National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for total coal electricity

  1. ,,,,,,"Coal Components",,,"Coke",,,"Electricity Components",...

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

    ,,,,,,"Coal Components",,,"Coke",,,"Electricity Components",,,..."Natural Gas ... " " "," "," ",,,,,"Bituminous",,,,,,"Electricity","Diesel Fuel",,,,,,"Motor",,,..."Natu...

  2. Electricity production levelized costs for nuclear, gas and coal

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    ... Electricity Production in Mexico Independent 15.74% Hydro 7.4% Wind 0.004% Nuclear 5.81% Coal 9.83% Geothermal 3.47% Thermal 58.15% Figure 1. Distribution of the total electricity ...

  3. Fact #844: October 27, 2014 Electricity Generated from Coal has...

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

    From 2002 to 2012, most states have reduced their reliance on coal for electricity generation. The figure below shows the percent change in electricity generated by coal and ...

  4. AEO 2015 Electricity, Coal, Nuclear and Renewables Preliminary...

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

    Electricity, Coal, Nuclear and Renewables Preliminary Results For Joint Electricity, Coal, Nuclear, and Renewables AEO2015 Working Group September 15, 2014 | Washington, DC By EIA, ...

  5. Table 6a. Total Electricity Consumption per Effective Occupied...

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

    a. Total Electricity Consumption per Effective Occupied Square Foot, 1992 Building Characteristics All Buildings Using Electricity (thousand) Total Electricity Consumption...

  6. 2014 Total Electric Industry- Customers

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

    Customers (Data from forms EIA-861- schedules 4A, 4B, 4D, EIA-861S and EIA-861U) State Residential Commercial Industrial Transportation Total New England 6,243,013 862,269 28,017 8 ...

  7. "2014 Total Electric Industry- Customers"

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

    Customers" "(Data from forms EIA-861- schedules 4A, 4B, 4D, EIA-861S and EIA-861U)" "State","Residential","Commercial","Industrial","Transportation","Total" "New England",6243013,8...

  8. Coal based electric generation comparative technologies report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1989-10-26

    Ohio Clean Fuels, Inc., (OCF) has licensed technology that involves Co-Processing (Co-Pro) poor grade (high sulfur) coal and residual oil feedstocks to produce clean liquid fuels on a commercial scale. Stone Webster is requested to perform a comparative technologies report for grassroot plants utilizing coal as a base fuel. In the case of Co-Processing technology the plant considered is the nth plant in a series of applications. This report presents the results of an economic comparison of this technology with other power generation technologies that use coal. Technologies evaluated were:Co-Processing integrated with simple cycle combustion turbine generators, (CSC); Co-Processing integrated with combined cycle combustion turbine generators, (CCC); pulverized coal-fired boiler with flue gas desulfurization and steam turbine generator, (PC) and Circulating fluidized bed boiler and steam turbine generator, (CFB). Conceptual designs were developed. Designs were based on approximately equivalent net electrical output for each technology. A base case of 310 MWe net for each technology was established. Sensitivity analyses at other net electrical output sizes varying from 220 MWe's to 1770 MWe's were also performed. 4 figs., 9 tabs.

  9. 5,"New Madrid","Coal","Associated Electric Coop, Inc",1154 6...

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

    Electric Co - (MO)",1182 5,"New Madrid","Coal","Associated Electric Coop, Inc",1154 6,"Thomas Hill","Coal","Associated Electric Coop, Inc",1133 7,"Sioux","Coal","Union Electric Co ...

  10. South Korean energy outlook: Coal and electricity focus

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Young, E.M.; Johnson, C.J.; Li, B.

    1995-03-01

    This paper concisely outlines the capacity for Korea to generate electricity by using coal. Resources (native and imported) as well as facilities are reviewed.

  11. Electricity from coal and utilization of coal combustion by-products

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Demirbas, A.

    2008-07-01

    Most electricity in the world is conventionally generated using coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear energy, or hydropower. Due to environmental concerns, there is a growing interest in alternative energy sources for heat and electricity production. The major by-products obtained from coal combustion are fly ash, bottom ash, boiler slag, and flue gas desulfurization (FGD) materials. The solid wastes produced in coal-fired power plants create problems for both power-generating industries and environmentalists. The coal fly ash and bottom ash samples may be used as cementitious materials.

