formats Summary High Economic Growth Case Tables PDF Gif Year-by-Year High Economic Growth Case Tables Excel Gif Table 1. Total Energy Supply and Disposition Summary Excel Gif Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption Excel Gif Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions Excel Gif

283

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, October 1991  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Environmental Regulatory Update Table provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M.; Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

284

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, August 1991  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Environmental Regulatory Update Table (August 1991) provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M., Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

285

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, September 1991  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Environmental Regulatory Update Table provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M.; Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

286

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, November 1991  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Environmental Regulatory Update Table provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M.; Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

287

Environmental regulatory update table, July 1991  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Environmental Regulatory Update Table (July 1991) provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M.; Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

288

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, November 1990  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Environmental Regulatory Update Table provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Hawkins, G.T.; Houlberg, L.M.; Noghrei-Nikbakht, P.A.; Salk, M.S.

1990-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

289

Capacity Allocation with Competitive Retailers Masabumi Furuhata  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

to uncertainty of market demands, costly capacity construction and time consuming capacity expansion. This makes the market to be unstable and malfunc- tioning. Such a problem is known as the capacity allocation investigate the properties of capacity allocation mechanisms for the markets where a sin- gle supplier

Zhang, Dongmo

290

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

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

3 3 Table 9 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:08:24 PM Table 9. Underground natural gas storage - by season, 2011-2013 (volumes in billion cubic feet) Natural Gas in Underground Storage at End of Period Change in Working Gas from Same Period Previous Year Storage Activity Year, Season, and Month Base Gas Working Gas Total Volume Percent Injections Withdrawals Net Withdrawals a 2011 Refill Season April 4,304 1,788 6,092 -223 -11.1 312 100 -212 May 4,304 2,187 6,491 -233 -9.6 458 58 -399 June 4,302 2,530 6,831 -210 -7.7 421 80 -340 July 4,300 2,775 7,075 -190 -6.4 359 116 -244 August 4,300 3,019 7,319 -134 -4.2 370 126 -244 September 4,301 3,416 7,717 -92 -2.6 454 55

291

All Price Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1) 1) June 2013 State Energy Price and Expenditure Estimates 1970 Through 2011 2011 Price and Expenditure Summary Tables Table E1. Primary Energy, Electricity, and Total Energy Price Estimates, 2011 (Dollars per Million Btu) State Primary Energy Electric Power Sector g,h Retail Electricity Total Energy g,i Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum Nuclear Fuel Biomass Total g,h,i Distillate Fuel Oil Jet Fuel b LPG c Motor Gasoline d Residual Fuel Oil Other e Total Wood and Waste f Alabama 3.09 5.66 26.37 22.77 25.54 27.12 13.18 19.42 25.90 0.61 3.01 8.75 2.56 27.08 19.85 Alaska 3.64 6.70 29.33 23.12 29.76 31.60 20.07 34.62 26.61 - 14.42 20.85 6.36 47.13 25.17 Arizona 1.99 7.07 27.73 22.84 31.95 26.97 17.00 17.23 26.71 0.75 6.31 10.79 2.16 28.46 25.23 Arkansas 1.93 6.94 26.37 22.45 26.66 27.35 17.35 33.22

292

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4) 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 (Trillion Btu) State Total Energy b Sources End-Use Sectors a Coal Natural Gas c Petroleum Nuclear Electric Power Hydro- electric Power d Biomass e Other f Net Interstate Flow of Electricity/Losses g Residential Commercial Industrial b Transportation Alabama 2,159.7 853.9 404.0 638.5 329.9 106.5 185.0 0.1 -358.2 393.7 270.2 1,001.1 494.7 Alaska 779.1 14.1 411.8 334.8 0.0 15.0 3.3 0.1 0.0 56.4 63.4 393.4 266.0 Arizona 1,436.6 425.4 354.9 562.8 293.1 69.9 8.7 3.6 -281.7 368.5 326.0 231.2 511.0 Arkansas 1,135.9 270.2 228.9 388.3 161.1 36.5 76.0 0.6 -25.7 218.3 154.7 473.9 288.9 California 8,364.6 68.9 2,474.2 3,787.8 315.6 342.2

293

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9) 9) June 2011 State Energy Consumption Estimates 1960 Through 2009 2009 Consumption Summary Tables Table C1. Energy Consumption Overview: Estimates by Energy Source and End-Use Sector, 2009 (Trillion Btu) State Total Energy b Sources End-Use Sectors a Fossil Fuels Nuclear Electric Power Renewable Energy e Net Interstate Flow of Electricity/ Losses f Net Electricity Imports Residential Commercial Industrial b Transportation Coal Natural Gas c Petroleum d Total Alabama 1,906.8 631.0 473.9 583.9 1,688.8 415.4 272.9 -470.3 0.0 383.2 266.0 788.5 469.2 Alaska 630.4 14.5 344.0 255.7 614.1 0.0 16.3 0.0 (s) 53.4 61.0 325.4 190.6 Arizona 1,454.3 413.3 376.7 520.8 1,310.8 320.7 103.5 -279.9 -0.8 400.8 352.1 207.8 493.6 Arkansas 1,054.8 264.1 248.1 343.1 855.3 158.7 126.5 -85.7 0.0 226.3 167.0 372.5

294

Microsoft Word - table_01.doc  

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

3 3 Table 1 Table 1. Summary of natural gas supply and disposition in the United States, 2008-2013 (billion cubic feet) Year and Month Gross Withdrawals Marketed Production NGPL Production a Dry Gas Production b Supplemental Gaseous Fuels c Net Imports Net Storage Withdrawals d Balancing Item e Consumption f 2008 Total 25,636 21,112 953 20,159 61 3,021 34 2 23,277 2009 Total 26,057 21,648 1,024 20,624 65 2,679 -355 -103 22,910 2010 Total 26,816 22,382 1,066 21,316 65 2,604 -13 115 24,087 2011 January 2,299 1,953 92 1,861 5 236 811 R -24 R 2,889 February 2,104 1,729 82 1,647 4 186 594 R 20 R 2,452 March 2,411 2,002 95 1,908 5 171 151 R -4 R 2,230 April 2,350 1,961 93 1,868 5 R 152 -216 R 17 R 1,825 May 2,411 2,031

295

Microsoft Word - table_02.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 2. Natural gas production, transmission, and consumption, by state, 2012 (million cubic feet) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Natural Gas Annual 4 Table 2 Alabama 215,710 7,110 -162,223 617,883 0 -2,478 0 666,738 Alaska 351,259 21,470 22,663 0 -9,342 0 0 343,110 Arizona 117 0 -13,236 389,036 -43,838 0 0 332,079 Arkansas 1,146,168 424 -18,281 -831,755 0 -103 0 295,811 California 246,822 12,755 104,820 2,222,355 -109,787 48,071 0 2,403,385 Colorado 1,709,376 81,943 -107,940 -1,077,968 0 2,570 4,412 443,367 Connecticut 0 0 4,191 225,228 0 260 0 229,159 Delaware 0 0 21,035 80,692 0 51 * 101,676 District of Columbia 0 0 497 28,075 0 0 0 28,572 Florida 18,681 0 15,168 1,294,620 0 0 0 1,328,469

296

TableHC2.12.xls  

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

Detached Attached 2 to 4 Units Energy Information Administration: 2005 Residential Energy Consumption Survey: Preliminary Housing Characteristics Tables Million U.S. Housing...

297

TableHC10.13.xls  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

or More... 0.3 Q Q Q Q Lighting Usage Indicators U.S. Census Region Northeast Midwest Table HC10.13 Lighting Usage...

298

TABLE54.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

Administration (EIA) Forms EIA-812, "Monthly Product Pipeline Report," and EIA-813, Monthly Crude Oil Report." Table 54. Movements of Crude Oil and Petroleum Products by Pipeline...

299

TABLE19.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

Table 19. PAD District IV-Year-to-Date Supply, Disposition, and Ending Stocks of Crude Oil and Petroleum (Thousand Barrels) January-July 2004 Products, Crude Oil...

300

TABLE15.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

Table 15. PAD District III-Year-to-Date Supply, Disposition, and Ending Stocks of Crude Oil and Petroleum (Thousand Barrels) January-July 2004 Products, Crude Oil...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


301

TABLE53.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

Table 53. Movements of Crude Oil and Petroleum Products by Pipeline, Tanker, and Barge Between July 2004 Crude Oil ... 0 383 0...

302

TABLE11.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

(Thousand Barrels) Table 11. PAD District II-Year-to-Date Supply, Disposition, and Ending Stocks of Crude Oil and Petroleum January-July 2004 Products, Crude Oil...

303

2011 Annual Report Table of Contents  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

) ...................12 Smart Grid Cyber Security.....................................................13 ICT Supply ChainComputer Security Division 2011 Annual Report #12;Table of Contents Welcome ................................................................. 1 Division Organization .................................................2 The Computer Security

304

Summary Statistics Table 1. Crude Oil Prices  

Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

Cost Report." Figure Energy Information Administration Petroleum Marketing Annual 1996 3 Table 2. U.S. Refiner Prices of Petroleum Products to End Users (Cents per Gallon...

305

GIS DEVELOPMENT GUIDE Table of Contents  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

GIS DEVELOPMENT GUIDE Volume II Table of Contents SURVEY OF AVAILABLE DATA Introduction ...................................................................................13 EVALUATING GIS HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE Introduction ...................................................................................14 Sources of Information About GIS......................................................14 GIS

Ghelli, Giorgio

306

Fe/Al2O3 C2H4 Hata mm/10 min  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Fe/Al2O3 C2H4 () () () () () () () * () 1. (SWNT) SWNT (CVD) (CNT)[1] Hata mm/10 min SWNT (Super Growth)[2]Al2O3 Fe C2H4 SWNT Fe/Al2O3 C2H4 CVD SWNT CNT CNT 2 SiO2 Al2O3 20 (RBM) 1350 cm-1 (D-Band)Fe G/D RBM Fe SWNT Al 15 nm Fe 0.6 nm CVD TEM Fig. 3 3 nm SWNT

Maruyama, Shigeo

307

A CHANDRA SNAPSHOT SURVEY FOR 3C RADIO GALAXIES WITH REDSHIFTS BETWEEN 0.3 AND 0.5  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This paper contains an analysis of short Chandra observations of 19 3C sources with redshifts between 0.3 and 0.5 not previously observed in the X-rays. This sample is part of a project to obtain Chandra data for all of the extragalactic sources in the 3C catalog. Nuclear X-ray intensities as well as any X-ray emission associated with radio jet knots, hotspots, or lobes have been measured in three energy bands: soft, medium, and hard. Standard X-ray spectral analysis for the four brightest nuclei has also been performed. X-ray emission was detected for all the nuclei of the radio sources in the current sample with the exception of 3C 435A. There is one compact steep spectrum source while all the others are FR II radio galaxies. X-ray emission from two galaxy clusters (3C 19 and 3C 320), from six hotspots in four radio galaxies (3C 16, 3C 19, 3C 268.2, 3C 313), and extended X-ray emission on kiloparsec scales in 3C 187 and 3C 313, has been detected.

Massaro, F. [SLAC National Laboratory and Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, 2575 Sand Hill Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025 (United States)] [SLAC National Laboratory and Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, 2575 Sand Hill Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025 (United States); Harris, D. E.; Paggi, A. [Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, 60 Garden Street, Cambridge, MA 02138 (United States)] [Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, 60 Garden Street, Cambridge, MA 02138 (United States); Tremblay, G. R. [European Southern Observatory, Karl-Schwarzschild-Str. 2, D-85748 Garching bei Muenchen (Germany)] [European Southern Observatory, Karl-Schwarzschild-Str. 2, D-85748 Garching bei Muenchen (Germany); Liuzzo, E. [Istituto di Radioastronomia, INAF, via Gobetti 101, I-40129, Bologna (Italy)] [Istituto di Radioastronomia, INAF, via Gobetti 101, I-40129, Bologna (Italy); Bonafede, A. [Hamburger Sternwarte, Universitaet Hamburg, Gojenbergsweg 112, D-21029 Hamburg (Germany)] [Hamburger Sternwarte, Universitaet Hamburg, Gojenbergsweg 112, D-21029 Hamburg (Germany)

2013-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

308

OpenEI - Electric Capacity  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

New Zealand Energy New Zealand Energy Outlook (2010): Electricity and Generation Capacity http://en.openei.org/datasets/node/357 The New Zealand Ministry of Economic Development publishes an annual Energy Outlook, which presents projections of New Zealand's future energy supply, demand, prices and greenhouse gas emissions. The principle aim of these projections is to inform the national energy debate. Included here are the model results for electricity and generation capacity. The spreadsheet provides an interactive tool for selecting which model results to view, and which scenarios to evaluate; full model results for each scenario are also included.

License

309

Data:3c67a7c1-9c44-435c-9c3c-70daeb652095 | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

7a7c1-9c44-435c-9c3c-70daeb652095 7a7c1-9c44-435c-9c3c-70daeb652095 No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: City of Cumberland, Wisconsin (Utility Company) Effective date: 2006/03/15 End date if known: Rate name: Cp-2 Large Power Service above 200kW Demand transformer Ownership Discount with Parallel Generation(20 kW or less)-Net Energy Billing Sector: Industrial Description: Power Cost Adjustment Clause - All metered rates shall be subject to a positive or negative power cost adjustment charge equivalent to the amount by which the current cost of power (per kilowatt-hour of sales) is greater or lesser than the base cost of power purchased (per kilowatt-hour of sales). The base cost of power (U) is $0.0294per kilowatt-hour.

310

X-rays from Sources 3C 273 and M 87  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

...3C80KS1273 217+02 170 _160 i-4 2 4.70 7.00 80 _ I ' I 1 I I I I I I-* *InL 4,, 4 for x-ray emission by the synchroton process. As Felten points out in a recent discussion (8), the lifetime prob-lem is already difficult to explain, even...

H. Friedman; E. T. Byram

1967-10-13T23:59:59.000Z

311

Incidence of ischemic stroke according to income level among older people: the 3C study  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

1 Incidence of ischemic stroke according to income level among older people: the 3C study Olivier 26 25. Email: olivier.grimaud@ehesp.fr Abstract Background Stroke has been shown to follow a social between socioeconomic status and ischemic stroke risk amongst older people. Setting The Cities of Bordeaux

Paris-Sud XI, Université de

312

Pressure Balance between Thermal and Non-Thermal Plasmas in the 3C129 Cluster  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

With new Chandra observations of the cluster containing the two radio galaxies 3C129 and 3C129.1, we have made a fit to the X-ray surface brightness to obtain thermal pressures. VLA data at 1.4 GHz have been obtained to complement previous maps at 0.33 GHz and at 5 and 8 GHz. From these radio data, we are able to derive the minimum non-thermal pressure of various emitting volumes along the tail of 3C129 and in the lobes of 3C129.1. Under the assumption that the non-thermal plasma excludes significant thermal plasma, we may expect pressure balance for most features since ram pressure should be important only close to the cores of the galaxies. Since we find that the minimum non-thermal pressures are generally only a factor of a few below estimates of the ambient thermal pressure, we conclude that it is unlikely that relativistic protons contribute significantly to the total pressure. Reasonable contributions from low energy electrons and filling factors in the range 0.1 to 1 suffice to achieve pressure balance. Although we do not find strong signatures for the exclusion of hot gas from the radio structures, we find soft features near the cores of both galaxies suggestive of cool gas stripping and hard features associated with radio jets and possibly a leading bow shock.

D. E. Harris; H. Krawczynski

2003-02-10T23:59:59.000Z

313

Hubble Space Telescope Cycle 11 General Observer Proposal Imaging Quasar 3C 273  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

of the choices for formattedsubmission Principal Investigator: Ms. Christina Bunker Institution: State University of New York at Stony Brook United States Electronic mail: christina.bunker@gmail.com Scientific category.86 UVIS ACCUM F606W 2 Grand total orbit request 2 #12;Ms. Christina Bunker Imaging Quasar 3C 273

Walter, Frederick M.

314

Modelling the very high energy flare of 3C279 using one-zone leptonic model  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

......Papers Modelling the very high energy flare of 3C279 using one-zone...AIP Conf. Vol. 745, High Energy Gamma-ray Astronomy: 2nd...International Symposium on High Energy Gamma-Ray Astronomy. Am. Inst. Phys., New York, p. 23. Shu F. H......

S. Sahayanathan; S. Godambe

2012-01-11T23:59:59.000Z

315

A 3D-3C Reflection Seismic Survey and Data Integration to Identify the  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

D-3C Reflection Seismic Survey and Data Integration to Identify the D-3C Reflection Seismic Survey and Data Integration to Identify the Seismic Response of Fractures and Permeable Zones Over a Known Geothermal Resource at Soda Lake, Churchill Co., NV Geothermal Project Jump to: navigation, search Last modified on July 22, 2011. Project Title A 3D-3C Reflection Seismic Survey and Data Integration to Identify the Seismic Response of Fractures and Permeable Zones Over a Known Geothermal Resource at Soda Lake, Churchill Co., NV Project Type / Topic 1 Recovery Act: Geothermal Technologies Program Project Type / Topic 2 Validation of Innovative Exploration Technologies Project Description The Soda Lake geothermal field is an ideal setting to test the applicability of the 3D-3C reflection seismic method because: it is a producing field with a great deal of geologic and drilling data already available; it is in an alluvial valley where the subsurface structures that carry the geothermal fluids have no surface manifestations; and, there are downhole geophysical logs of fractures and permeable zones that can be used to ground-truth the new data.

316

High capacity immobilized amine sorbents  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

A method is provided for making low-cost CO.sub.2 sorbents that can be used in large-scale gas-solid processes. The improved method entails treating an amine to increase the number of secondary amine groups and impregnating the amine in a porous solid support. The method increases the CO.sub.2 capture capacity and decreases the cost of utilizing an amine-enriched solid sorbent in CO.sub.2 capture systems.