  12. Table 6b. Relative Standard Errors for Total Electricity Consumption...

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

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

  13. Table 12. Total Coal Consumption, Projected vs. Actual

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

    Total Coal Consumption, Projected vs. Actual" "Projected" " (million short tons)" ,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010,2011,2012,2013 "AEO 1994",920,928,933,938,943,948,953,958,962,967,978,990,987,992,1006,1035,1061,1079 "AEO 1995",,935,940,941,947,948,951,954,958,963,971,984,992,996,1002,1013,1025,1039 "AEO

  14. Table 12. Total Coal Consumption, Projected vs. Actual Projected

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

    Total Coal Consumption, Projected vs. Actual Projected (million short tons) 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 AEO 1994 920 928 933 938 943 948 953 958 962 967 978 990 987 992 1006 1035 1061 1079 AEO 1995 935 940 941 947 948 951 954 958 963 971 984 992 996 1002 1013 1025 1039 AEO 1996 937 942 954 962 983 990 1004 1017 1027 1033 1046 1067 1070 1071 1074 1082 1087 1094 1103 AEO 1997 948 970 987 1003 1017 1020 1025 1034 1041

  15. Clean coal technologies in electric power generation: a brief overview

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Janos Beer; Karen Obenshain

    2006-07-15

    The paper talks about the future clean coal technologies in electric power generation, including pulverized coal (e.g., advanced supercritical and ultra-supercritical cycles and fluidized-bed combustion), integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC), and CO{sub 2} capture technologies. 6 refs., 2 tabs.

  16. Table A11. Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generatio

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

    2" " (Estimates in Trillion Btu)" ,,,,,,,"Coal" ,,,,"Distillate",,,"(excluding" ,,,,"Fuel Oil",,,"Coal Coke",,"RSE" ,,"Net","Residual","and Diesel",,,"and",,"Row" "End-Use Categories","Total","Electricity(a)","Fuel Oil","Fuel(b)","Natural

  17. Table A37. Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity

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

    2" " (Estimates in Trillion Btu)" ,,,,,,,"Coal" ,,,,"Distillate",,,"(excluding" ,,,,"Fuel Oil",,,"Coal Coke",,"RSE" ,,"Net","Residual","and Diesel",,,"and",,"Row" "End-Use Categories","Total","Electricity(a)","Fuel Oil","Fuel(b)","Natural

  18. 1,"Elm Road Generating Station","Coal","Wisconsin Electric Power...

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

    Wisconsin" ,"Plant","Primary energy source","Operating company","Net summer capacity (MW)" 1,"Elm Road Generating Station","Coal","Wisconsin Electric Power Co",1268 2,"Point Beach ...

  19. ,,,,,,"Coal Components",,,"Coke",,,"Electricity Components",...

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

    Utility(c)","Fuel Oil","Fuel","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil","Gas","Gas","Highway Usage)","Hydrogen","Kerosene","Black Liquor","NGL(d)","Total","Utility(b)","Local Utility(c)","Total","...

  20. Table A10. Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generatio

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

    1" " (Estimates in Btu or Physical Units)" ,,,,,"Distillate",,,"Coal" ,,,,,"Fuel Oil",,,"(excluding" ,,,"Net","Residual","and Diesel",,,"Coal Coke",,"RSE" "SIC",,"Total","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Fuel(c)","Natural Gas(d)","LPG","and Breeze)","Other(e)","Row" "Code(a)","End-Use

  1. Table A10. Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generatio

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

    0. Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generation" " by Fuel Type, Industry Group, Selected Industries, and End Use, 1994:" " Part 2" " (Estimates in Trillion Btu)" ,,,,,"Distillate",,,"Coal" ,,,,,"Fuel Oil",,,"(excluding",,"RSE" "SIC",,,"Net","Residual","and Diesel",,,"Coal Coke",,"Row" "Code(a)","End-Use

  2. Table A11. Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generatio

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

    1" " (Estimates in Btu or Physical Units)" ,,,,"Distillate",,,"Coal" ,,,,"Fuel Oil",,,"(excluding" ,,"Net","Residual","and Diesel",,,"Coal Coke",,"RSE" ,"Total","Electricity(a)","Fuel Oil","Fuel(b)","Natural Gas(c)","LPG","and Breeze)","Other(d)","Row" "End-Use Categories","(trillion

  3. Table A36. Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity

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

    ,,,,,,,,"Coal" " Part 1",,,,,,,,"(excluding" " (Estimates in Btu or Physical Units)",,,,,"Distillate",,,"Coal Coke" ,,,,,"Fuel Oil",,,"and" ,,,"Net","Residual","and Diesel","Natural Gas",,"Breeze)",,"RSE" "SIC",,"Total","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Fuel","(billion","LPG","(1000

  4. Table A36. Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity

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

    " Part 2" " (Estimates in Trillion Btu)",,,,,,,,"Coal" ,,,,,"Distillate",,,"(excluding" ,,,,,"Fuel Oil",,,"Coal Coke",,"RSE" "SIC",,,"Net","Residual","and Diesel",,,"and",,"Row" "Code(a)","End-Use Categories","Total","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Fuel(c)","Natural

  5. Table A37. Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity

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

    1",,,,,,,"Coal" " (Estimates in Btu or Physical Units)",,,,,,,"(excluding" ,,,,"Distillate",,,"Coal Coke" ,,"Net",,"Fuel Oil",,,"and" ,,"Electricity(a)","Residual","and Diesel","Natural Gas",,"Breeze)",,"RSE" ,"Total","(million","Fuel Oil","Fuel","(billion","LPG","(1000

  6. The Market for Coal Based Electric Power Generation

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

    Roadmap "CURC/EPRI/DOE Consensus Roadmap" Background Information Go to Roadmap http://www.netl.doe.gov/coalpower/ccpi/pubs/CCT-Roadmap-Background.pdf 04/20/04 The Clean Coal Technology Roadmap is the U.S. Department of Energy's plan to develop the technology needed for future energy plants that use coal to produce electricity and, when economically favored, transportation fuels, and other valuable energy products as well; have near-zero emissions including CO 2 ; are highly efficient;

  7. 2014 Total Electric Industry- Sales (Megawatthours

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

    EIA-861U)" "State","Residential","Commercial","Industrial","Transportation","Total" "New England",47211525,53107038,19107433,557463,119983459 "Connecticut",12777579,12893531,351479...

  8. Electricity and technical progress: The bituminous coal mining industry, mechanization to automation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Devine, W.D. Jr.

    1987-07-01

    Development and use of electric mobile machinery facilitated the mechanization of underground bituminous coal mining and has played a lesser but important role in the growth of surface mining. Electricity has been central to the rise of mechanically integrated mining, both underground (after 1950) and on the surface (recently). Increasing labor productivity in coal mining and decreasing total energy use per ton of coal mined are associated with penetration of new electric technology through at least 1967. Productivity declined and energy intensity increased during the 1970s due in part to government regulations. Recent productivity gains stem partly from new technology that permits automation of certain mining operations. On most big electric excavating machines, a pair of large alternating current (ac) motors operate continuously at full speed. These drive direct current (dc) generators that energize dc motors, each matched to the desired power and speed range of a particular machine function. Direct-current motors provide high torque at low speeds, thus reducing the amount of gearing required; each crawler is independently propelled forward or backward by its own variable-speed dc motors. The principal advantages of electric power are that mechanical power-transmission systems - shafts, gears, etc. - are eliminated or greatly simplified. Reliability is higher, lifetime is longer, and maintenance is much simpler with electric power than with diesel power, and the spare parts inventory is considerably smaller. 100 refs., 11 figs., 12 tabs.

  9. Table A19. Components of Total Electricity Demand by Census...

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

    Components of Total Electricity Demand by Census Region and" " Economic Characteristics of ...ansfers","Onsite","Transfers"," ","Row" "Economic Characteristics(a)","Purchases","In(b)",...

  10. "2014 Total Electric Industry- Revenue (Thousands Dollars)"

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

    EIA-861U)" "State","Residential","Commercial","Industrial","Transportation","Total" "New England",8414175.4,7806276.7,2262752.4,57837.4,18541041.8 "Connecticut",2523348.7,2004629.1...