Gray, McMahan L. (Pittsburgh, PA); Champagne, Kenneth J. (Fredericktown, PA); Soong, Yee (Monroeville, PA); Filburn, Thomas (Granby, CT)

2007-10-30T23:59:59.000Z

317

Exhibit C Table of Contents  

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

Exhibit C Schedules and Lists Exhibit C Schedules and Lists Dated 5-20-13 Subcontract No. 241314 Page 1 of 5 EXHIBIT "C" SCHEDULES AND LISTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Form Title A Schedule of Quantities and Prices B Milestone and Payment Schedule C Lower-Tier Subcontractor and Vendor List Exhibit C Schedules and Lists Dated 5-20-13 Subcontract No. 241314 Page 2 of 5 EXHIBIT "C" FORM A SCHEDULE OF QUANTITIES AND PRICES NOTE: This Exhibit "C" Form A is part of the model subcontract for Trinity and is provided to Offerors for informational purposes only. It is not intended that this form be returned with the Offeror's proposal. 1.0 WORK TO BE PERFORMED Work shall be performed strictly in accordance with requirements of the Subcontract

318

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2005 Alabama .................................. 255,157 9,748 13,759 37,048 Alaska...................................... 3,089,229 23,700 27,956 105,449 Arkansas.................................. 16,756 177 231 786 California ................................. 226,230 11,101 13,748 45,926 Colorado .................................. 730,948 25,603 34,782 95,881 Florida...................................... 3,584 359 495 1,400 Illinois....................................... 280 37 46 129 Kansas..................................... 476,656 22,165 31,521 85,737 Kentucky.................................. 38,792 1,411 1,716 5,725 Louisiana ................................. 2,527,636 73,035 103,381

319

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 5. Number of Producing Gas Wells by State and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2006-2010 Alabama .......................................................... 6,227 6,591 6,860 6,913 7,026 Alaska.............................................................. 231 239 261 261 269 Arizona ............................................................ 7 7 6 6 5 Arkansas.......................................................... 3,814 4,773 5,592 6,314 7,397 California ......................................................... 1,451 1,540 1,645 1,643 1,580 Colorado .......................................................... 20,568 22,949 25,716 27,021 28,813 Gulf of Mexico.................................................. 2,419 2,552 1,527 1,984 1,852 Illinois...............................................................

320

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas, 2004-2008, and by State, 2008 2004 Total ............................ 15,223,749 -- 5.46 19,517,491 106,521,974 2005 Total ............................ 15,425,867 -- 7.33 18,927,095 138,750,746 2006 Total ............................ 15,981,421 -- 6.39 19,409,674 124,074,399 2007 Total ............................ R 16,335,710 -- R 6.25 R 20,196,346 R 126,164,553 2008 Total ............................ 18,424,440 -- 7.96 21,239,516 169,038,089 Alabama ............................... 246,747 2,382,188 9.65 257,884 2,489,704 Alaska................................... 337,359 2,493,128 7.39 398,442 2,944,546 Arizona ................................. 503 3,568 7.09 523 3,710 Arkansas...............................

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


321

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 21. Number of Natural Gas Industrial Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2008-2009 Alabama ...................... 2,476 281 2,757 2,789 271 3,060 Alaska.......................... 2 4 6 2 1 3 Arizona ........................ 285 98 383 274 116 390 Arkansas...................... 648 456 1,104 582 443 1,025 California ..................... 36,124 R 3,467 R 39,591 35,126 3,762 38,888 Colorado ...................... 341 4,475 4,816 297 4,787 5,084 Connecticut.................. 2,386 810 3,196 2,228 910 3,138 Delaware ..................... 96 69 165 39 73 112 Florida.......................... 161 288 449 123 484 607 Georgia........................ 1,003 1,887 2,890 956 1,298 2,254 Hawaii.......................... 27 0 27 25 0 25 Idaho............................ 108 91 199 109 78 187 Illinois...........................

322

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 21. Number of Natural Gas Industrial Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2004-2005 Alabama ...................... 2,495 R 304 R 2,799 2,487 299 2,786 Alaska.......................... 6 4 10 7 5 12 Arizona ........................ 328 86 414 319 106 425 Arkansas...................... 782 R 441 R 1,223 671 449 1,120 California ..................... 39,426 2,061 41,487 38,150 2,076 40,226 Colorado ...................... 393 3,782 4,175 364 3,954 4,318 Connecticut.................. 2,625 845 3,470 2,618 819 3,437 Delaware ..................... 134 52 186 124 55 179 Florida.......................... R 174 224 R 398 159 273 432 Georgia........................ R 993 2,168 R 3,161 854 2,599 3,453 Hawaii.......................... 29 0 29 28 0 28 Idaho............................ 117 79 196 116 79 195

323

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 5. Number of Wells Producing Gas and Gas Condensate by State and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2001-2005 Alabama .......................................................... 4,597 4,803 5,157 5,526 5,523 Alaska.............................................................. 170 165 195 224 227 Arizona ............................................................ 8 7 9 6 6 Arkansas.......................................................... 4,825 6,755 7,606 3,460 2,878 California ......................................................... 1,244 1,232 1,249 1,272 1,356 Colorado .......................................................... 22,117 23,554 18,774 16,718 22,691 Gulf of Mexico.................................................. 3,271 3,245 3,039 2,781 2,123 Illinois...............................................................

324

EM International Program Action Table  

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

EM INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIVE PROGRAM] October, 2012 EM INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIVE PROGRAM] October, 2012 E M I n t e r n a t i o n a l P r o g r a m s Page 1 ACTION TABLE Subject Lead Office Engaging Country Meeting Location Purpose Status Date of Event 3 rd US/German Workshop on Salt Repository Research, Design and Operations N. Buschman, EM-22 Germany Albuquerque & Carlsbad, NM Continue collaboration with Germans on salt repository research, design and operations. Draft agenda prepared. October 8-12, 2012 International Framework for Nuclear Energy Cooperation (IFNEC) Ministerial R. Elmetti, EM- 2.1 Multilateral Marrakech, Morocco To support the development of nuclear energy infrastructure globally through workforce training, information sharing, and approaches related to the safe, secure and responsible use of

325

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2009 Alabama .................................. 248,232 11,667 17,232 42,984 Alaska...................................... 2,830,034 19,542 22,925 86,767 Arkansas.................................. 2,352 125 168 541 California ................................. 198,213 11,042 13,722 45,669 Colorado .................................. 1,233,260 47,705 67,607 174,337 Illinois....................................... 164 24 31 84 Kansas..................................... 370,670 18,863 26,948 72,922 Kentucky.................................. 60,167 2,469 3,270 9,982 Louisiana ................................. 2,175,026 67,067 95,359 250,586 Michigan .................................. 23,819 2,409

326

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2006 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ...................... 0 11 0 0 6,138 6,149 Connecticut.................. 0 91 0 0 0 91 Delaware ..................... 0 * 0 0 0 * Georgia........................ 0 3 0 0 0 3 Hawaii.......................... 2,610 3 0 0 0 2,613 Illinois........................... 0 13 0 0 0 13 Indiana......................... 0 2 0 0 1,640 1,642 Iowa ............................. 0 * 0 0 46 46 Kentucky...................... 0 3 0 0 0 3 Maryland ...................... 0 41 0 0 0 41 Massachusetts............. 0 51 0 0 0 51 Minnesota .................... 0 13 0 0 0 13 Missouri ....................... 0 78 0 0 0 78 Nebraska ..................... 0 19 0 0 0 19 New Hampshire ........... 0 92 0 0 0 92 New Jersey .................. 0 0 0 0 175 175 New York .....................

327

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

20 20 Table 9. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Imports and Exports, 2004-2008 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a .................................................... 3,606,543 3,700,454 3,589,995 3,782,708 3,589,221 Mexico ...................................................... 0 9,320 12,749 54,062 43,314 Total Pipeline Imports............................. 3,606,543 3,709,774 3,602,744 3,836,770 3,632,535 LNG Algeria....................................................... 120,343 97,157 17,449 77,299 0 Australia.................................................... 14,990 0 0 0 0 Egypt......................................................... 0 72,540 119,528 114,580 54,839 Equatorial Guinea .....................................

328

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2007 Alabama .................................. 257,443 13,381 19,831 48,922 Alaska...................................... 2,965,956 22,419 26,332 99,472 Arkansas.................................. 11,532 126 162 552 California ................................. 206,239 11,388 13,521 47,045 Colorado .................................. 888,705 27,447 38,180 102,563 Florida...................................... 2,422 103 132 423 Illinois....................................... 235 38 48 131 Kansas..................................... 391,022 19,600 28,063 74,941 Kentucky.................................. 38,158 1,455 1,957 5,917 Louisiana ................................. 2,857,443 77,905 110,745

329

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 State Energy Data 2011: Consumption Table C11. Energy Consumption by Source, Ranked by State, 2011 Rank Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum b Retail Electricity Sales State Trillion Btu State Trillion Btu State Trillion Btu State Trillion Btu 1 Texas 1,695.2 Texas 3,756.9 Texas 5,934.3 Texas 1,283.1 2 Indiana 1,333.4 California 2,196.6 California 3,511.4 California 893.7 3 Ohio 1,222.6 Louisiana 1,502.9 Louisiana 1,925.7 Florida 768.0 4 Pennsylvania 1,213.0 New York 1,246.9 Florida 1,680.3 Ohio 528.0 5 Illinois 1,052.2 Florida 1,236.6 New York 1,304.0 Pennsylvania 507.6 6 Kentucky 1,010.6 Pennsylvania 998.6 Pennsylvania 1,255.6 New York 491.5

330

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2008 Alabama .................................. 253,028 11,753 17,222 43,191 Alaska...................................... 2,901,760 20,779 24,337 92,305 Arkansas.................................. 6,531 103 139 446 California ................................. 195,272 11,179 13,972 46,176 Colorado .................................. 1,029,641 37,804 53,590 139,332 Florida...................................... 300 16 22 65 Illinois....................................... 233 33 42 115 Kansas..................................... 397,587 19,856 28,302 76,021 Kentucky.................................. 58,899 1,783 2,401 7,233 Louisiana ................................. 2,208,920 66,369 94,785 245,631

331

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 9. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Imports and Exports, 2002-2006 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a .................................................... 3,784,978 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,700,454 3,589,995 Mexico ...................................................... 1,755 0 0 9,320 12,749 Total Pipeline Imports............................. 3,786,733 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,709,774 3,602,744 LNG Algeria....................................................... 26,584 53,423 120,343 97,157 17,449 Australia.................................................... 0 0 14,990 0 0 Brunei ....................................................... 2,401 0 0 0 0 Egypt.........................................................

332

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 9. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Imports and Exports, 2001-2005 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a .................................................... 3,728,537 3,784,978 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,700,454 Mexico ...................................................... 10,276 1,755 0 0 9,320 Total Pipeline Imports............................. 3,738,814 3,786,733 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,709,774 LNG Algeria....................................................... 64,945 26,584 53,423 120,343 97,157 Australia.................................................... 2,394 0 0 14,990 0 Brunei ....................................................... 0 2,401 0 0 0 Egypt.........................................................

333

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 5. Number of Wells Producing Gas and Gas Condensate by State and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2002-2006 Alabama .......................................................... 4,803 5,157 5,526 5,523 6,227 Alaska.............................................................. 165 195 224 227 231 Arizona ............................................................ 7 9 6 6 7 Arkansas.......................................................... 6,755 7,606 3,460 R 3,462 3,811 California ......................................................... 1,232 1,249 1,272 1,356 1,451 Colorado .......................................................... 23,554 18,774 16,718 22,691 20,568 Gulf of Mexico.................................................. 3,245 3,039 2,781 2,123 1,946 Illinois...............................................................

334

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

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

9 9 Table 21. Number of natural gas commercial consumers by type of service and state, 2011-2012 R Revised data. Note: Totals may not equal sum of components due to independent rounding. Source: Energy Information Administration (EIA), Form EIA-176, "Annual Report of Natural and Supplemental Gas Supply and Disposition." Please see the cautionary note regarding the number of residential and commercial customers located on the second page of Appendix A of this report. Alabama R 67,561 135 R 67,696 67,099 135 67,234 Alaska R 12,724 303 R 13,027 13,073 61 13,134 Arizona 56,349 198 56,547 56,252 280 56,532 Arkansas 67,454 361 67,815 68,151 614 68,765

335

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 5. Number of Wells Producing by State and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2003-2007 Alabama .......................................................... 5,157 5,526 5,523 6,227 6,591 Alaska.............................................................. 195 224 227 231 239 Arizona ............................................................ 9 6 6 7 7 Arkansas.......................................................... 7,606 3,460 3,462 R 3,814 4,773 California ......................................................... 1,249 1,272 1,356 1,451 1,540 Colorado .......................................................... 18,774 16,718 22,691 20,568 22,949 Gulf of Mexico.................................................. 3,039 2,781 2,123 R 2,419 2,552 Illinois...............................................................

336

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 9. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Imports and Exports, 2003-2007 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a .................................................... 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,700,454 3,589,995 3,782,708 Mexico ...................................................... 0 0 9,320 12,749 54,062 Total Pipeline Imports............................. 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,709,774 3,602,744 3,836,770 LNG Algeria....................................................... 53,423 120,343 97,157 17,449 77,299 Australia.................................................... 0 14,990 0 0 0 Egypt......................................................... 0 0 72,540 119,528 114,580 Equatorial Guinea .....................................

337

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 21. Number of Natural Gas Industrial Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2007-2008 Alabama ...................... 2,409 295 2,704 2,476 281 2,757 Alaska.......................... 7 4 11 2 4 6 Arizona ........................ 296 99 395 285 98 383 Arkansas...................... 637 418 1,055 648 456 1,104 California ..................... 35,814 3,320 39,134 36,124 3,533 39,657 Colorado ...................... 298 4,294 4,592 341 4,475 4,816 Connecticut.................. 2,472 845 3,317 2,386 810 3,196 Delaware ..................... 125 60 185 96 69 165 Florida.......................... 156 311 467 161 288 449 Georgia........................ R 1,013 1,900 R 2,913 1,003 1,887 2,890 Hawaii.......................... 27 0 27 27 0 27 Idaho............................ 109 79 188 108 91 199 Illinois...........................

338

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2006 Alabama .................................. 287,278 14,736 21,065 54,529 Alaska...................................... 2,665,742 20,993 24,638 93,346 Arkansas.................................. 13,702 166 212 734 California ................................. 223,580 11,267 14,056 46,641 Colorado .................................. 751,036 26,111 36,317 97,697 Florida...................................... 3,972 357 485 1,416 Illinois....................................... 242 37 47 128 Kansas..................................... 453,111 21,509 30,726 83,137 Kentucky.................................. 39,559 1,666 2,252 6,763 Louisiana ................................. 2,511,802 73,551 105,236

339

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas by State, 2005-2009 2005 Total ............................ 15,425,867 -- 7.33 18,927,095 138,750,746 2006 Total ............................ 15,981,421 -- 6.39 19,409,674 124,074,399 2007 Total ............................ 16,335,710 -- 6.25 20,196,346 126,164,553 2008 Total ............................ R 18,305,411 -- R 7.97 R 21,112,053 R 168,342,230 2009 Total ............................ 18,763,726 -- 3.67 21,604,158 79,188,096 Alabama ............................... 225,666 975,789 4.32 236,029 1,020,599 Alaska................................... 397,077 1,163,555 2.93 397,077 1,163,554 Arizona ................................. 695 2,214 3.19 712 2,269 Arkansas............................... 680,613 2,332,956 3.43

340

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 21. Number of natural gas commercial consumers by type of service and state, 2010-2011 R Revised data. Note: Totals may not equal sum of components due to independent rounding. Source: Energy Information Administration (EIA), Form EIA-176, "Annual Report of Natural and Supplemental Gas Supply and Disposition." Please see the cautionary note regarding the number of residential and commercial customers located on the second page of Appendix A of this report. Alabama R 68,017 146 R 68,163 67,522 135 67,657 Alaska 12,673 325 12,998 12,721 303 13,024 Arizona 56,510 166 56,676 56,349 198 56,547 Arkansas 67,676 311 67,987 67,454 361 67,815 California 399,290 40,282

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


341

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas by State, 2006-2010 2006 Total ............................ 15,981,421 -- 6.39 19,409,674 124,074,399 2007 Total ............................ 16,335,710 -- 6.25 20,196,346 126,164,553 2008 Total ............................ 18,305,411 -- 7.97 21,112,053 168,342,230 2009 Total ............................ 18,763,726 -- 3.67 R 21,647,936 R 79,348,561 2010 Total ............................ 19,262,198 -- 4.48 22,402,141 100,272,654 Alabama ............................... 212,769 949,340 4.46 222,932 994,688 Alaska................................... 316,546 1,002,566 3.17 374,226 1,185,249 Arizona ................................. 165 676 4.11 183 753 Arkansas............................... 936,600 3,594,843 3.84

342

Microsoft Word - table_10.doc  

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

4 4 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:09:15 PM Table 10. Underground natural gas storage - salt cavern storage fields, 2008-2013 (volumes in billion cubic feet) Natural Gas in Underground Storage at End of Period Change in Working Gas from Same Period Previous Year Storage Activity Year and Month Base Gas Working Gas Total Volume Percent Injections Withdrawals Net Withdrawals a 2008 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 440 398 -42 2009 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 459 403 -56 2010 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 511 452 -58 2011 January 137 174 311 65 59.3 23 69 46 February 137 125 262 48 62.5 30 80 49 March 137 151 288 39 34.8 51 25 -25 April 140 172 312 17 11.2 42 21 -22 May 140 211 352

343

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2005 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ...................... 0 2 0 0 5,283 5,285 Connecticut.................. 0 273 0 0 0 273 Delaware ..................... 0 * 0 0 0 * Georgia........................ 0 * 0 0 0 * Hawaii.......................... 2,593 14 0 0 0 2,606 Illinois........................... 0 11 0 4 0 15 Indiana......................... 0 30 0 0 1,958 1,988 Iowa ............................. 0 2 0 30 0 31 Kentucky...................... 0 15 0 0 0 15 Maryland ...................... 0 382 0 0 0 382 Massachusetts............. 0 46 0 0 0 46 Minnesota .................... 0 154 0 0 0 154 Missouri ....................... 0 15 0 0 0 15 Nebraska ..................... 0 16 0 * 0 16 New Hampshire ........... 0 84 0 0 0 84 New Jersey .................. 0 0 0 0 435 435 New York

344

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

17 17 Table C12. Total Energy Consumption, Gross Domestic Product (GDP), Energy Consumption per Real Dollar of GDP, Ranked by State, 2011 Rank Total Energy Consumption Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Energy Consumption per Real Dollar of GDP State Trillion Btu State Billion Chained (2005) Dollars State Thousand Btu per Chained (2005) Dollar 1 Texas 12,206.6 California 1,735.4 Louisiana 19.7 2 California 7,858.4 Texas 1,149.9 Wyoming 17.5 3 Florida 4,217.1 New York 1,016.4 North Dakota 15.4 4 Louisiana 4,055.3 Florida 661.1 Alaska 14.3 5 Illinois 3,977.8 Illinois 582.1 Mississippi 13.8 6 Ohio 3,827.6 Pennsylvania 500.4 Kentucky 13.5

345

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas, 2003-2007, and by State, 2007 2003 Total ............................ 14,589,545 -- 4.88 19,974,360 97,555,375 2004 Total ............................ 15,223,749 -- 5.46 19,517,491 106,521,974 2005 Total ............................ 15,425,867 -- 7.33 18,927,095 138,750,746 2006 Total ............................ R 15,981,421 -- R 6.39 R 19,409,674 R 124,074,399 2007 Total ............................ 16,031,199 -- 6.37 20,019,321 127,530,680 Alabama ............................... 259,062 1,926,374 7.44 270,407 2,010,736 Alaska................................... 368,344 2,072,647 5.63 433,485 2,439,193 Arizona ................................. 634 3,791 5.98 655 3,913 Arkansas...............................