  11. 2014 Total Electric Industry- Revenue (Thousands Dollars)

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

    Revenue (Thousands Dollars) (Data from forms EIA-861- schedules 4A-D, EIA-861S and EIA-861U) State Residential Commercial Industrial Transportation Total New England 8,414,175 ...

  12. By Coal Destination State

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

    California (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total...

  13. Utility to Purchase Electricity from Innovative DOE-Supported Clean Coal

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

    Project | Department of Energy Utility to Purchase Electricity from Innovative DOE-Supported Clean Coal Project Utility to Purchase Electricity from Innovative DOE-Supported Clean Coal Project January 17, 2012 - 12:00pm Addthis Washington, DC - An innovative clean coal technology project in Texas will supply electricity to the largest municipally owned utility in the United States under a recently signed Power Purchase Agreement, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announced today. Under the

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

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

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

  15. United States Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source, 2006 - 2010" "(Megawatts)" "United States" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",761603,763994,770221,774279,782176 " Coal",312956,312738,313322,314294,316800 " Petroleum",58097,56068,57445,56781,55647 " Natural Gas",388294,392876,397460,401272,407028 " Other Gases",2256,2313,1995,1932,2700

  16. Table A39. Total Expenditures for Purchased Electricity and Steam

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

    9. Total Expenditures for Purchased Electricity and Steam" " by Type of Supplier, Census Region, Census Division, and" " Economic Characteristics of the Establishment, 1994" " (Estimates in Million Dollars)" ," Electricity",," Steam" ,,,,,"RSE" ,"Utility","Nonutility","Utility","Nonutility","Row" "Economic

  17. Fact #844: October 27, 2014 Electricity Generated from Coal has Declined while Generation from Natural Gas has Grown

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    From 2002 to 2012, most states have reduced their reliance on coal for electricity generation. The figure below shows the percent change in electricity generated by coal and natural gas for each...

  18. "Characteristic(a)","Total(b)","Electricity(c)","Fuel Oil","Fuel...

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

    Gas(e)","NGL(f)","Coal","Breeze","Other(g)","Produced Onsite(h)" ,"Total United ... raw" "Natural Gas Liquids '(NGL).'" " (g) 'Other' includes net steam (the sum of ...

  19. Nuclear economics 2000: Deterministic and probabilistic projections of nuclear and coal electric power generation costs for the year 2000

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Williams, K.A.; Delene, J.G.; Fuller, L.C.; Bowers, H.I.

    1987-06-01

    The total busbar electric generating costs were estimated for locations in ten regions of the United States for base-load nuclear and coal-fired power plants with a startup date of January 2000. For the Midwest region a complete data set that specifies each parameter used to obtain the comparative results is supplied. When based on the reference set of input variables, the comparison of power generation costs is found to favor nuclear in most regions of the country. Nuclear power is most favored in the northeast and western regions where coal must be transported over long distances; however, coal-fired generation is most competitive in the north central region where large reserves of cheaply mineable coal exist. In several regions small changes in the reference variables could cause either option to be preferred. The reference data set reflects the better of recent electric utility construction cost experience (BE) for nuclear plants. This study assumes as its reference case a stable regulatory environment and improved planning and construction practices, resulting in nuclear plants typically built at the present BE costs. Today's BE nuclear-plant capital investment cost model is then being used as a surrogate for projected costs for the next generation of light-water reactor plants. An alternative analysis based on today's median experience (ME) nuclear-plant construction cost experience is also included. In this case, coal is favored in all ten regions, implying that typical nuclear capital investment costs must improve for nuclear to be competitive.

  20. Construction Begins on First-of-its-Kind Advanced Clean Coal Electric

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

    Generating Facility | Department of Energy Construction Begins on First-of-its-Kind Advanced Clean Coal Electric Generating Facility Construction Begins on First-of-its-Kind Advanced Clean Coal Electric Generating Facility September 10, 2007 - 3:16pm Addthis ORLANDO, Fla. - Officials representing the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Southern Company, KBR Inc. and the Orlando Utilities Commission (OUC) today broke ground to begin construction of an advanced 285-megawatt integrated

  1. Alabama Natural Gas % of Total Electric Utility Deliveries (Percent)

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

    Electric Utility Deliveries (Percent) Alabama Natural Gas % of Total Electric Utility Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.17 0.13 0.23 0.23 0.29 0.60 0.53 2000's 0.81 1.29 1.98 1.68 2.14 1.79 2.34 2.57 2.46 3.30 2010's 3.81 4.53 4.40 4.08 4.23 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 4/29/2016 Next Release Date: 5/31/2016