346

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2010 Alabama .................................. 242,444 13,065 19,059 47,741 Alaska...................................... 2,731,803 17,798 20,835 79,355 Arkansas.................................. 9,599 160 213 692 California ................................. 204,327 10,400 13,244 42,509 Colorado .................................. 1,434,003 57,924 82,637 209,191 Kansas..................................... 341,778 18,424 26,251 70,425 Kentucky.................................. 66,579 3,317 4,576 13,311 Louisiana ................................. 2,207,760 71,231 102,448 262,178 Michigan .................................. 23,449 2,207 2,943 8,272 Mississippi ...............................

347

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

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

7 7 Table 7. Supplemental gas supplies by state, 2012 (million cubic feet) Colorado 0 99 0 4,313 4,412 Georgia 0 0 660 0 660 Hawaii 2,491 20 0 0 2,510 Illinois 0 1 0 0 1 Indiana 0 1 0 0 1 Kentucky 0 1 0 0 1 Louisiana 0 0 553 0 553 Maryland 0 116 0 0 116 Minnesota 0 9 0 0 9 Missouri * 0 0 0 * Nebraska 0 4 0 0 4 New Jersey 0 0 0 139 139 North Dakota 52,541 0 0 0 52,541 Ohio 0 6 360 0 366 Pennsylvania 0 2 0 0 2 Vermont 0 3 0 0 3 Virginia 0 48 0 0 48 Total 55,032 309 1,573 4,452 61,366 State Synthetic Natural Gas Propane-Air Biomass Gas Other Total * Volume is less than 500,000 cubic feet.

348

All Price Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4) 4) June 2007 State Energy Price and Expenditure Estimates 1970 Through 2004 2004 Price and Expenditure Summary Tables Table S1a. Energy Price Estimates by Source, 2004 (Nominal Dollars per Million Btu) State Primary Energy Electric Power Sector d,e Retail Electricity Total Energy d,f Coal Natural Gas Petroleum Nuclear Fuel Biomass c Total d,e,f Distillate Fuel Jet Fuel LPG a Motor Gasoline Residual Fuel Other b Total Alabama 1.57 7.72 11.91 8.82 15.78 13.68 4.78 8.25 12.28 0.43 1.81 5.32 1.68 18.01 11.29 Alaska 1.91 3.59 12.43 9.61 19.64 15.55 3.63 12.09 11.05 - 6.68 9.07 3.18 32.29 11.09 Arizona 1.31 6.84 13.59 9.53 18.40 15.33 5.29 7.23 13.92 0.45 5.90 6.68 2.18 21.83 15.24 Arkansas 1.25 8.09 12.01 8.30 14.80 13.97 4.67 11.02 12.77 0.49 1.79 6.59 1.43 16.76 11.89 California 1.82 7.63 13.58

349

All Price Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7) 7) August 2009 State Energy Price and Expenditure Estimates 1970 Through 2007 2007 Price and Expenditure Summary Tables Table S1a. Energy Price Estimates by Source, 2007 (Nominal Dollars per Million Btu) State Primary Energy Electric Power Sector e,f Retail Electricity Total Energy e,g Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum Nuclear Fuel Biomass Total e,f,g Distillate Fuel Oil Jet Fuel LPG b Motor Gasoline Residual Fuel Oil Other c Total Wood and Waste d Alabama 2.17 9.06 19.43 16.20 21.84 21.26 8.46 14.19 19.62 0.42 2.71 7.47 2.29 22.46 16.01 Alaska 2.34 5.76 19.43 16.35 28.63 22.14 11.51 23.69 17.97 - 10.51 14.88 4.94 38.96 17.87 Arizona 1.61 8.44 19.84 16.24 27.16 21.95 10.04 11.27 20.50 0.57 10.86 9.61 2.78 25.02 20.72 Arkansas 1.65 9.33 19.63 15.73 21.10 21.54 8.65 18.76 20.42 0.57 2.66 9.45 1.98 20.57

350

TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION A: PREINTERVIEW OBSERVATION  

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

TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION A: PREINTERVIEW OBSERVATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 SECTION B: HOUSING TYPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 SECTION C: HOME HEATING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 SECTION D: AIR CONDITIONING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 SECTION E: WATER HEATING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 SECTION F: LIGHTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 SECTION G: APPLIANCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Cooking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Refrigerators and Freezers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

351

Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook  

Reports and Publications (EIA)

The Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) Supplemental tables were generated for the reference case of the AEO using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO projections.

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

352

Tables in Context: Integrating Horizontal Displays with  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

design challenges for tabletop interfaces: integrating access to public and private information, managing a cooperative gesture to organize digital documents on an interactive table. Our tabletop interface designTables in Context: Integrating Horizontal Displays with Ubicomp Environments Abstract Our work

Klemmer, Scott

353

Tafel Musik: Formatting algorithm of tables  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

This paper provides a description on the formatting algorithm of tables that the authors have developed. This algorithm is an important component of the so called TafeMusik (Tafel Musik) environment. TafeMusikprovides the user with an environment to ... Keywords: First-fit algorithm, Linear programming, Optimization, Tables, Tabular formatting, Tabular layout

K. -H. Shin; K. Kobayashi; A. Suzuki

1997-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

354

electricity generating capacity | OpenEI  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

generating capacity generating capacity Dataset Summary Description The New Zealand Ministry of Economic Development publishes energy data including many datasets related to electricity. Included here are three electricity generating capacity datasets: annual operational electricity generation capacity by plant type (1975 - 2009); estimated generating capacity by fuel type for North Island, South Island and New Zealand (2009); and information on generating plants (plant type, name, owner, commissioned date, and capacity), as of December 2009. Source New Zealand Ministry of Economic Development Date Released Unknown Date Updated July 03rd, 2009 (5 years ago) Keywords biomass coal Electric Capacity electricity generating capacity geothermal Hydro Natural Gas wind Data application/vnd.ms-excel icon Operational Electricity Generation Capacity by Plant Type (xls, 42.5 KiB)

355

Energy Information Administration (EIA) - Supplement Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Regional Energy Consumption and Prices by Sector Energy Consumption by Sector Table 1. New England Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 2. Middle Atlantic Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 3. East North Central Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 4. West North Central Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 5. South Atlantic Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

356

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Indiana" Indiana" "NERC Region(s)",,"RFC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Coal" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",27638,13 " Electric Utilities",23008,8 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",4630,23 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",125180739,11 " Electric Utilities",107852560,5 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",17328179,20 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",385,4 " Nitrogen Oxide",120,4 " Carbon Dioxide",116283,5 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",6.8,4 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",2.1,12 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",2048,4

357

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Jersey" Jersey" "NERC Region(s)",,"RFC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Nuclear" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",18424,22 " Electric Utilities",460,43 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",17964,6 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",65682494,23 " Electric Utilities",-186385,50 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",65868878,6 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",14,40 " Nitrogen Oxide",15,41 " Carbon Dioxide",19160,37 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",0.5,45 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",0.5,48 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",643,43

358

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Arizona" Arizona" "NERC Region(s)",,"WECC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Coal" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",26392,15 " Electric Utilities",20115,14 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",6277,16 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",111750957,12 " Electric Utilities",91232664,11 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",20518293,17 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",33,33 " Nitrogen Oxide",57,17 " Carbon Dioxide",55683,15 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",0.7,43 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",1.1,31 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1099,35

359

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Louisiana" Louisiana" "NERC Region(s)",,"SERC/SPP" "Primary Energy Source",,"Gas" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",26744,14 " Electric Utilities",16471,17 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",10272,10 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",102884940,16 " Electric Utilities",51680682,19 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",51204258,8 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",126,15 " Nitrogen Oxide",75,11 " Carbon Dioxide",58706,14 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",2.7,21 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",1.6,21 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1258,27

360

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Carolina" Carolina" "NERC Region(s)",,"SERC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Coal" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",27674,12 " Electric Utilities",25553,6 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",2121,34 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",128678483,10 " Electric Utilities",121251138,3 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",7427345,34 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",131,14 " Nitrogen Oxide",57,16 " Carbon Dioxide",73241,13 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",2.2,31 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",1,34 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1255,28

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


361

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Idaho" Idaho" "NERC Region(s)",,"WECC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Hydroelectric" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",3990,44 " Electric Utilities",3035,36 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",955,42 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",12024564,44 " Electric Utilities",8589208,37 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",3435356,40 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",7,45 " Nitrogen Oxide",4,48 " Carbon Dioxide",1213,49 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1.2,39 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",0.8,43 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",222,50

362

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Nebraska" Nebraska" "NERC Region(s)",,"MRO/SPP" "Primary Energy Source",,"Coal" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",7857,38 " Electric Utilities",7647,30 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",210,50 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",36630006,36 " Electric Utilities",36242921,30 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",387085,50 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",65,24 " Nitrogen Oxide",40,30 " Carbon Dioxide",24461,34 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",3.9,12 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",2.4,9 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1472,19

363

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Kansas" Kansas" "NERC Region(s)",,"MRO/SPP" "Primary Energy Source",,"Coal" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",12543,32 " Electric Utilities",11732,20 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",812,45 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",47923762,32 " Electric Utilities",45270047,24 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",2653716,44 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",41,30 " Nitrogen Oxide",46,26 " Carbon Dioxide",36321,26 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1.9,33 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",2.1,13 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1671,14

364

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Oregon" Oregon" "NERC Region(s)",,"WECC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Hydroelectric" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",14261,29 " Electric Utilities",10846,27 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",3415,28 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",55126999,27 " Electric Utilities",41142684,26 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",13984316,26 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",16,37 " Nitrogen Oxide",15,42 " Carbon Dioxide",10094,40 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",0.6,44 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",0.6,47 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",404,48

365

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Michigan" Michigan" "NERC Region(s)",,"MRO/RFC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Coal" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",29831,11 " Electric Utilities",21639,10 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",8192,14 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",111551371,13 " Electric Utilities",89666874,13 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",21884497,16 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",254,6 " Nitrogen Oxide",89,6 " Carbon Dioxide",74480,11 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",5,8 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",1.8,19 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1472,20

366

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Missouri" Missouri" "NERC Region(s)",,"SERC/SPP" "Primary Energy Source",,"Coal" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",21739,18 " Electric Utilities",20360,12 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",1378,39 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",92312989,18 " Electric Utilities",90176805,12 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",2136184,46 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",233,8 " Nitrogen Oxide",56,18 " Carbon Dioxide",78815,10 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",5.6,6 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",1.3,26 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1882,7

367

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

West Virginia" West Virginia" "NERC Region(s)",,"RFC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Coal" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",16495,24 " Electric Utilities",11719,21 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",4775,19 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",80788947,20 " Electric Utilities",56719755,18 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",24069192,13 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",105,20 " Nitrogen Oxide",49,23 " Carbon Dioxide",74283,12 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",2.9,20 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",1.3,25 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",2027,5

368

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

District of Columbia" District of Columbia" "NERC Region(s)",,"RFC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Petroleum" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",790,51 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",790,46 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",199858,51 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",199858,51 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",1,49 " Nitrogen Oxide","*",51 " Carbon Dioxide",191,50 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",8.8,2 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",4,3 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",2104,1 "Total Retail Sales (megawatthours)",11876995,43 " Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours)",3388490,50

369

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Hawaii" Hawaii" "NERC Region(s)",,"--" "Primary Energy Source",,"Petroleum" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",2536,47 " Electric Utilities",1828,40 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",708,47 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",10836036,45 " Electric Utilities",6416068,38 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",4419968,38 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",17,36 " Nitrogen Oxide",21,36 " Carbon Dioxide",8287,42 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",3.4,16 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",4.3,2 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1686,13

370

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Kentucky" Kentucky" "NERC Region(s)",,"RFC/SERC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Coal" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",20453,21 " Electric Utilities",18945,16 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",1507,38 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",98217658,17 " Electric Utilities",97472144,7 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",745514,48 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",249,7 " Nitrogen Oxide",85,7 " Carbon Dioxide",93160,7 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",5.6,5 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",1.9,15 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",2091,3

371

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Oklahoma" Oklahoma" "NERC Region(s)",,"SPP" "Primary Energy Source",,"Gas" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",21022,20 " Electric Utilities",16015,18 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",5006,17 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",72250733,22 " Electric Utilities",57421195,17 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",14829538,24 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",85,21 " Nitrogen Oxide",71,12 " Carbon Dioxide",49536,17 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",2.6,24 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",2.2,11 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1512,17

372

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Delaware" Delaware" "NERC Region(s)",,"RFC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Gas" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",3389,46 " Electric Utilities",55,48 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",3334,29 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",5627645,50 " Electric Utilities",30059,46 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",5597586,36 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",13,41 " Nitrogen Oxide",5,47 " Carbon Dioxide",4187,45 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",5.2,7 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",1.9,16 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1640,15 "Total Retail Sales (megawatthours)",11605932,44

373

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Nevada" Nevada" "NERC Region(s)",,"WECC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Gas" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",11421,34 " Electric Utilities",8713,29 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",2708,33 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",35146248,38 " Electric Utilities",23710917,34 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",11435331,29 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",7,44 " Nitrogen Oxide",15,40 " Carbon Dioxide",17020,38 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",0.4,46 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",1,37 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1068,37 "Total Retail Sales (megawatthours)",33772595,33

374

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Georgia" Georgia" "NERC Region(s)",,"SERC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Coal" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",36636,7 " Electric Utilities",26639,3 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",9998,11 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",137576941,8 " Electric Utilities",120425913,4 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",17151028,21 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",265,5 " Nitrogen Oxide",79,10 " Carbon Dioxide",82592,8 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",4.2,10 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",1.3,28 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1324,25

375

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Tennessee" Tennessee" "NERC Region(s)",,"RFC/SERC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Coal" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",21417,19 " Electric Utilities",20968,11 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",450,49 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",82348625,19 " Electric Utilities",79816049,15 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",2532576,45 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",138,13 " Nitrogen Oxide",33,31 " Carbon Dioxide",48196,18 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",3.7,14 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",0.9,40 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1290,26

376

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Dakota" Dakota" "NERC Region(s)",,"MRO/WECC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Hydroelectric" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",3623,45 " Electric Utilities",2994,37 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",629,48 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",10049636,46 " Electric Utilities",8682448,36 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",1367188,47 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",12,43 " Nitrogen Oxide",12,43 " Carbon Dioxide",3611,47 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",2.6,23 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",2.6,8 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",792,41

377

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Texas" Texas" "NERC Region(s)",,"SERC/SPP/TRE/WECC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Gas" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",108258,1 " Electric Utilities",26533,4 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",81724,1 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",411695046,1 " Electric Utilities",95099161,9 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",316595885,1 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",430,2 " Nitrogen Oxide",204,1 " Carbon Dioxide",251409,1 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",2.3,28 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",1.1,32 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1346,22

378

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Wyoming" Wyoming" "NERC Region(s)",,"WECC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Coal" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",7986,37 " Electric Utilities",6931,31 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",1056,41 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",48119254,31 " Electric Utilities",44738543,25 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",3380711,42 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",67,23 " Nitrogen Oxide",61,15 " Carbon Dioxide",45703,21 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",3.1,19 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",2.8,7 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",2094,2

379

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Wisconsin" Wisconsin" "NERC Region(s)",,"MRO/RFC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Coal" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",17836,23 " Electric Utilities",13098,19 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",4738,20 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",64314067,24 " Electric Utilities",45579970,22 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",18734097,18 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",145,12 " Nitrogen Oxide",49,25 " Carbon Dioxide",47238,19 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",5,9 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",1.7,20 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1619,16

380

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Iowa" Iowa" "NERC Region(s)",,"MRO/SERC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Coal" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",14592,28 " Electric Utilities",11282,24 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",3310,30 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",57508721,26 " Electric Utilities",46188988,21 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",11319733,30 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",108,18 " Nitrogen Oxide",50,22 " Carbon Dioxide",47211,20 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",4.1,11 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",1.9,14 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1810,10

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


381

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Florida" Florida" "NERC Region(s)",,"FRCC/SERC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Gas" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",59147,3 " Electric Utilities",50853,1 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",8294,13 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",229095935,3 " Electric Utilities",206062185,1 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",23033750,15 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",160,11 " Nitrogen Oxide",101,5 " Carbon Dioxide",123811,2 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1.5,37 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",1,35 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1191,31

382

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Massachusetts" Massachusetts" "NERC Region(s)",,"NPCC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Gas" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",13697,31 " Electric Utilities",937,42 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",12760,8 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",42804824,34 " Electric Utilities",802906,43 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",42001918,10 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",35,31 " Nitrogen Oxide",17,38 " Carbon Dioxide",20291,36 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1.8,34 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",0.9,39 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1045,38

383

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Hampshire" Hampshire" "NERC Region(s)",,"NPCC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Nuclear" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",4180,43 " Electric Utilities",1132,41 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",3048,32 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",22195912,42 " Electric Utilities",3979333,41 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",18216579,19 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",34,32 " Nitrogen Oxide",6,46 " Carbon Dioxide",5551,43 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",3.4,17 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",0.6,46 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",551,47

384

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Alabama" Alabama" "NERC Region(s)",,"SERC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Coal" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",32417,9 " Electric Utilities",23642,7 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",8775,12 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",152150512,6 " Electric Utilities",122766490,2 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",29384022,12 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",218,10 " Nitrogen Oxide",66,14 " Carbon Dioxide",79375,9 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",3.2,18 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",1,36 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1150,33

385

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Minnesota" Minnesota" "NERC Region(s)",,"MRO" "Primary Energy Source",,"Coal" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",14715,27 " Electric Utilities",11547,22 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",3168,31 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",53670227,29 " Electric Utilities",45428599,23 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",8241628,32 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",57,27 " Nitrogen Oxide",44,27 " Carbon Dioxide",32946,29 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",2.3,27 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",1.8,18 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1353,21

386

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Mexico" Mexico" "NERC Region(s)",,"SPP/WECC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Coal" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",8130,36 " Electric Utilities",6345,33 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",1785,36 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",36251542,37 " Electric Utilities",30848406,33 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",5403136,37 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",15,38 " Nitrogen Oxide",56,19 " Carbon Dioxide",29379,31 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",0.9,42 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",3.4,5 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1787,11

387

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Illinois" Illinois" "NERC Region(s)",,"MRO/RFC/SERC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Nuclear" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",44127,5 " Electric Utilities",4800,35 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",39327,3 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",201351872,5 " Electric Utilities",12418332,35 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",188933540,3 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",232,9 " Nitrogen Oxide",83,8 " Carbon Dioxide",103128,6 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",2.5,25 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",0.9,38 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1129,34

388

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Rhode Island" Rhode Island" "NERC Region(s)",,"NPCC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Gas" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",1782,49 " Electric Utilities",7,50 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",1775,37 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",7738719,47 " Electric Utilities",10827,47 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",7727892,33 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide","*",50 " Nitrogen Oxide",3,49 " Carbon Dioxide",3217,48 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)","*",50 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",0.8,42 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",916,39

389

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Alaska" Alaska" "NERC Region(s)",,"--" "Primary Energy Source",,"Gas" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",2067,48 " Electric Utilities",1889,39 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",178,51 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",6759576,48 " Electric Utilities",6205050,40 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",554526,49 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",3,46 " Nitrogen Oxide",16,39 " Carbon Dioxide",4125,46 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1,41 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",5.2,1 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1345,23 "Total Retail Sales (megawatthours)",6247038,50

390

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Pennsylvania" Pennsylvania" "NERC Region(s)",,"RFC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Coal" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",45575,4 " Electric Utilities",455,44 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",45120,2 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",229752306,2 " Electric Utilities",1086500,42 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",228665806,2 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",387,3 " Nitrogen Oxide",136,2 " Carbon Dioxide",122830,3 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",3.7,13 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",1.3,27 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1179,32

391

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Montana" Montana" "NERC Region(s)",,"MRO/WECC" "Primary Energy Source",,"Coal" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",5866,41 " Electric Utilities",2340,38 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",3526,27 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",29791181,41 " Electric Utilities",6271180,39 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",23520001,14 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",22,35 " Nitrogen Oxide",21,35 " Carbon Dioxide",20370,35 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1.6,35 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",1.6,22 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1507,18

392

Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics  

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

Dakota" Dakota" "NERC Region(s)",,"MRO" "Primary Energy Source",,"Coal" "Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)",6188,40 " Electric Utilities",4912,34 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",1276,40 "Net Generation (megawatthours)",34739542,39 " Electric Utilities",31343796,32 " Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power",3395746,41 "Emissions (thousand metric tons)" " Sulfur Dioxide",116,17 " Nitrogen Oxide",52,21 " Carbon Dioxide",31064,30 " Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",7.3,3 " Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh)",3.3,6 " Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh)",1971,6 "Total Retail Sales (megawatthours)",12956263,42

393

Data:D4058b99-d561-466d-869d-6d3c11e0ec88 | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

b99-d561-466d-869d-6d3c11e0ec88 b99-d561-466d-869d-6d3c11e0ec88 No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Texas-New Mexico Power Co Effective date: 2009/09/01 End date if known: Rate name: Roadway Lighting Service - (underground service), Schedule IV -Ornamental Pole - two lamps per pole - 400W, MV (Closed) Sector: Lighting Description: The service provided pursuant to this Tariff is for any end-use customer for roadway lighting service where existing facilities have adequate capacity and suitable voltage. Unmetered, automatically controlled, overhead lighting service operating from dusk to dawn. The Company will install, operate and maintain such lighting. Lights will be mounted on an existing service pole or poles and such service will be limited to 120 volt service.

394

Data:Fe6df7aa-7f27-4351-9969-bb9663b3c307 | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

df7aa-7f27-4351-9969-bb9663b3c307 df7aa-7f27-4351-9969-bb9663b3c307 No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Maui Electric Co Ltd Effective date: 2013/07/01 End date if known: 2013/07/30 Rate name: Lanai-SCHEDULE "Q" Purchases From Qualifying Facilities - 100 KW or Less - Single Phase Sector: Commercial Description: Availability: This schedule is available to customers with cogeneration and/or small power production facilities which qualify under the commission's Rules, Chapter 74 of Title 6, Subchapter 2 with a design capacity of 100 kilowatts or less. Such qualifying facilities (QF's) shall be designed to operate properly in parallel with the Company's system without adversely affecting the operations of its customers and without presenting safety hazards to the Company's or other customer's personnel. The customer shall comply with the Company's requirements for customer generation interconnected with the utility system.

395

Data:84e3c5cc-ef77-49fe-95d8-5bc9ab32c56c | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

e3c5cc-ef77-49fe-95d8-5bc9ab32c56c e3c5cc-ef77-49fe-95d8-5bc9ab32c56c No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: KEM Electric Coop Inc Effective date: End date if known: Rate name: Grain Drying Controlled - Three Phase/Stand Alone Sector: Commercial Description: Available to all members who require multi-phase electric service and who are drying agricultural crops. Service capacity shall not exceed 50 kVa. Service shall be to a single point of service. Type of Service Three phase, 60 cycles, at secondary voltages. The Cooperative will provide meter, meter socket, and C.T. equipment and load management device necessary to measure and interrupt electric usage.

396

Data:13a469f4-d70f-4c8f-9fa3-c6f1c98a45ad | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

a469f4-d70f-4c8f-9fa3-c6f1c98a45ad a469f4-d70f-4c8f-9fa3-c6f1c98a45ad No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Southern Rivers Energy Effective date: 2009/06/01 End date if known: Rate name: Farm and Home Sector: Residential Description: To farm and home Consumers for all farm and home uses, and to schools, churches, and community halls. The capacity of individual motors served under this Schedule shall not exceed seven and one-half horsepower without the consent of the Cooperative. Source or reference: Rates Binder A Source Parent: Comments Applicability Demand (kW) Minimum (kW): Maximum (kW):

397

Data:5e52d4d6-cd3c-4448-92c4-ac93b1e528b0 | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

d6-cd3c-4448-92c4-ac93b1e528b0 d6-cd3c-4448-92c4-ac93b1e528b0 No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Northwestern Rural E C A, Inc Effective date: End date if known: Rate name: Optional CP Generation Sector: Description: Optional Pricing for Three Phase Service: Availability of Three Phase Service: Any single phase service with transformer capacity greater than 50 KVA and all three phase services up to 1,000 kVA; upon election by any small commercial or public authority consumer for a minimum of 12 consecutive months; subject to the established rules and regulations. Criteria for Optional CP Generation Pricing To receive this option, the consumer shall be charged for the excess cost of special metering based upon the additional cost of said metering times the Cooperative's then effective fixed charge rate, or at the Cooperative's option, the CP Cost of Service Charge shall apply.

398

Data:2ad93708-7776-4aba-b57d-5be76a3c7f60 | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

ad93708-7776-4aba-b57d-5be76a3c7f60 ad93708-7776-4aba-b57d-5be76a3c7f60 No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Interstate Power and Light Co Effective date: 2011/04/11 End date if known: Rate name: General Service Usage - Three Phase Sector: Commercial Description: General Service Customers for all electric uses in one establishment adjacent to an electric distribution circuit of adequate capacity. Customers with usage greater than 20,000 kWh for 12 consecutive billing months shall be placed on the Large General Service rate for a minimum of one year. Source or reference: https://www.alliantenergy.com/wcm/groups/wcm_internet/@int/@tariff/documents/document/015422.pdf

399

Data:61d8b2b3-c39d-4004-8351-615bfb1f467f | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

b2b3-c39d-4004-8351-615bfb1f467f b2b3-c39d-4004-8351-615bfb1f467f No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Piedmont Electric Member Corp Effective date: 2012/05/01 End date if known: Rate name: SMALL QUALIFYING FACILITIES PURCHASED POWER Sector: Description: Availability: Available only to members located in the Cooperative's service territory which have qualifying facilities fueled by trash or methane derived from landfills, hog waste, or poultry waste, or other renewable generating facilities contracting to sell generating capacity and energy not in excess of 25 kW, which are interconnected directly with the Cooperative's system and which are qualifying facilities as defined by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission pursuant to Section 210 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978.

400

Data:05e5ec6a-e3c9-4a76-a83f-341cc82d4290 | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

ec6a-e3c9-4a76-a83f-341cc82d4290 ec6a-e3c9-4a76-a83f-341cc82d4290 No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Taylor County Rural E C C Effective date: 2013/01/01 End date if known: Rate name: Cogeneration and small power production power purchase rate schedule less than 100 kW - Non-Time Differentiated Rates Sector: Commercial Description: Available only to qualified cogeneration or small power production facilities with a design capacity of less than 100 kW which have executed a contract with Taylor County RECC and East Kentucky Power Cooperative for the purchase of electric power by East Kentucky Power Cooperative.

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


401

TABLE OF CONTENT A. CAMPUS SYSTEMS  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY A.3 UTILITIES & SERVICES A.4 ENERGY A.5 SOLAR INVENTORY B. FACILITIES & SPACE B.1

Brownstone, Rob

402

[working paper] Regional Economic Capacity, Economic Shocks,  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

1 [working paper] Regional Economic Capacity, Economic Shocks, and Economic that makes them more likely to resist economic shocks or to recover quickly from of resilience capacity developed by Foster (2012) is related to economic resilience

Sekhon, Jasjeet S.

403

Fair capacity sharing of multiple aperiodic servers  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

For handling multiple aperiodic tasks with different temporal requirements, multiple aperiodic servers are used. Since capacity is partitioned statically among the multiple servers, they suffer from heavy capacity exhaustions. Bernat and Burns...

Melapudi, Vinod Reddy

2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

404

1999 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey Detailed Tables  

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

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 Census Region for Sum of Major Fuels................................................................................................... 145 Table C6. Expenditures by Census Region for Sum of Major Fuels......................... 150 Table C7. Consumption and Gross Energy Intensity by Building Size for Sum of

405

T-583: Linux Kernel OSF Partition Table Buffer Overflow Lets...  

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

3: Linux Kernel OSF Partition Table Buffer Overflow Lets Local Users Obtain Information T-583: Linux Kernel OSF Partition Table Buffer Overflow Lets Local Users Obtain Information...

406

Table 4-3 Site Wide Environmental Management Matrix  

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

Table 4-3. Site-Wide Environmental Management Matrix National Renewable Energy Laboratory's South Table Mountain Complex FINAL POTENTIAL ISSUES PROGRAM OF IMPROVEMENTS Off- Site...

407

Microsoft Word - OPC Security WP 3 _Version 1-3c_.doc  

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

intrinsically secure intrinsically secure po box 178 #5 - 7217 Lantzville rd lantzville, bc canada v0r 2h0 office 250.390.1333 fax 250.390.3899 www.byressecurity.com Digital Bond suite 130 1580 sawgrass corp pkwy sunrise, FL 33323 office 954.315.4633 www.digitalbond.com OPC Security Whitepaper #3 Hardening Guidelines for OPC Hosts PREPARED BY: Digital Bond British Columbia Institute of Technology Byres Research November 13, 2007 OPC Security WP 3 (Version 1-3c).doc OPC Security Whitepaper #3 Hardening Guidelines for OPC Hosts OPC Security WP 3 (Version 1-3c).doc ii November 2007 Revision History Revision Date Authors Details 0.7 May 15, 2006 E. Byres, M Franz, Draft internal review version 1.0 May 31, 2006 E. Byres, J. Carter, M Franz Draft for controlled public review

408

Visible Photoluminescence from Cubic (3C) Silicon Carbide Microdisks Coupled to High Quality Whispering Gallery Modes  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

We present the design, fabrication and characterization of cubic (3C) silicon carbide microdisk resonators with high quality factor modes at visible and near infrared wavelengths (600 - 950 nm). Whispering gallery modes with quality factors as high as 2,300 and corresponding mode volumes V ~ 2 ({\\lambda}/n)^3 are measured using laser scanning confocal microscopy at room temperature. We obtain excellent correspondence between transverse-magnetic (TM) and transverse-electric (TE) polarized resonances simulated using Finite Difference Time Domain (FDTD) method and those observed in experiment. These structures based on ensembles of optically active impurities in 3C-SiC resonators could play an important role in diverse applications of nonlinear and quantum photonics, including low power optical switching and quantum memories.

Radulaski, Marina; Mller, Kai; Lagoudakis, Konstantinos G; Zhang, Jingyuan Linda; Buckley, Sonia; Kelaita, Yousif A; Alassaad, Kassem; Ferro, Gabriel; Vu?kovi?, Jelena

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

409

Visible Photoluminescence from Cubic (3C) Silicon Carbide Microdisks Coupled to High Quality Whispering Gallery Modes  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

We present the design, fabrication and characterization of cubic (3C) silicon carbide microdisk resonators with high quality factor modes at visible and near infrared wavelengths (600 - 950 nm). Whispering gallery modes with quality factors as high as 2,300 and corresponding mode volumes V ~ 2 ({\\lambda}/n)^3 are measured using laser scanning confocal microscopy at room temperature. We obtain excellent correspondence between transverse-magnetic (TM) and transverse-electric (TE) polarized resonances simulated using Finite Difference Time Domain (FDTD) method and those observed in experiment. These structures based on ensembles of optically active impurities in 3C-SiC resonators could play an important role in diverse applications of nonlinear and quantum photonics, including low power optical switching and quantum memories.

Marina Radulaski; Thomas M. Babinec; Kai Mller; Konstantinos G. Lagoudakis; Jingyuan Linda Zhang; Sonia Buckley; Yousif A. Kelaita; Kassem Alassaad; Gabriel Ferro; Jelena Vu?kovi?

2014-12-08T23:59:59.000Z

410

Chandra X-Ray Detection of the Radio Hotspots of 3C295  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

An observation of the radio galaxy 3C295 during the calibration phase of the Chandra X-ray Observatory reveals X-ray emission from the core of the galaxy, from each of the two prominent radio hotspots, and from the previously known cluster gas. We discuss the possible emission processes for the hotspots and argue that a synchrotron self-Compton model is preferred for most or all of the observed X-ray emission. SSC models with near equipartition fields thus explain the X-ray emission from the hotspots in the two highest surface brightness FRII radio galaxies, Cygnus A and 3C295. This lends weight to the assumption of equipartition and suggests that relativistic protons do not dominate the particle energy density.

D. E. Harris; P. E. J. Nulsen; T. P. Ponman; M. Bautz; R. A. Cameron; L. P. David; R. H. Donnelly; W. R. Forman; L. Grego; M. J. Hardcastle; J. P. Henry; C. Jones; J. P. Leahy; M. Markevitch; A. R. Martel; B. R. McNamara; P. Mazzotta; W. Tucker; S. N. Virani; J. Vrtilek

1999-11-19T23:59:59.000Z

411

Can Science and Technology Capacity be Measured?  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

The ability of a nation to participate in the global knowledge economy depends to some extent on its capacities in science and technology. In an effort to assess the capacity of different countries in science and technology, this article updates a classification scheme developed by RAND to measure science and technology capacity for 150 countries of the world.