  2. Should we transport coal, gas, or electricity: cost, efficiency, and environmental implications

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Joule A. Bergerson; Lester B. Lave

    2005-08-15

    The authors examine the life cycle costs, environmental discharges, and deaths of moving coal via rail, coal to synthetic natural gas via pipeline, and electricity via wire from the Powder River Basin (PRB) in Wyoming to Texas. Which method has least social cost depends on how much additional investment in rail line, transmission, or pipeline infrastructure is required, as well as how much and how far energy is transported. If the existing rail lines have unused capacity, coal by rail is the cheapest method (up to 200 miles of additional track could be added). If no infrastructure exists, greater distances and larger amounts of energy favor coal by rail and gasified coal by pipeline over electricity transmission. For 1,000 miles and 9 gigawatts of power, a gas pipeline is cheapest, has less environmental discharges, uses less land, and is least obtrusive. 28 refs., 4 figs., 3 tabs.

  3. Table 15. Total Electricity Sales, Projected vs. Actual

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

    Total Electricity Sales, Projected vs. Actual" "Projected" " (billion kilowatt-hours)" ,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010,2011,2012,2013 "AEO 1994",2843,2891,2928,2962,3004,3039,3071,3112,3148,3185,3228,3263,3298,3332,3371,3406,3433,3469 "AEO 1995",,2951,2967,2983,3026,3058,3085,3108,3134,3166,3204,3248,3285,3321,3357,3396,3433,3475 "AEO

  4. Table 15. Total Electricity Sales, Projected vs. Actual Projected

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

    Total Electricity Sales, Projected vs. Actual Projected (billion kilowatt-hours) 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 AEO 1994 2843 2891 2928 2962 3004 3039 3071 3112 3148 3185 3228 3263 3298 3332 3371 3406 3433 3469 AEO 1995 2951 2967 2983 3026 3058 3085 3108 3134 3166 3204 3248 3285 3321 3357 3396 3433 3475 AEO 1996 2973 2998 3039 3074 3106 3137 3173 3215 3262 3317 3363 3409 3454 3505 3553 3604 3660 3722 3775 AEO 1997 3075

  5. Coal combustion products (CCPs

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

    Coal combustion products (CCPs) are solid materials produced when coal is burned to generate electricity. Since coal provides the largest segment of U.S. electricity generation (45 ...

  6. U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Distribution...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    short tons) Coal Origin State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 6,085 670...

  7. U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Distribution...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    tons) Coal Destination State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 6,982 679...

  8. U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Distribution...

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

    (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total...

  9. U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Distribution...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    short tons) Coal Destination State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total...

  10. "Table A25. Components of Total Electricity Demand by Census...

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

    ... 29,"Petroleum and Coal Products",2058,0," W ",0," W ",19.6 2911,"Petroleum Refining",1824,0," W ",0," W ",20.3 30,"Rubber and Miscellaneous Plastics Products",3350,0,0,0,3350,15...

  11. Minnesota Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity,...

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

    Minnesota" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",9714,9550,10548,10752,10519 " Coal",5444,5207,5235,4826,4789 " Petroleum",746,764,782,801,795 " Natural ...

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

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

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

  13. Texas Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy...

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

    Texas" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",349849,351720,344813,333227,341054 " Coal",146391,147279,147132,139107,150173 " Petroleum",1789,1309,1034,1405,708 " ...

  14. Tennessee Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy...

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

    Tennessee" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",61336,61205,57753,42242,46203 " Coal",60498,60237,57058,41633,43670 " Petroleum",160,232,216,187,217 " Natural ...

  15. Rail Coal Transportation Rates to the Electric Power Sector

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    modes, the Coal Waybill Data is based only on rail shipments. Due to the different nature of the data sources, users should exercise caution when attempting to combine the two...

  16. 2,"Laramie River Station","Coal","Basin Electric Power Coop"...

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

    6,"Wyodak","Coal","PacifiCorp",332 7,"Top of the World Windpower Project","Wind","Duke Energy Top Of the World WindPower",200 8,"TransAlta Wyoming Wind","Wind","NextEra ...