Wagner, Caroline S; Dutta, Arindum

2015-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

412

Internal Markets for Supply Chain Capacity Allocation  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Internal Markets for Supply Chain Capacity Allocation David McAdams and Thomas W. Malone Sloan David McAdams & Thomas Malone #12;Internal Markets for Supply Chain Capacity Allocation David Mc ("internal markets") to help allocate manufacturing capacity and determine the prices, delivery dates

413

Photonic Crystal Cavities in Cubic (3C) Polytype Silicon Carbide Films  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

We present the design, fabrication, and characterization of high quality factor and small mode volume planar photonic crystal cavities from cubic (3C) thin films (thickness ~ 200 nm) of silicon carbide (SiC) grown epitaxially on a silicon substrate. We demonstrate cavity resonances across the telecommunications band, with wavelengths from 1,250 - 1,600 nm. Finally, we discuss possible applications in nonlinear optics, optical interconnects, and quantum information science.

Marina Radulaski; Thomas M. Babinec; Sonia Buckley; Armand Rundquist; J Provine; Kassem Alassaad; Gabriel Ferro; Jelena Vu?kovi?

2013-11-30T23:59:59.000Z

414

Microsoft Word - table_03.doc  

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

7 7 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:04:58 PM Table 3. Selected national average natural gas prices, 2008-2013 (dollars per thousand cubic feet, except where noted) Year and Month NGL Composite Spot Price a Natural Gas Spot Price b Citygate Price Delivered to Consumers Electric Power Price d Residential Commercial Industrial Price % of Total c Price % of Total c Price % of Total c 2008 Annual Average 15.20 8.86 9.18 13.89 97.5 12.23 79.7 9.65 20.4 9.26 2009 Annual Average 8.99 5.24 6.48 12.14 97.4 10.06 77.8 5.33 18.8 4.93 2010 Annual Average 11.83 4.37 6.18 11.39 97.4 9.47 77.5 5.49 18.0 5.27 2011 January 13.03 4.49 5.69 9.90 96.5 R 8.74 72.8 R 5.66 R 16.8 5.66 February 13.64 4.09 5.75 10.14 96.5 8.88 72.0 R 5.77 R 16.6

415

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 6. Natural gas processed, liquids extracted, and estimated extraction loss by state, 2011 Alabama 230,546 12,265 17,271 43,636 Alaska 2,721,396 18,314 21,554 82,255 Arkansas 5,611 212 268 883 California 180,648 9,831 12,095 39,909 Colorado 1,507,467 63,075 90,801 223,858 Illinois 15,727 705 1,043 2,409 Kansas 322,944 18,098 25,804 67,845 Kentucky 60,941 3,398 4,684 13,377 Louisiana 2,048,175 66,426 95,630 239,349 Michigan 21,518 2,132 2,465 7,875 Mississippi 126,859 7,732 11,221 28,404 Montana 11,185 927 1,252 3,744 New Mexico 795,069 61,857 90,291 223,829 North Dakota 112,206 10,199 14,182 41,156 Oklahoma 1,218,855 91,963 134,032 328,694 Pennsylvania 131,959 6,721 8,931 26,896 Tennessee 6,200

416

Microsoft Word - table_18.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 18. Natural Gas Delivered to Industrial Consumers for the Account of Others by State, 2001-2005 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 120,717 77.85 125,467 78.45 124,857 78.77 R 129,337 R 79.22 115,449 76.41 Alaska................................... 2,539 3.78 6,411 9.76 11,433 27.77 15,472 R 33.10 16,582 31.35 Arizona ................................. 11,380 53.61 10,089 58.81 9,174 60.05 9,290 44.85 9,569 56.37 Arkansas............................... 114,976 94.00 112,544 95.03 105,215 94.65 R 94,613 R 94.06 84,177 94.77 California .............................. 606,097 90.94 682,886 92.26 740,589 95.06 791,981 94.75 738,704 94.54 Colorado ............................... 136,704 99.27 128,709 98.75 111,291 99.07 111,316 99.23 125,618 99.41

417

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

3 3 Table 5. Number of producing gas wells by state and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2008-2012 Alabama 6,860 6,913 7,026 7,063 6,327 Alaska 261 261 269 277 185 Arizona 6 6 5 5 5 Arkansas 5,592 6,314 7,397 8,388 8,538 California 1,645 1,643 1,580 1,308 1,423 Colorado 25,716 27,021 28,813 30,101 32,000 Gulf of Mexico 1,527 1,984 1,852 1,559 1,474 Illinois 45 51 50 40 40 Indiana 525 563 620 914 819 Kansas 17,862 21,243 22,145 25,758 24,697 Kentucky 16,290 17,152 17,670 14,632 17,936 Louisiana 19,213 18,860 19,137 21,235 19,792 Maryland 7 7 7 8 9 Michigan 9,995 10,600 10,100 11,100 10,900 Mississippi 2,343 2,320 1,979 5,732 1,669 Missouri 0 0 0 53 100 Montana 7,095 7,031 6,059 6,477 6,240 Nebraska 322 285 276 322 270 Nevada 0 0 0 0 0 New Mexico 44,241 44,784

418

Microsoft Word - table_02.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 2. Natural gas production, transmission, and consumption, by state, 2011 (million cubic feet) Alabama 195,581 17,271 -53,277 480,317 0 7,282 0 598,068 Alaska 356,225 21,554 14,450 0 -16,398 0 0 332,723 Arizona 168 0 -17,607 348,820 -42,026 0 0 289,357 Arkansas 1,072,212 268 3,943 -791,878 0 212 0 283,797 California 250,177 12,095 72,353 1,954,947 -91,287 20,598 0 2,153,498 Colorado 1,637,576 90,801 -76,093 -1,005,837 0 3,128 4,268 465,985 Connecticut 0 0 1,253 228,585 0 129 0 229,710 Delaware 0 0 11,756 67,928 0 -31 0 79,716 District of Columbia 0 0 1,961 31,016 0 0 0 32,976 Florida 15,125 0 -5,102 1,208,317 0 0 0 1,218,340 Georgia 0 0 -10,315 459,390 75,641 2,542 701 522,874 Gulf of Mexico 1,812,328 0 -82 -1,711,029 0

419

Microsoft Word - table_26.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 26. Percent distribution of natural gas supply and disposition by state, 2011 Alabama 0.8 2.5 Alaska 1.5 1.4 Arizona < 1.2 Arkansas 4.7 1.2 California 1.0 8.8 Colorado 6.8 1.9 Connecticut -- 0.9 Delaware -- 0.3 District of Columbia -- 0.1 Florida 0.1 5.0 Georgia -- 2.1 Gulf of Mexico 7.9 0.4 Hawaii -- < Idaho -- 0.3 Illinois < 4.0 Indiana < 2.6 Iowa -- 1.3 Kansas 1.2 1.1 Kentucky 0.5 0.9 Louisiana 12.8 5.7 Maine -- 0.3 Maryland < 0.8 Massachusetts -- 1.8 Michigan 0.6 3.2 Minnesota -- 1.7 Mississippi 0.3 1.8 Missouri -- 1.1 Montana 0.3 0.3 Nebraska < 0.7 Nevada < 1.0 New Hampshire -- 0.3 New Jersey -- 2.7 New Mexico 5.0 1.0 New York 0.1

420

Microsoft Word - table_23.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 23. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Consumers by State and Sector, 2008 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 18.30 100.00 15.58 80.17 10.57 27.20 17.32 10.03 Alaska................................... 8.72 100.00 8.66 74.90 5.49 78.23 -- W Arizona ................................. 17.60 100.00 13.01 93.06 10.47 29.65 11.00 8.60 Arkansas............................... 14.09 100.00 11.32 64.49 10.56 3.87 -- 9.23 California .............................. 12.75 99.31 11.75 56.69 10.80 4.85 11.32 8.23 Colorado ............................... 9.77 100.00 9.01 95.24 8.76 0.56 13.57 7.02 Connecticut........................... 17.85 97.75 13.81 70.71 12.63 47.28 24.04 10.48 Delaware .............................. 16.07 100.00 14.24

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


421

Microsoft Word - table_18.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 18. Natural Gas Delivered to Industrial Consumers for the Account of Others by State, 2004-2008 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 129,337 79.22 115,449 76.41 114,699 76.48 R 114,325 R 75.97 103,662 72.80 Alaska................................... 15,472 33.10 16,582 31.35 11,619 36.94 5,934 30.04 1,304 21.77 Arizona ................................. 9,290 44.85 9,569 56.37 11,457 62.11 13,292 68.67 14,200 70.35 Arkansas............................... 94,613 94.06 84,177 94.77 83,347 95.22 82,213 95.85 81,841 96.13 California .............................. 791,981 94.75 738,704 94.54 690,491 94.32 699,283 94.69 726,927 95.15 Colorado ............................... 111,316 99.23 125,618 99.41 110,565 99.38 116,699 99.55 119,032 99.44 Connecticut...........................

422

Microsoft Word - table_11.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 11. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Exports By Point of Exit, 2005-2009 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet, Prices in Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Pipeline (Canada) Calais, ME .......................... 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 2,131 5.62 Detroit, MI ........................... 40,255 8.12 22,156 7.61 22,904 6.88 27,220 8.37 43,980 4.01 Eastport, ID......................... 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 252 7.43 113 4.49 Marysville, MI...................... 5,222 7.92 3,483 7.36 9,158 7.77 8,756 7.48 14,925 4.85 Sault Ste. Marie, MI ............ 5,537 8.13 5,070 8.11 4,389 7.13 3,122 8.75 2,044 5.04 St. Clair, MI ......................... 286,804 7.77 286,582 7.39 418,765 7.24 R 492,235 R 8.96 612,369 4.62 Noyes, MN .......................... 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Babb, MT ............................

423

Microsoft Word - table_22.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 22. Average City Gate Price of Natural Gas in the United States, 2003-2007 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 6.06 6.65 8.47 10.26 8.78 Alaska................................... 2.33 3.05 3.74 5.25 6.75 Arizona ................................. 4.87 5.63 7.32 7.67 8.25 Arkansas............................... 6.07 7.12 8.83 7.96 8.55 California .............................. 5.16 6.04 7.88 6.76 6.82 Colorado ............................... 4.11 5.02 6.10 7.61 6.23 Connecticut........................... 5.59 7.56 9.74 9.11 8.67 Delaware .............................. 5.88 6.13 8.32 8.84 7.58 Florida................................... 5.87 6.60 9.30 8.32 7.97 Georgia................................. 6.25 6.81 9.85 9.37 8.15

424

Microsoft Word - table_18.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 18. Natural Gas Delivered to Industrial Consumers for the Account of Others by State, 2005-2009 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 115,449 76.4 114,699 76.5 114,325 76.0 103,662 72.8 94,597 72.1 Alaska................................... 16,582 31.4 11,619 36.9 5,934 30.0 1,304 21.8 1,827 27.5 Arizona ................................. 9,569 56.4 11,457 62.1 13,292 68.7 14,200 70.4 12,730 70.9 Arkansas............................... 84,177 94.8 83,347 95.2 82,213 95.8 81,841 96.1 74,752 96.4 California .............................. 738,704 94.5 690,491 94.3 699,283 94.7 R 683,512 R 94.9 673,034 95.3 Colorado ............................... 125,618 99.4 110,565 99.4 116,699 99.5 119,032 99.4 112,995 99.5 Connecticut...........................

425

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 4. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2002-2006 (Million Cubic Feet) 2002 Total ................ 485,126 211,778 696,905 3,722,249 893,193 4,615,443 5,312,348 Alabama.................. 202,002 0 202,002 NA NA NA 202,002 Alaska..................... 102,972 190,608 293,580 0 0 0 293,580 California................. 0 7,068 7,068 3,080 64,735 67,816 74,884 Gulf of Mexico......... 0 0 0 3,719,169 828,458 4,547,627 4,547,627 Louisiana ................ 125,481 11,711 137,192 NA NA NA 137,192 Texas...................... 54,672 2,391 57,063 NA NA NA 57,063 2003 Total ................ 456,090 254,150 710,240 3,565,614 939,828 4,505,443 5,215,683 Alabama.................. 194,339 0 194,339 NA NA NA 194,339 Alaska..................... 85,606 236,404 322,010

426

Microsoft Word - table_11.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 11. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Exports By Point of Exit, 2004-2008 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet, Prices in Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Pipeline (Canada) Eastport, ID......................... 48 5.36 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 252 7.43 Detroit, MI ........................... 40,030 6.47 40,255 8.12 22,156 7.61 22,904 6.88 27,220 8.37 Marysville, MI...................... 4,455 6.83 5,222 7.92 3,483 7.36 9,158 7.77 8,756 7.48 Sault Ste. Marie, MI ............ 6,666 6.38 5,537 8.13 5,070 8.11 4,389 7.13 3,122 8.75 St. Clair, MI ......................... 317,797 6.56 286,804 7.77 286,582 7.39 418,765 7.24 524,065 8.98 Noyes, MN .......................... 2,193 5.77 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Babb, MT ............................ 1,429 4.98 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Havre, MT ...........................

427

Microsoft Word - table_22.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 22. Average City Gate Price of Natural Gas in the United States, 2004-2008 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 6.65 8.47 10.26 8.78 9.84 Alaska................................... 3.05 3.74 5.25 6.75 6.74 Arizona ................................. 5.63 7.32 7.67 8.25 8.49 Arkansas............................... 7.12 8.83 7.96 8.55 8.88 California .............................. 6.04 7.88 6.76 6.82 8.11 Colorado ............................... 5.02 6.10 7.61 6.23 6.98 Connecticut........................... 7.56 9.74 9.11 8.67 10.24 Delaware .............................. 6.13 8.32 8.84 7.58 8.32 Florida................................... 6.60 9.30 8.32 7.97 9.73 Georgia................................. 6.81 9.85 9.37 8.15 9.35

428

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 8. Summary of U.S. natural gas imports, 2007-2011 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a 3,782,708 3,589,089 3,271,107 3,279,752 3,117,081 Mexico 54,062 43,314 28,296 29,995 2,672 Total Pipeline Imports 3,836,770 3,632,403 3,299,402 3,309,747 3,119,753 LNG Algeria 77,299 0 0 0 0 Egypt 114,580 54,839 160,435 72,990 35,120 Equatorial Guinea 17,795 0 0 0 0 Nigeria 95,028 12,049 13,306 41,733 2,362 Norway 0 14,882 29,327 26,014 15,175 Peru 0 0 0 16,045 16,620 Qatar 18,352 3,108 12,687 45,583 90,972 Trinidad/Tobago 447,758 266,821 236,202 189,748 128,620 Yemen 0 0 0 38,897 60,071 Total LNG Imports 770,812 351,698

429

Microsoft Word - table_23.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 23. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Consumers by State and Sector, 2007 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 18.13 100.00 15.07 79.82 8.70 24.02 -- 7.19 Alaska................................... 8.68 100.00 7.57 76.01 4.67 69.96 -- 3.58 Arizona ................................. 17.21 100.00 12.84 93.36 10.49 31.33 9.40 6.84 Arkansas............................... 13.08 100.00 10.07 70.38 9.51 4.15 8.39 7.04 California .............................. 11.57 99.50 10.20 60.63 9.07 5.31 7.71 6.72 Colorado ............................... 8.84 100.00 8.10 95.70 7.21 0.45 8.72 4.35 Connecticut........................... 16.39 98.20 12.61 71.49 10.54 50.04 20.57 7.81 Delaware .............................. 16.21 100.00 14.48

430

Microsoft Word - table_13.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 13. Additions to and Withdrawals from Gas Storage by State, 2005 (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ................... 15,572 15,356 216 493 606 -114 103 Alaska....................... 0 0 0 738 738 0 0 Arkansas................... 4,394 4,707 -313 72 51 20 -293 California .................. 190,055 179,359 10,696 82 50 31 10,727 Colorado ................... 38,588 39,442 -854 0 0 0 -854 Connecticut............... 0 0 0 1,383 682 701 701 Delaware .................. 0 0 0 138 145 -7 -7 Georgia..................... 0 0 0 4,179 2,660 1,520 1,520 Idaho......................... 0 0 0 46 189 -143 -143 Illinois........................ 260,515 259,288 1,226 3 405 -402 824 Indiana...................... 21,405 22,827 -1,422 831 1,066 -236 -1,658 Iowa .......................... 66,827 70,206 -3,379 2,626 2,845 -219

431

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 4. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2005-2009 (Million Cubic Feet) 2005 Total ................ 363,652 321,019 684,671 2,474,076 730,830 3,204,906 3,889,577 Alabama.................. 152,902 0 152,902 NA NA NA 152,902 Alaska..................... 74,928 305,641 380,568 0 0 0 380,568 California................. 0 6,685 6,685 684 53,404 54,088 60,773 Gulf of Mexico......... 0 0 0 2,473,392 677,426 3,150,818 3,150,818 Louisiana ................ 99,290 8,294 107,584 NA NA NA 107,584 Texas...................... 36,532 400 36,932 NA NA NA 36,932 2006 Total ................ 321,261 308,391 629,652 2,272,669 681,869 2,954,538 3,584,190 Alabama.................. 145,762 0 145,762 NA NA NA 145,762 Alaska..................... 62,156 292,660 354,816

432

Microsoft Word - table_20.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 20. Number of natural gas residential consumers by type of service and state, 2011-2012 Alabama R 772,892 0 R 772,892 767,412 0 767,412 Alaska 121,736 0 121,736 122,983 0 122,983 Arizona 1,146,280 6 1,146,286 1,157,682 6 1,157,688 Arkansas 551,795 0 551,795 549,959 0 549,959 California R 10,545,585 R 79,605 10,625,190 10,547,706 134,210 10,681,916 Colorado 1,645,711 5 1,645,716 1,659,803 5 1,659,808 Connecticut 494,065 905 494,970 503,241 897 504,138 Delaware 152,005 0 152,005 153,307 0 153,307 District of Columbia 130,888 14,636 145,524 129,674 16,264 145,938 Florida 664,564 R 14,635 R 679,199 672,160 14,861 687,021 Georgia 321,515 1,418,491 1,740,006 319,179 1,420,364 1,739,543 Hawaii 25,305 0 25,305

433

Microsoft Word - table_11.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 11. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Exports By Point of Exit, 2003-2007 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet, Prices in Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Pipeline (Canada) Eastport, ID......................... 15 4.34 48 5.36 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Detroit, MI ........................... 19,737 5.47 40,030 6.47 40,255 8.12 22,156 7.61 22,904 6.88 Marysville, MI...................... 811 5.06 4,455 6.83 5,222 7.92 3,483 7.36 9,158 7.77 Sault Ste. Marie, MI ............ 605 4.94 6,666 6.38 5,537 8.13 5,070 8.11 4,389 7.13 St. Clair, MI ......................... 238,444 6.13 317,797 6.56 286,804 7.77 286,582 7.39 418,765 7.24 Noyes, MN .......................... 172 5.43 2,193 5.77 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Babb, MT ............................ 38 6.48 1,429 4.98 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Havre, MT ...........................

434

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 4. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2006-2010 (Million Cubic Feet) 2006 Total ................ 321,261 308,391 629,652 2,272,669 681,869 2,954,538 3,584,190 Alabama.................. 145,762 0 145,762 NA NA NA 145,762 Alaska..................... 62,156 292,660 354,816 0 0 0 354,816 California................. 156 6,654 6,809 2,094 38,313 40,407 47,217 Gulf of Mexico......... 0 0 0 2,270,575 643,556 2,914,131 2,914,131 Louisiana ................ 88,657 8,822 97,479 NA NA NA 97,479 Texas...................... 24,529 255 24,785 NA NA NA 24,785 2007 Total ................ 276,117 341,925 618,042 2,204,379 654,334 2,858,713 3,476,755 Alabama.................. 134,451 0 134,451 NA NA NA 134,451 Alaska..................... 48,876 325,328 374,204

435

Microsoft Word - table_03.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 3. Gross withdrawals and marketed production of natural gas by state and the Gulf of Mexico, 2008-2012 (million cubic feet) 2008 Total 15,134,644 5,609,425 2,022,228 2,869,960 25,636,257 3,638,622 166,909 718,674 21,112,053 953,451 20,158,602 2009 Total 14,414,287 5,674,120 2,010,171 3,958,315 26,056,893 3,522,090 165,360 721,507 21,647,936 1,024,082 20,623,854 2010 Total 13,247,498 5,834,703 1,916,762 5,817,122 26,816,085 3,431,587 165,928 836,698 22,381,873 1,066,366 21,315,507 2011 Total 12,291,070 5,907,919 1,779,055 8,500,983 28,479,026 3,365,313 209,439 867,922 24,036,352 1,134,473 22,901,879 2012 Total 12,736,678 4,969,668 1,539,395 10,296,572 29,542,313 3,259,680 212,848 761,836 25,307,949 1,250,340 24,057,609

436

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Created on: 1/7/2014 9:25:31 AM Table 7. Marketed production of natural gas in selected states and the Federal Gulf of Mexico, 2008-2013 (million cubic feet) Year and Month Alaska Louisiana New Mexico Oklahoma Texas Wyoming Other a States Federal Gulf of Mexico U.S. Total 2008 Total 398,442 1,377,969 1,446,204 1,886,710 6,960,693 2,274,850 4,452,843 2,314,342 21,112,053 2009 Total 397,077 1,548,607 1,383,004 1,901,556 6,818,973 2,335,328 4,834,474 2,428,916 21,647,936 2010 Total 374,226 2,210,099 1,292,185 1,827,328 6,715,294 2,305,525 5,412,154 2,245,062 22,381,873 2011 January 31,027 224,410 100,352 154,940 588,714 178,331 496,362 178,597 1,952,732 February 31,076 208,495 88,553

437

Microsoft Word - table_03.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 3. Gross Withdrawals and Marketed Production of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2004-2008 (Million Cubic Feet) 2004 Total ............. 17,885,247 6,084,431 NA 23,969,678 3,701,656 96,408 654,124 19,517,491 926,600 18,590,891 2005 Total ............. 17,471,847 5,984,975 NA 23,456,822 3,699,535 119,097 711,095 18,927,095 876,497 18,050,598 2006 Total ............. 17,995,554 5,539,464 NA 23,535,018 3,264,929 129,469 730,946 19,409,674 906,069 18,503,605 2007 Total ............. 17,065,375 R 5,818,405 1,779,875 R 24,663,656 R 3,662,685 R 143,457 R 661,168 R 20,196,346 930,320 R 19,266,026 2008 Total ............. 18,011,151 5,844,798 1,898,399 25,754,348 3,638,563 166,588 709,681 21,239,516 953,451 20,286,065 Alabama Total ...... 159,912 6,368 111,273 277,553 475 1,801 17,394

438

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 4. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2004-2008 (Million Cubic Feet) 2004 Total ................ 401,662 279,249 680,911 3,214,488 840,852 4,055,340 4,736,252 Alabama.................. 165,630 0 165,630 NA NA NA 165,630 Alaska..................... 73,457 260,667 334,125 0 0 0 334,125 California................. 0 6,966 6,966 850 53,805 54,655 61,622 Gulf of Mexico......... 0 0 0 3,213,638 787,047 4,000,685 4,000,685 Louisiana ................ 117,946 11,299 129,245 NA NA NA 129,245 Texas...................... 44,630 316 44,946 NA NA NA 44,946 2005 Total ................ 363,652 321,019 684,671 2,474,076 730,830 3,204,906 3,889,577 Alabama.................. 152,902 0 152,902 NA NA NA 152,902 Alaska..................... 74,928 305,641 380,568

439

Microsoft Word - table_02.doc  

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

5 5 Created on: 12/12/2013 1:57:32 PM Table 2. Natural gas consumption in the United States, 2008-2013 (billion cubic feet) Delivered to Consumers Year and Month Lease and Plant Fuel a Pipeline and Distribution Use b Residential Commercial Industrial Electric Power Vehicle Fuel Total Total Consumption 2008 Total 1,220 648 4,892 3,153 6,670 6,668 26 21,409 23,277 2009 Total 1,275 670 4,779 3,119 6,167 6,873 27 20,965 22,910 2010 Total 1,286 674 4,782 3,103 6,826 7,387 29 22,127 24,087 2011 January 107 R 83 970 528 R 659 540 3 R 2,699 R 2,889 February 97 70 R 768 432 R 600 484 2 R 2,285 R 2,452 March 111 63 R 595 R 361 R 616 482 3 R 2,056 R 2,230 April 109 51 R 341 R 232 R 569 521 R 2 R 1,665 R 1,825 May 112 46 R 205 R 166 R

440

Microsoft Word - table_13.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 13. Additions to and Withdrawals from Gas Storage by State, 2006 (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ................... 20,604 12,127 8,477 704 698 7 8,484 Arkansas................... 4,789 4,081 707 45 57 -12 695 California .................. 168,957 182,247 -13,290 92 76 16 -13,274 Colorado ................... 35,836 38,506 -2,670 0 0 0 -2,670 Connecticut............... 0 0 0 532 246 286 286 Delaware .................. 0 0 0 68 68 * * Georgia..................... 0 0 0 7,705 1,963 5,742 5,742 Idaho......................... 0 0 0 415 275 140 140 Illinois........................ 242,754 235,590 7,163 238 358 -119 7,044 Indiana...................... 23,598 20,707 2,891 1,447 1,172 275 3,165 Iowa .......................... 68,750 65,187 3,563 2,438 1,540 899 4,462 Kansas...................... 103,105 99,698 3,407

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


441

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 4. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2001-2005 (Million Cubic Feet) 2001 Total ................ 508,374 170,206 678,580 4,146,993 989,969 5,136,962 5,815,542 Alabama.................. 200,862 0 200,862 NA NA NA 200,862 Alaska..................... 113,870 149,067 262,937 0 0 0 262,937 California................. 0 7,262 7,262 3,913 67,034 70,947 78,209 Gulf of Mexico......... 0 0 0 4,143,080 922,935 5,066,015 5,066,015 Louisiana ................ 140,358 13,513 153,871 NA NA NA 153,871 Texas...................... 53,285 364 53,649 NA NA NA 53,649 2002 Total ................ 485,126 211,778 696,905 3,722,249 893,193 4,615,443 5,312,348 Alabama.................. 202,002 0 202,002 NA NA NA 202,002 Alaska..................... 102,972 190,608 293,580

442

Microsoft Word - table_25.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 25. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Residential and Commercial Sector Consumers by Local Distribution and Marketers in Selected States, 2009-2010 (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Florida................................... 20.22 R 18.41 20.18 97.7 17.85 19.44 17.89 97.9 Georgia................................. 13.20 16.81 16.30 14.1 12.18 15.67 15.17 14.3 Maryland ............................... 13.09 R 16.80 13.73 82.8 12.20 13.51 12.44 81.7 New Jersey ........................... 14.49 R 16.52 14.54 97.7 12.77 14.87 12.84 96.6 New York .............................. 14.96 R 15.38 15.05 77.1 13.87 14.55 14.04 74.6 Ohio ...................................... 11.64 13.64 12.68 47.8 10.28 11.80 11.13 43.7 Pennsylvania ........................ 14.56 R 16.46 14.74 90.9

443

Microsoft Word - table_22.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

3 3 Table 22. Average City Gate Price of Natural Gas in the United States, 2002-2006 (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 4.74 6.06 6.65 8.47 10.26 Alaska................................... 2.36 2.33 3.05 3.74 5.25 Arizona ................................. 3.77 4.87 5.63 7.32 7.67 Arkansas............................... 5.17 6.07 7.12 8.83 7.96 California .............................. 3.20 5.16 6.04 7.88 6.76 Colorado ............................... 2.72 4.11 5.02 6.10 7.61 Connecticut........................... 6.42 5.59 7.56 R 9.74 9.11 Delaware .............................. 5.37 5.88 6.13 8.32 8.84 Florida................................... 3.90 5.87 6.60 9.30 8.32 Georgia................................. 4.55 6.25 6.81 9.85 9.37 Hawaii...................................

444

Microsoft Word - table_20.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 20. Number of Natural Gas Residential Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2009-2010 Alabama ...................... R 785,005 0 R 785,005 768,921 0 768,921 Alaska.......................... 120,124 0 120,124 121,166 0 121,166 Arizona ........................ 1,130,047 0 1,130,047 1,138,448 0 1,138,448 Arkansas...................... 557,355 0 557,355 549,970 0 549,970 California ..................... R 10,454,747 R 56,203 R 10,510,950 10,469,734 72,850 10,542,584 Colorado ...................... 1,622,429 5 1,622,434 1,634,582 5 1,634,587 Connecticut.................. 488,614 735 489,349 489,380 805 490,185 Delaware ..................... 149,006 0 149,006 150,458 0 150,458 District of Columbia...... 129,738 13,698 143,436 130,048 14,103 144,151 Florida.......................... 659,725 14,365

445

Microsoft Word - table_20.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 20. Number of Natural Gas Commercial Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2008-2009 Alabama ...................... R 65,193 120 R 65,313 67,468 128 67,596 Alaska.......................... 12,267 497 12,764 12,854 363 13,217 Arizona ........................ 57,481 105 57,586 57,022 169 57,191 Arkansas...................... 68,943 201 69,144 68,794 249 69,043 California ..................... 417,531 29,629 447,160 406,270 35,225 441,495 Colorado ...................... 144,543 176 144,719 145,455 169 145,624 Connecticut.................. 50,023 3,880 53,903 50,106 4,404 54,510 Delaware ..................... 12,619 84 12,703 12,726 113 12,839 District of Columbia...... 6,838 3,186 10,024 6,706 3,582 10,288 Florida.......................... 41,164 16,961 58,125 41,748 17,801 59,549

446

Microsoft Word - table_23.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 23. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Consumers by State and Sector, 2009 (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 18.12 100.0 14.93 78.7 6.48 27.9 19.17 4.30 Alaska................................... 10.23 100.0 9.51 85.3 4.02 72.5 -- W Arizona ................................. 17.65 100.0 12.15 88.0 8.19 29.1 14.96 4.16 Arkansas............................... 13.39 100.0 10.71 59.4 8.47 3.6 -- 4.14 California .............................. 9.43 98.9 7.75 54.9 6.57 4.7 7.61 4.44 Colorado ............................... 8.80 100.0 7.56 94.8 6.57 0.5 9.12 4.27 Connecticut........................... 14.81 97.5 9.92 69.0 8.44 37.5 15.26 4.89 Delaware .............................. 17.79 100.0 15.87 53.5 13.99 2.1 14.12 W District of Columbia...............

447

Microsoft Word - table_13.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 13. Additions to and Withdrawals from Gas Storage by State, 2010 (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ................... 23,026 16,740 6,286 946 968 -21 6,264 Arkansas................... 4,672 4,368 304 42 40 2 306 California .................. 226,810 203,653 23,157 56 54 2 23,159 Colorado ................... 43,250 45,010 -1,760 0 0 0 -1,760 Connecticut............... 0 0 0 651 473 178 178 Delaware .................. 0 0 0 73 76 -2 -2 Georgia..................... 0 0 0 2,693 2,314 379 379 Idaho......................... 0 0 0 142 72 70 70 Illinois........................ 247,458 245,135 2,323 398 325 74 2,397 Indiana...................... 21,943 22,454 -511 1,983 1,148 835 324 Iowa .......................... 76,407 78,444 -2,037 1,458 1,312 146 -1,891 Kansas...................... 113,253 121,737 -8,484

448

Microsoft Word - table_24.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 24. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Residential and Commercial Sector Consumers by Local Distribution and Marketers in Selected States, 2006-2007 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Florida................................... 21.48 24.62 21.54 97.95 20.55 23.23 20.61 97.79 Georgia................................. 15.84 18.81 R 18.37 14.70 14.64 18.02 17.53 14.35 Maryland ............................... 16.14 17.41 16.36 82.27 14.95 16.26 15.17 83.26 New Jersey ........................... 14.87 17.69 R 14.91 98.66 14.45 16.50 14.48 98.35 New York .............................. 15.09 16.99 15.35 86.06 15.50 15.46 15.49 84.07 Ohio ...................................... 14.41 14.36 14.39 58.77 13.05 13.95 13.47 53.01 Pennsylvania ........................ 16.48 16.06 16.45

449

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2 2 Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas, 2001-2005, and by State, 2005 2001 Total ............................ 19,577,660 -- 4.00 20,570,295 82,202,805 2002 Total ............................ 14,467,289 -- 2.95 19,884,780 58,596,868 2003 Total ............................ 14,589,545 -- 4.88 19,974,360 97,555,375 2004 Total ............................ 15,223,749 -- 5.46 R 19,517,491 R 106,521,974 2005 Total ............................ 15,525,771 -- 7.33 18,950,734 138,987,902 Alabama ............................... 285,237 2,645,780 9.28 296,528 2,750,513 Alaska................................... 502,887 2,387,581 4.75 487,282 2,313,492 Arizona ................................. 211 1,445 6.86 233 1,599 Arkansas............................... 190,533 1,383,193 7.26

450

Microsoft Word - table_24.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 24. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Residential and Commercial Sector Consumers by Local Distribution and Marketers in Selected States, 2007-2008 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Florida................................... 20.55 23.23 20.61 97.79 21.11 25.00 21.19 97.78 Georgia................................. 14.64 18.02 17.53 14.35 15.46 18.73 18.26 14.43 Maryland ............................... 14.95 16.26 15.17 83.26 15.98 16.54 16.08 83.15 New Jersey ........................... 14.45 16.50 14.48 98.35 15.15 18.07 15.21 97.98 New York .............................. R 15.79 15.46 R 15.73 R 82.34 16.79 16.57 16.75 80.64 Ohio ...................................... 13.05 13.95 13.47 53.01 14.60 14.45 14.52 52.47 Pennsylvania ........................

451

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

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

5 5 Table 8. Summary of U.S. natural gas imports, 2008-2012 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a 3,589,089 3,271,107 3,279,752 3,117,081 2,962,827 Mexico 43,314 28,296 29,995 2,672 314 Total Pipeline Imports 3,632,403 3,299,402 3,309,747 3,119,753 2,963,140 LNG by Vessel Egypt 54,839 160,435 72,990 35,120 2,811 Nigeria 12,049 13,306 41,733 2,362 0 Norway 14,882 29,327 26,014 15,175 6,212 Peru 0 0 16,045 16,620 0 Qatar 3,108 12,687 45,583 90,972 33,823 Trinidad/Tobago 266,821 236,202 189,748 128,620 112,207 Yemen 0 0 38,897 60,071 19,595 Total LNG Imports 351,698 451,957 431,010 348,939 174,649 Total Imports 3,984,101 3,751,360

452

Microsoft Word - table_19.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 19. Number of Natural Gas Residential Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2004-2005 Alabama ...................... R 806,660 R 0 R 806,660 799,256 0 799,256 Alaska.......................... 104,360 0 104,360 108,401 0 108,401 Arizona ........................ 993,885 0 993,885 1,042,662 0 1,042,662 Arkansas...................... R 554,844 0 R 554,844 555,861 0 555,861 California ..................... 9,921,331 R 36,081 R 9,957,412 10,092,466 31,967 10,124,433 Colorado ...................... R 1,496,873 3 R 1,496,876 1,524,810 3 1,524,813 Connecticut.................. 468,918 414 469,332 474,807 414 475,221 District of Columbia...... 120,709 17,425 138,134 127,139 13,873 141,012 Delaware ..................... 133,197 0 133,197 137,115 0 137,115 Florida.......................... R 628,104 10,910

453

Microsoft Word - table_20.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 20. Number of Natural Gas Commercial Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2006-2007 Alabama ...................... R 66,222 115 R 66,337 65,738 118 65,856 Alaska.......................... 12,858 1,526 14,384 12,491 917 13,408 Arizona ........................ 56,955 136 57,091 57,047 122 57,169 Arkansas...................... 69,318 157 69,475 69,319 176 69,495 California ..................... 426,379 15,673 442,052 421,449 24,671 446,120 Colorado ...................... 139,566 180 139,746 141,201 219 141,420 Connecticut.................. 49,056 3,926 52,982 48,522 3,867 52,389 Delaware ..................... 12,288 57 12,345 12,507 69 12,576 District of Columbia...... 7,004 3,406 10,410 6,867 3,048 9,915 Florida.......................... 41,190 14,069 55,259 41,325 15,995 57,320

454

Microsoft Word - table_11.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 11. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Exports By Point of Exit, 2001-2005 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet, Prices in Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Pipeline (Canada) Eastport, ID......................... 0 -- 176 4.40 15 4.34 48 5.36 0 -- Detroit, MI ........................... 35,644 4.57 7,431 3.03 19,737 5.47 40,030 6.47 40,255 8.12 Marysville, MI...................... 3,651 3.92 0 -- 811 5.06 4,455 6.83 5,222 7.92 Sault Ste. Marie, MI ............ 0 -- 0 -- 605 4.94 6,666 6.38 5,537 8.13 St. Clair, MI ......................... 122,293 3.82 164,084 3.42 238,444 6.13 317,797 6.56 286,804 7.77 Noyes, MN .......................... 0 -- 71 1.99 172 5.43 2,193 5.77 0 -- Babb, MT ............................ 549 3.55 143 2.28 38 6.48 1,429 4.98 0 -- Havre, MT ...........................