  17. Fact #844: October 27, 2014 Electricity Generated from Coal has Declined while Generation from Natural Gas has Grown – Dataset

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Excel file with dataset for Fact #844: Electricity Generated from Coal has Declined while Generation from Natural Gas has Grown

  18. Table 11.5a Emissions From Energy Consumption for Electricity Generation and Useful Thermal Output: Total (All Sectors), 1989-2010 (Sum of Tables 11.5b and 11.5c; Metric Tons of Gas)

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

    a Emissions From Energy Consumption for Electricity Generation and Useful Thermal Output: Total (All Sectors), 1989-2010 (Sum of Tables 11.5b and 11.5c; Metric Tons of Gas) Year Carbon Dioxide 1 Sulfur Dioxide Nitrogen Oxides Coal 2 Natural Gas 3 Petroleum 4 Geo- thermal 5 Non- Biomass Waste 6 Total Coal 2 Natural Gas 3 Petroleum 4 Other 7 Total Coal 2 Natural Gas 3 Petroleum 4 Other 7 Total 1989 1,573,566,415 218,383,703 145,398,976 363,247 5,590,014 1,943,302,355 14,468,564 1,059 984,406

  19. Table 11b. Coal Prices to Electric Generating Plants, Projected vs. Actual

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

    b. Coal Prices to Electric Generating Plants, Projected vs. Actual" "Projected Price in Nominal Dollars" " (nominal dollars per million Btu)" ,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010,2011,2012,2013 "AEO

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  17. Delaware Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy...

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

    ...e","-","-","-","-","-" "Other","-","-",11,6,"-" "Total",7182,8534,7524,4842,5628 " " "s Value is less than 0.5 of the table metric, but value is included in any associated total.

  18. AEO2011: World Total Coal Flows By Importing Regions and Exporting...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Coal Flows By Importing Regions and Exporting Countries This dataset comes from the Energy Information Administration (EIA), and is part of the 2011 Annual Energy Outlook Report...

  19. Table 8.11a Electric Net Summer Capacity: Total (All Sectors), 1949-2011 (Sum of Tables 8.11b and 8.11d; Kilowatts)

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

    a Electric Net Summer Capacity: Total (All Sectors), 1949-2011 (Sum of Tables 8.11b and 8.11d; Kilowatts) Year Fossil Fuels Nuclear Electric Power Hydro- electric Pumped Storage Renewable Energy Other 9 Total Coal 1 Petroleum 2 Natural Gas 3 Other Gases 4 Total Conventional Hydroelectric Power 5 Biomass Geo- thermal Solar/PV 8 Wind Total Wood 6 Waste 7 1949 NA NA NA NA 44,887,000 0 [5] 18,500,000 13,000 [10] NA NA NA 18,513,000 NA 63,400,000 1950 NA NA NA NA 49,987,000 0 [5] 19,200,000 13,000

  20. Table A45. Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity...

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

    Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generation" " by Enclosed Floorspace, Percent Conditioned Floorspace, and Presence of Computer" " Controls for Building ...

  1. Coal Study Guide for Elementary School

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Focuses on the basics of coal, history of coal use, conversion of coal into electricity, and climate change concerns.

  2. Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Coal-Fired Electricity Generation: Systematic Review and Harmonization

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Whitaker, M.; Heath, G. A.; O'Donoughue, P.; Vorum, M.

    2012-04-01

    This systematic review and harmonization of life cycle assessments (LCAs) of utility-scale coal-fired electricity generation systems focuses on reducing variability and clarifying central tendencies in estimates of life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Screening 270 references for quality LCA methods, transparency, and completeness yielded 53 that reported 164 estimates of life cycle GHG emissions. These estimates for subcritical pulverized, integrated gasification combined cycle, fluidized bed, and supercritical pulverized coal combustion technologies vary from 675 to 1,689 grams CO{sub 2}-equivalent per kilowatt-hour (g CO{sub 2}-eq/kWh) (interquartile range [IQR]= 890-1,130 g CO{sub 2}-eq/kWh; median = 1,001) leading to confusion over reasonable estimates of life cycle GHG emissions from coal-fired electricity generation. By adjusting published estimates to common gross system boundaries and consistent values for key operational input parameters (most importantly, combustion carbon dioxide emission factor [CEF]), the meta-analytical process called harmonization clarifies the existing literature in ways useful for decision makers and analysts by significantly reducing the variability of estimates ({approx}53% in IQR magnitude) while maintaining a nearly constant central tendency ({approx}2.2% in median). Life cycle GHG emissions of a specific power plant depend on many factors and can differ from the generic estimates generated by the harmonization approach, but the tightness of distribution of harmonized estimates across several key coal combustion technologies implies, for some purposes, first-order estimates of life cycle GHG emissions could be based on knowledge of the technology type, coal mine emissions, thermal efficiency, and CEF alone without requiring full LCAs. Areas where new research is necessary to ensure accuracy are also discussed.