455

Microsoft Word - table_23.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 23. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Consumers by State and Sector, 2005 (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 15.82 100.00 13.13 81.65 9.51 23.59 -- 9.67 Alaska................................... 5.73 100.00 4.93 51.19 2.59 68.65 -- 3.42 Arizona ................................. 13.54 100.00 9.85 93.29 8.53 43.63 7.91 8.24 Arkansas............................... 13.65 100.00 10.20 74.07 9.44 5.23 10.16 8.59 California .............................. 11.86 99.66 10.69 68.67 9.84 5.46 8.80 8.09 Colorado ............................... 10.29 99.99 9.39 95.15 8.68 0.59 8.17 7.41 Connecticut........................... 16.24 98.75 13.00 70.34 11.68 46.41 14.60 9.31 District of Columbia............... 16.87 79.76 13.17 100.00 --

456

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2 2 Table 4. Offshore gross withdrawals of natural gas by state and the Gulf of Mexico, 2007-2011 (million cubic feet) 2007 Total 276,117 341,925 618,042 2,204,379 654,334 2,858,713 3,476,755 Alabama 134,451 0 134,451 NA NA NA 134,451 Alaska 48,876 325,328 374,204 0 0 0 374,204 California 312 6,977 7,289 2,137 43,379 45,516 52,805 Gulf of Mexico 0 0 0 2,202,242 610,955 2,813,197 2,813,197 Louisiana 63,357 9,512 72,868 NA NA NA 72,868 Texas 29,121 108 29,229 NA NA NA 29,229 2008 Total 297,565 356,139 653,704 1,849,891 524,965 2,374,857 3,028,561 Alabama 125,502 0 125,502 NA NA NA 125,502 Alaska 43,079 345,109 388,188 0 0 0 388,188 California 266 6,764 7,029 1,601 43,300 44,902

457

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 4. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2003-2007 (Million Cubic Feet) 2003 Total ................ 456,090 254,150 710,240 3,565,614 939,828 4,505,443 5,215,683 Alabama.................. 194,339 0 194,339 NA NA NA 194,339 Alaska..................... 85,606 236,404 322,010 0 0 0 322,010 California................. 0 6,866 6,866 1,731 56,363 58,095 64,961 Gulf of Mexico......... 0 0 0 3,563,883 883,465 4,447,348 4,447,348 Louisiana ................ 123,939 9,517 133,456 NA NA NA 133,456 Texas...................... 52,206 1,363 53,569 NA NA NA 53,569 2004 Total ................ 401,662 279,249 680,911 3,214,488 840,852 4,055,340 4,736,252 Alabama.................. 165,630 0 165,630 NA NA NA 165,630 Alaska..................... 73,457 260,667 334,125

458

Microsoft Word - table_25.doc  

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

8 8 Table 25. Average price of natural gas delivered to residential and commercial sector consumers by local distribution and marketers in selected states, 2011-2012 (dollars per thousand cubic feet) Georgia 11.98 16.38 15.72 15.1 12.47 16.82 16.23 13.5 New York 13.52 14.22 13.71 72.4 12.72 13.59 12.97 71.2 Ohio 10.32 11.09 10.78 40.8 8.75 10.42 9.91 30.9 Residential 2011 2012 State Local Distribution Company Average Price a Marketer Average Price b Combined Average Price c Percent Sold by Local Distribution Company Local Distribution Company Average Price a Marketer Average Price b Combined Average Price c Percent Sold by Local Distribution Company a Price derived from Form EIA-176, "Annual Report of Natural and Supplemental Gas Supply and Disposition."

459

Spectral Evolution of The Parsec-Scale Jet in The Quasar 3C345  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

The long-term evolution of the synchrotron emission from the parsec-scale jet in the quasar 3C345 is analysed, on the basis of multi-frequency monitoring with very long baseline interferometry (VLBI) and covering the period 1979-1994. We combine the model fits from 44 VLBI observations of 3C345 made at 8 different frequencies between 2.3 and 100GHz. We calculate the turnover frequency, turnover flux density, integrated 4-25GHz flux and 4-25GHz luminosity of the core and the moving features. The core has an estimated mean luminosity of 7.1+/-3.5 * 10^42 erg/s; the estimated total luminosity of 3C345 on parsec scales is ~3*10^43 erg/s (about 1% of the observed luminosity of the source between the radio to infrared regimes). The spectral changes in the core can be reconciled with a shock or dense plasma condensation traveling through the region where the jet becomes optically thin. We are able to describe the evolution of the core spectrum by a sequence of 5 flare-like events characterized by an exponential rise and decay of the particle number density of the material injected into the jet. The same model is also capable of predicting the changes in the flux density observed in the core. The flares occur approximately every 3.5-4 years, roughly correlating with appearances of new moving features in the jet.

A. P. Lobanov; J. A. Zensus

1999-03-22T23:59:59.000Z

460

Data:E6b7653a-5e32-4b37-a6f8-3c76c58dad98 | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

53a-5e32-4b37-a6f8-3c76c58dad98 53a-5e32-4b37-a6f8-3c76c58dad98 No revision has been approved for this page. It is currently under review by our subject matter experts. Jump to: navigation, search Loading... 1. Basic Information 2. Demand 3. Energy << Previous 1 2 3 Next >> Basic Information Utility name: Atlantic City Electric Co Effective date: 2012/11/01 End date if known: Rate name: MGS Primary CIEP<500kw Single Phase Sector: Commercial Description: Available at any point of Company's system where facilities of adequate character and capacity exist for the entire electric service requirements of any customer delivered at one point and metered at or compensated to the voltage of delivery. This schedule is not available to residential customers. This is a bundled service

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


461

EIA - Reference Case Projection Tables 1990-2030  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Tables (1990-2030) Tables (1990-2030) International Energy Outlook 2006 Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030) Formats Data Table Titles (1 to 14 complete) Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A1 World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region, Reference Case Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A2 World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel, Reference Case Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

462

DOE Transmission Capacity Report | Department of Energy  

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

Transmission Capacity Report Transmission Capacity Report DOE Transmission Capacity Report DOE Transmission Capacity Report: Transmission lines, substations, circuit breakers, capacitors, and other equipment provide more than just a highway to deliver energy and power from generating units to distribution systems. Transmission systems both complement and substitute for generation. Transmission generally enhances reliability; lowers the cost of electricity delivered to consumers; limits the ability of generators to exercise market power; and provides flexibility to protect against uncertainties about future fuel prices, load growth, generator construction, and other factors affecting the electric system. DOE Transmission Capacity Report More Documents & Publications Report to Congress:Impacts of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's

463

FY 2005 Control Table by Organization  

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

Organization Organization (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) Table of Contents Summary...................................................................................................... 1 Mandatory Funding....................................................................................... 2 National Nuclear Security Administration..................................................... 3 Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.................................................... 4 Electric Transmission and Distribution......................................................... 4 Fossil Energy................................................................................................ 5 Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology...................................................

464

Federal Buildings Supplemental Survey -- Publication and Tables  

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

Overview > Publication and Tables Overview > Publication and Tables Publication and Tables Percent of FBSS Buildings and Floorspace by Selected Agencies, FY 1993 Percent of FBSS buildings and floorspace by selected agencies, FY 1993 Sources: Energy Information Administration, Energy Markets and End Use, 1993 Federal Buildings Supplemental Survey. Separater Bar Separater Bar You have the option of downloading the entire report or selected sections of the report. Full Report - Federal Buildings Supplemental Survey, 1993 (file size 1.15 MB) pages: 183 Selected Sections Main Text (file size 161,775 bytes) pages: 17. - Requires Adobe Acrobat Reader Contacts Preface Contents Introduction At a Glance Highlights on Federal Buildings Detailed Tables Appendices Appendix A. How the Survey Was Conducted (file size 45,191 bytes) pages: 8.

465

Precision Flow Table | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Table Table Jump to: navigation, search Basic Specifications Facility Name Flow Table Overseeing Organization United States Army Corp of Engineers (ERDC) Hydrodynamic Testing Facility Type Flow Table Length(m) 2.4 Beam(m) 1.2 Water Type Freshwater Cost(per day) Contact POC Towing Capabilities Towing Capabilities None Wavemaking Capabilities Wavemaking Capabilities None Channel/Tunnel/Flume Channel/Tunnel/Flume Yes Wind Capabilities Wind Capabilities None Control and Data Acquisition Description Automated data acquisition and control system Cameras None Available Sensors Flow, Pressure Range(psi), Turbulence, Velocity, Wave Probe Data Generation Capability Real-Time No Test Services Test Services Yes Past Pertinent Test Experience Users are District Engineers, Planners, and Engineering Consultants

466

FY 2005 Control Table by Appropriation  

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

Appropriation Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) Table of Contents Summary...................................................................................................... 1 Mandatory Funding....................................................................................... 3 Energy Supply.............................................................................................. 4 Non-Defense site acceleration completion................................................... 5 Uranium enrichment D&D fund.................................................................... 5 Non-Defense environmental services.......................................................... 5 Science.........................................................................................................

467

Commercial Buildings Characteristics 1992 - Publication and Tables  

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

Buildings Characteristics Data > Publication and Tables Buildings Characteristics Data > Publication and Tables Publication and Tables Percent of Buildings and Floorspace by Census Region, 1992 figure on percent of building and floorspace by census region, 1992 separater bar To View and/or Print Reports (requires Adobe Acrobat Reader) - Download Adobe Acrobat Reader If you experience any difficulties, visit our Technical Frequently Asked Questions. You have the option of downloading the entire report or selected sections of the report. Full Report - Commercial Buildings Characteristics, 1992 with only selected tables (file size 1.34 MB) pages: 157 Selected Sections: Main Text (file size 883,980 bytes) pages: 28, includes the following: Contacts Contents Executive Summary Introduction Background Organization of the report

468

ii Colorado Climate Table of Contents  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

#12;ii Colorado Climate Table of Contents Web: http://climate.atmos.colostate.edu Colorado Climate Spring 2002 Vol. 3, No. 2 Lightning in Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Colorado Climate in Review

469

TableHC11.12.xls  

Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

... 2.8 0.3 Q 0.2 Million U.S. Housing Units Home Electronics Usage Indicators Table HC11.12 Home Electronics Usage Indicators by Northeast Census Region,...

470

TableHC6.13.xls  

Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

Q 5 or More... 0.3 N Q Q Q Q Lighting Usage Indicators 4 Members 5 or More Members Table HC6.13 Lighting Usage Indicators by...

471

TABLES3.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

S3. Crude Oil and Petroleum Product Imports, 1988 - Present (Thousand Barrels per Day) See footnotes at end of table. 1988 Average ... 300 58 345 343 92 80 0 0 1989...

472

Table of Contents Resilient Sustainable Communities  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

..................................... 5 Onondaga County: Sustainable Development Plan....................... 9 Comparison of the Hazard Mitigation Plan and Onondaga County Sustainable Development Plan DraftTable of Contents Resilient Sustainable Communities: Integrating Hazard Mitigation & Sustainability

473

Table of Contents Chapter and Content Pages  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

#12;Page 2 Table of Contents Chapter and Content Pages 1. Field Trip Itinerary ................................................................................. 7 4. Geologic Framework of the Netherlands Antilles 5. Coral Reefs of the Netherlands Antilles

Fouke, Bruce W.

474

Capacity Value of Concentrating Solar Power Plants  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This study estimates the capacity value of a concentrating solar power (CSP) plant at a variety of locations within the western United States. This is done by optimizing the operation of the CSP plant and by using the effective load carrying capability (ELCC) metric, which is a standard reliability-based capacity value estimation technique. Although the ELCC metric is the most accurate estimation technique, we show that a simpler capacity-factor-based approximation method can closely estimate the ELCC value. Without storage, the capacity value of CSP plants varies widely depending on the year and solar multiple. The average capacity value of plants evaluated ranged from 45%?90% with a solar multiple range of 1.0-1.5. When introducing thermal energy storage (TES), the capacity value of the CSP plant is more difficult to estimate since one must account for energy in storage. We apply a capacity-factor-based technique under two different market settings: an energy-only market and an energy and capacity market. Our results show that adding TES to a CSP plant can increase its capacity value significantly at all of the locations. Adding a single hour of TES significantly increases the capacity value above the no-TES case, and with four hours of storage or more, the average capacity value at all locations exceeds 90%.

Madaeni, S. H.; Sioshansi, R.; Denholm, P.

2011-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

475

Property:InstalledCapacity | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

InstalledCapacity InstalledCapacity Jump to: navigation, search Property Name InstalledCapacity Property Type Quantity Description Installed Capacity (MW) or also known as Total Generator Nameplate Capacity (Rated Power) Use this property to express potential electric energy generation, such as Nameplate Capacity. The default unit is megawatts (MW). For spatial capacity, use property Volume. Acceptable units (and their conversions) are: 1 MW,MWe,megawatt,Megawatt,MegaWatt,MEGAWATT,megawatts,Megawatt,MegaWatts,MEGAWATT,MEGAWATTS 1000 kW,kWe,KW,kilowatt,KiloWatt,KILOWATT,kilowatts,KiloWatts,KILOWATT,KILOWATTS 1000000 W,We,watt,watts,Watt,Watts,WATT,WATTS 1000000000 mW,milliwatt,milliwatts,MILLIWATT,MILLIWATTS 0.001 GW,gigawatt,gigawatts,Gigawatt,Gigawatts,GigaWatt,GigaWatts,GIGAWATT,GIGAWATTS

476

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2 2 State Energy Data 2011: Consumption Table C9. Electric Power Sector Consumption Estimates, 2011 (Trillion Btu) State Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum Nuclear Electric Power Hydroelectric Power b Biomass Geothermal Solar/PV d Wind Net Electricity Imports e Total f Distillate Fuel Oil Petroleum Coke Residual Fuel Oil Total Wood and Waste c Alabama ............. 586.1 349.4 1.1 0.0 0.0 1.1 411.8 86.3 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,439.3 Alaska ................. 6.0 42.3 3.3 0.0 1.5 4.8 0.0 13.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 (s) 66.3 Arizona ............... 449.9 183.9 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.6 327.3 89.1 2.4 0.0 0.8 2.5 1.5 1,057.9 Arkansas ............. 300.5 109.2 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.6 148.5 28.7 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 588.9 California ............ 19.7 630.1 0.4 11.1 (s) 11.5 383.6 413.4 69.0 122.0 8.4 75.3 20.1 1,753.1 Colorado ............. 362.4 88.1 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 20.2 0.9

477

Microsoft Word - table_03.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 3. Gross withdrawals and marketed production of natural gas by state and the Gulf of Mexico, 2007-2011 (million cubic feet) 2007 Total R 14,991,891 R 5,681,871 R 1,999,748 1,990,145 24,663,656 3,662,685 143,457 661,168 20,196,346 930,320 19,266,026 2008 Total R 15,134,644 R 5,609,425 R 2,022,228 R 2,869,960 25,636,257 3,638,622 166,909 718,674 21,112,053 953,451 20,158,602 2009 Total R 14,414,287 R 5,674,120 R 2,010,171 R 3,958,315 26,056,893 3,522,090 165,360 721,507 21,647,936 1,024,082 20,623,854 2010 Total R 13,247,498 R 5,834,703 1,916,762 5,817,122 R 26,816,085 3,431,587 165,928 836,698 R 22,381,873 R 1,066,366 R 21,315,507 2011 Total 12,291,070 5,907,919 1,779,055 8,500,983 28,479,026 3,365,313 209,439 867,922 24,036,352 1,134,473 22,901,879

478

Microsoft Word - table_18.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 18. Natural gas delivered to commercial consumers for the account of others by state, 2008-2012 (volumes in million cubic feet) Alabama 4,999 19.8 5,160 21.2 5,494 20.3 5,313 21.1 5,126 23.8 Alaska 4,274 25.1 2,448 14.7 1,951 12.3 2,208 R 11.4 1,005 5.1 Arizona 2,258 6.9 3,866 12.0 3,605 11.3 3,988 12.2 4,213 13.4 Arkansas 13,112 35.5 14,776 40.6 17,862 44.4 19,402 48.5 24,772 59.8 California 108,738 43.3 111,702 45.1 113,903 45.9 R 112,448 45.7 126,571 50.0 Colorado 3,132 4.8 3,240 5.2 3,118 5.4 3,457 6.2 4,061 7.8 Connecticut 11,032 29.3 12,324 31.0 14,068 34.6 15,519 34.6 14,774 34.9 Delaware 2,611 29.4 5,438 46.5 6,117 50.2 4,879 46.6 5,647 56.3 District of Columbia 15,110 82.1 15,550 83.1 15,507 83.6 14,029

479

Microsoft Word - table_18.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 18. Natural gas delivered to commercial consumers for the account of others by state, 2007-2011 (volumes in million cubic feet) Alabama 4,722 20.2 4,999 19.8 5,160 21.2 5,494 R 20.3 5,313 21.1 Alaska 4,499 24.0 4,274 25.1 2,448 14.7 1,951 12.3 2,208 13.3 Arizona 2,172 6.6 2,258 6.9 3,866 12.0 3,605 11.3 3,988 12.2 Arkansas 9,534 29.6 13,112 35.5 14,776 40.6 17,862 44.4 19,402 48.5 California 98,776 39.3 108,738 43.3 111,702 45.1 113,903 45.9 112,561 45.7 Colorado 2,721 4.3 3,132 4.8 3,240 5.2 R 3,118 5.4 3,457 6.2 Connecticut 10,252 28.5 11,032 29.3 12,324 31.0 14,068 34.6 15,519 34.6 Delaware 2,178 25.2 2,611 29.4 5,438 46.5 6,117 50.2 4,879 46.6 District of Columbia 15,703 81.4 15,110 82.1 15,550 83.1 15,507 83.6 14,029

480

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

State State Energy Data 2011: Consumption 11 Table C8. Transportation Sector Energy Consumption Estimates, 2011 (Trillion Btu) State Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum Retail Electricity Sales Net Energy Electrical System Energy Losses e Total Aviation Gasoline Distillate Fuel Oil Jet Fuel b LPG c Lubricants Motor Gasoline d Residual Fuel Oil Total Alabama ............. 0.0 23.5 0.4 124.4 13.4 0.3 2.3 316.3 6.7 463.7 0.0 487.2 0.0 487.2 Alaska ................. 0.0 3.5 0.8 44.4 118.2 (s) 0.4 32.9 0.4 197.2 0.0 200.7 0.0 200.7 Arizona ............... 0.0 15.6 1.0 111.3 21.5 0.8 1.6 318.2 0.0 454.5 0.0 470.1 0.0 470.1 Arkansas ............. 0.0 11.5 0.4 99.7 5.9 0.4 2.0 171.3 0.0 279.8 (s) 291.2 (s) 291.2 California ............ 0.0 25.7 1.9 440.9 549.7 3.8 13.3 1,770.1 186.9 2,966.5 2.8 2,995.1 5.5 3,000.5 Colorado ............. 0.0 14.7 0.6 83.2 58.3 0.3

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 3c capacity" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


481

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table C6. Commercial Sector Energy Consumption Estimates, 2011 (Trillion Btu) State Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum Hydro- electric Power e Biomass Geothermal Retail Electricity Sales Net Energy g Electrical System Energy Losses h Total g Distillate Fuel Oil Kerosene LPG b Motor Gasoline c Residual Fuel Oil Total d Wood and Waste f Alabama ............. 0.0 25.5 7.0 (s) 2.7 0.2 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 75.9 112.4 144.8 257.2 Alaska ................. 9.4 16.9 10.1 0.1 0.6 0.7 0.0 11.5 0.0 0.3 0.1 9.7 48.0 20.2 68.2 Arizona ............... 0.0 33.1 6.8 (s) 1.5 0.7 0.0 8.9 0.0 0.5 (s) 100.7 143.2 202.3 345.5 Arkansas ............. 0.0 40.6 3.6 (s) 1.2 0.4 0.0 5.2 0.0 1.3 0.0 41.4 88.6 86.1 174.7 California ............ 0.0 250.9 47.9 0.1 8.7 1.4 0.0 58.1 (s) 17.4 0.7 418.9 746.2 809.9 1,556.1 Colorado ............. 3.2 57.6 5.9 (s) 2.9 0.2 0.0 9.1 0.0 1.2 0.2

482

Microsoft Word - table_24.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 24. Average price of natural gas delivered to consumers by state and sector, 2011 (dollars per thousand cubic feet) Alabama 15.09 100.0 12.37 78.9 5.56 23.4 11.45 4.36 Alaska 8.77 100.0 8.77 86.7 3.84 60.8 -- 5.04 Arizona 15.04 100.0 9.99 87.8 6.86 24.2 7.73 5.02 Arkansas 11.46 100.0 8.90 51.5 7.44 2.1 -- 4.73 California 9.93 98.3 8.28 54.3 7.04 4.5 7.32 4.71 Colorado 8.25 100.0 7.84 93.8 6.42 7.6 9.56 4.97 Connecticut 13.83 96.8 8.48 65.4 9.16 31.4 18.59 5.09 Delaware 15.38 100.0 13.58 53.4 11.69 1.6 28.76 W District of Columbia 13.06 75.0 12.24 16.9 -- -- 4.17 -- Florida 18.16 98.1 11.11 39.8 8.07 3.0 4.93 5.86 Georgia 15.72 100.0 10.51 100.0 5.90 18.2 5.57 4.72 Hawaii 55.28 100.0 45.58

483

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 State Energy Data 2011: Consumption Table C7. Industrial Sector Energy Consumption Estimates, 2011 (Trillion Btu) State Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum Hydro- electric power e Biomass Geo- thermal Retail Electricity Sales Net Energy h,i Electrical System Energy Losses j Total h,i Distillate Fuel Oil LPG b Motor Gasoline c Residual Fuel Oil Other d Total Wood and Waste f Losses and Co- products g Alabama ............. 65.0 179.1 23.9 3.7 3.3 6.7 46.3 83.9 0.0 147.2 0.0 (s) 115.1 590.4 219.5 810.0 Alaska ................. 0.1 253.8 19.2 0.1 1.0 0.0 27.1 47.4 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 4.5 306.0 9.4 315.4 Arizona ............... 10.0 22.0 33.2 1.4 4.6 (s) 18.4 57.6 0.0 1.4 3.1 0.2 42.1 136.5 84.7 221.2 Arkansas ............. 5.6 93.1 31.1 2.6 4.0 0.1 17.4 55.1 0.0 72.7 0.0 (s) 58.0 284.5 120.5 405.0 California ............ 35.6 767.4 77.2 23.9 29.6 (s) 312.5

484

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 State Energy Data 2011: Consumption Table C5. Residential Sector Energy Consumption Estimates, 2011 (Trillion Btu) State Coal a Natural Gas b Petroleum Biomass Geothermal Solar/PV e Retail Electricity Sales Net Energy f Electrical System Energy Losses g Total f Distillate Fuel Oil Kerosene LPG c Total Wood d Alabama ............. 0.0 37.2 0.1 0.1 6.0 6.2 6.0 0.1 0.2 112.6 162.2 214.7 376.9 Alaska ................. 0.0 20.5 8.1 0.1 0.5 8.8 1.9 0.1 (s) 7.3 38.6 15.1 53.7 Arizona ............... 0.0 39.1 (s) (s) 5.5 5.5 2.6 (s) 7.9 112.9 168.0 226.8 394.7 Arkansas ............. 0.0 34.2 0.1 (s) 5.2 5.3 8.6 0.7 0.2 64.1 113.1 133.2 246.3 California ............ 0.0 522.4 0.6 0.6 30.9 32.2 33.3 0.2 43.2 301.6 932.9 583.1 1,516.1 Colorado ............. 0.0 134.2 0.1 (s) 12.3 12.4 8.3 0.2 0.7 62.4 216.5 136.5 353.0 Connecticut ......... 0.0 46.0 59.6

485

Microsoft Word - table_24.doc  

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

7 7 Table 24. Average price of natural gas delivered to consumers by state and sector, 2012 (dollars per thousand cubic feet) Alabama 16.20 100.0 12.55 76.2 4.35 22.1 17.99 3.09 Alaska 8.47 100.0 8.09 94.9 5.11 100.0 -- 4.32 Arizona 15.75 100.0 9.35 86.6 5.78 21.4 13.19 3.51 Arkansas 11.82 100.0 7.99 40.2 6.38 1.9 9.04 3.19 California 9.14 97.5 7.05 50.0 5.77 4.2 7.01 3.68 Colorado 8.31 100.0 7.58 92.2 5.79 6.8 11.65 W Connecticut 14.17 96.7 8.40 65.1 8.83 32.3 13.70 3.99 Delaware 15.24 100.0 13.31 43.7 11.61 0.3 30.97 -- District of Columbia 12.10 73.9 11.19 17.9 -- -- 9.38 -- Florida 18.31 97.7 10.41 37.0 6.96 2.7 9.83 4.80 Georgia 16.23 100.0 9.74 100.0 4.60 20.0 14.51 3.40 Hawaii 52.86 100.0 47.03

486

Brittle dynamic fracture of crystalline cubic silicon carbide ,,3C-SiC... via molecular dynamics simulation  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Brittle dynamic fracture of crystalline cubic silicon carbide ,,3C-SiC... via molecular dynamics for three low-index crack surfaces, i.e., 110 , 111 , and 100 , in crystalline cubic silicon carbide 3C Institute of Physics. DOI: 10.1063/1.2135896 I. INTRODUCTION Potential applications of silicon carbide Si

Southern California, University of

487

RSE Table 7.5 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.5  

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

5 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.5;" " Unit: Percents." " ",," "," ",," "," " "Economic",,"Residual","Distillate","Natural ","LPG and" "Characteristic(a)","Electricity","Fuel...

488

RSE Table 10.12 Relative Standard Errors for Table 10.12  

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

2 Relative Standard Errors for Table 10.12;" " Unit: Percents." ,,"LPG",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total"," ","Not","Electricity","Natural...

489

Improved visible light driven photoelectrochemical properties of 3C-SiC semiconductor with Pt nanoparticles for hydrogen generation  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

We propose the n-type 3C-SiC with Pt nanoparticles (Pt NPs) as photo-anode for photoelectrochemical hydrogen (H{sub 2}) generation. We found that band-edge structure of 3C-SiC is suitable for H{sub 2} generation, and the property can be optimized by dopant (nitrogen) concentration in 3C-SiC. We also confirmed that Pt NPs enhance photoelectrochemical properties showing 0.2%0.8% higher Incident Photon-to-Current Efficiency than bare 3C-SiC in visible wavelength despite diminished light absorption. Solar-conversion efficiency increases approximately 6.3 times, and H{sub 2} production is improved by 6.5 times with 33% of Faradaic efficiency. Lastly, 3C-SiC surface corrosion is effectively inhibited.

Tae Song, Jun; Kamiya, Masayuki; Iwasaki, Takayuki; Hatano, Mutsuko [Department of Physical Electronics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2-12-1 Ookayama, Meguro, Tokyo 152-8552 (Japan)] [Department of Physical Electronics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2-12-1 Ookayama, Meguro, Tokyo 152-8552 (Japan); Mashiko, Hisanori; Ohtomo, Akira [Department of Applied Chemistry, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2-12-1 Ookayama, Meguro, Tokyo 152-8552 (Japan)] [Department of Applied Chemistry, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2-12-1 Ookayama, Meguro, Tokyo 152-8552 (Japan); Nakamine, Yoshifumi [Program for Leading Graduate Schools, Academy for Co-Creative Education of Environment and Energy Science, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2-12-1 Ookayama, Meguro, Tokyo 152-8552 (Japan)] [Program for Leading Graduate Schools, Academy for Co-Creative Education of Environment and Energy Science, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2-12-1 Ookayama, Meguro, Tokyo 152-8552 (Japan)

2013-11-18T23:59:59.000Z

490

Qualified Energy Conservation Bond State-by-State Summary Tables  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Provides a list of qualified energy conservation bond state summary tables. Author: Energy Programs Consortium

491

Residential Transportation Historical Data Tables for 1983-2001  

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

RTECS Historical Data Tables RTECS Historical Data Tables Residential Transportation Historical Data Tables Released: May 2008 Below are historical data tables from the Residential Transportation Energy Consumption Survey (RTECS) and Household Vehicles Energy Use: Latest Data & Trends report. These tables cover the trends in energy consumption for household transportation throughout the survey years. The data focus on several important indicators of demand for transportation: number and type of vehicles per household; vehicle-miles traveled per household and per vehicle; fuel consumption; fuel expenditures; and fuel economy. Excel PDF Trends in Households & Vehicles Table 1. Number of Households with Vehicles excel pdf Table 2. Percent of Households with Vehicles excel pdf

492

Table Definitions, Sources, and Explanatory Notes  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Capacity Capacity Definitions Key Terms Definition Aquifer Storage Field A sub-surface facility for storing natural gas, consisting of water-bearing sands topped by an impermeable cap rock. Depleted Reservoir Storage Field A sub-surface natural geological reservoir, usually a depleted gas or oil field, used for storing natural gas. Natural Gas A gaseous mixture of hydrocarbon compounds, the primary one being methane. Salt Dome Storage Field (Salt Cavern) A storage facility that is a cavern hollowed out in either a salt "bed" or "dome" formation. Storage Capacity The present developed maximum operating capacity. Working Gas Capacity The volume of total natural gas storage capacity that contains natural gas available for withdrawal. For definitions of related energy terms, refer to the EIA Energy Glossary.

493

Design and Evaluation of Novel High Capacity Cathode Materials...  

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

High Capacity Cathodes Vehicle Technologies Office Merit Review 2014: Design and Evaluation of High Capacity Cathodes Design and Evaluation of Novel High Capacity Cathode Materials...

494

EIA - Low Economic Growth Case Projection Tables 1990-2030  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Low Economic Growth Case Projection Tables (1990-2030) Low Economic Growth Case Projection Tables (1990-2030) International Energy Outlook 2006 Low Economic Growth Case Projection Tables (1990-2030) Formats Data Table Titles (1 to 13 complete) Low Economic Growth Case Projection Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Low Economic Growth Case Projection Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table C1 World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region, Low Economic Growth Case Low Economic Growth Case Projection Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Low Economic Growth Case Projection Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table C2 World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel, Low Economic Growth Case

495

EIA - Appendix A - Reference Case Projection Tables 1990-2030  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Tables (1990-2030) Tables (1990-2030) International Energy Outlook 2009 Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030) Formats Data Table Titles (1 to 14 complete) Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030). Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A1 World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region Table A1. World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A2 World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel Table A2. World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

496

EIA - Appendix D - High Price Case Projections Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

High Price Case Projections Tables (2005-2035) High Price Case Projections Tables (2005-2035) International Energy Outlook 2010 High Oil Price Case Projections Tables (2005-2035) Formats Data Table Titles (1 to 12 complete) High Oil Price Case Projections Tables (1990-2030). Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Appendix D. High Oil Price Case Projections Tables (1990-2030). Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table D1 World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region Table D1. World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table D2 World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel Table D2. World total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

497

EIA - Appendix A - Reference Case Projection Tables 1990-2030  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030) Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030) International Energy Outlook 2008 Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030) Formats Data Table Titles (1 to 14 complete) Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A1 World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region Table A1. World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A2 World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel Table A2. World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

498

EIA - International Energy Outlook 2007-Reference Case Projection Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030) Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030) International Energy Outlook 2007 Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030) Formats Data Table Titles (1 to 14 complete) Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A1 World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region Table A1. World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A2 World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel Table A2. World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

499

Atomic configuration of irradiation-induced planar defects in 3C-SiC  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The atomic configuration of irradiation-induced planar defects in single crystal 3C-SiC at high irradiation temperatures was shown in this research. A spherical aberration corrected scanning transmission electron microscope provided images of individual silicon and carbon atoms by the annular bright-field (ABF) method. Two types of irradiation-induced planar defects were observed in the ABF images including the extrinsic stacking fault loop with two offset Si-C bilayers and the intrinsic stacking fault loop with one offset Si-C bilayer. The results are in good agreement with images simulated under identical conditions.

Lin, Y. R. [Department of Engineering and System Science, National Tsing-Hua University, Hsinchu 30013, Taiwan (China); National Synchrotron Radiation Center, 101 Hsin-Ann Road, Hsinchu Science Park, Hsinchu 30076, Taiwan (China); Ho, C. Y. [Institute of Nuclear Engineering and Science, National Tsing-Hua University, Hsinchu 30013, Taiwan (China); Hsieh, C. Y.; Chang, M. T.; Lo, S. C. [Material and Chemical Research Laboratories, Industrial Technology Research Institute, Hsinchu 31040, Taiwan (China); Chen, F. R. [Department of Engineering and System Science, National Tsing-Hua University, Hsinchu 30013, Taiwan (China); Kai, J. J., E-mail: ceer0001@gmail.com [Department of Engineering and System Science, National Tsing-Hua University, Hsinchu 30013, Taiwan (China); Institute of Nuclear Engineering and Science, National Tsing-Hua University, Hsinchu 30013, Taiwan (China)

2014-03-24T23:59:59.000Z

500

Transition temperatures and vacancies in superconducting Rb{sub 3}C{sub 60}  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

We have studied the role of alkali-metal vacancies in the structure and superconductivity in nominal Rb{sub 3}C{sub 60} through preparation of samples with different alkali-metal loadings and annealing temperatures, to search for the possible role of nonstoichiometry in superconductivity. We find sample-to-sample variations of {approx}1 K in the superconducting transition temperature, but this does not correlate with vacancy concentration. We conclude that a model of electronic structure of alkali-metal fullerenes based on proximity to a Mott-Hubbard transition at integer doping is not applicable.

Huq, Ashfia; Stephens, Peter W. [Department of Physics and Astronomy, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York 11794-3800 (United States)

2005-09-01T23:59:59.000Z