  3. Nitrogen oxides emission control options for coal-fired electric utility boilers

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ravi K. Srivastava; Robert E. Hall; Sikander Khan; Kevin Culligan; Bruce W. Lani

    2005-09-01

    Recent regulations have required reductions in emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) from electric utility boilers. To comply with these regulatory requirements, it is increasingly important to implement state-of-the-art NOx control technologies on coal-fired utility boilers. This paper reviews NOx control options for these boilers. It discusses the established commercial primary and secondary control technologies and examines what is being done to use them more effectively. Furthermore, the paper discusses recent developments in NOx controls. The popular primary control technologies in use in the United States are low-NOx burners and overfire air. Data reflect that average NOx reductions for specific primary controls have ranged from 35% to 63% from 1995 emissions levels. The secondary NOx control technologies applied on U.S. coal-fired utility boilers include reburning, selective noncatalytic reduction (SNCR), and selective catalytic reduction (SCR). Thirty-six U.S. coal-fired utility boilers have installed SNCR, and reported NOx reductions achieved at these applications ranged from 15% to 66%. Recently, SCR has been installed at 150 U.S. coal-fired utility boilers. Data on the performance of 20 SCR systems operating in the United States with low-NOx emissions reflect that in 2003, these units achieved NOx emission rates between 0.04 and 0.07 lb/106 Btu. 106 refs., 6 figs., 6 tabs.

  4. Coal Transportation Issues (released in AEO2007)

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2007-01-01

    Most of the coal delivered to U.S. consumers is transported by railroads, which accounted for 64% of total domestic coal shipments in 2004. Trucks transported approximately 12% of the coal consumed in the United States in 2004, mainly in short hauls from mines in the East to nearby coal-fired electricity and industrial plants. A number of minemouth power plants in the West also use trucks to haul coal from adjacent mining operations. Other significant modes of coal transportation in 2004 included conveyor belt and slurry pipeline (12%) and water transport on inland waterways, the Great Lakes, and tidewater areas (9%).

  5. Health and environmental effects of coal-fired electric power plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Morris, S.C.; Hamilton, L.D.

    1984-05-01

    This paper describes health and environmental impacts of coal-fired electric power plants. Effects on man, agriculture, and natural ecosystems are considered. These effects may result from direct impacts or exposures via air, water, and food chains. The paper is organized by geographical extent of effect. Occupational health impacts and local environmental effects such as noise and solid waste leachate are treated first. Then, regional effects of air pollution, including acid rain, are analyzed. Finally, potential global impacts are examined. Occupational health concerns considered include exposure to noise, dust, asbestos, mercury, and combustion products, and resulting injury and disease. Local effects considered include noise; air and water emissions of coal storage piles, solid waste operations, and cooling systems. Air pollution, once an acute local problem, is now a regional concern. Acute and chronic direct health effects are considered. Special attention is given to potential effects of radionuclides in coal and of acid rain. Finally, potential global impacts associated with carbon dioxide emissions are considered. 88 references, 9 tables.

  6. Comparative life-cycle air emissions of coal, domestic natural gas, LNG, and SNG for electricity generation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Paulina Jaramillo; W. Michael Griffin; H. Scott Matthews

    2007-09-15

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) estimates that in the coming decades the United States' natural gas (NG) demand for electricity generation will increase. Estimates also suggest that NG supply will increasingly come from imported liquefied natural gas (LNG). Additional supplies of NG could come domestically from the production of synthetic natural gas (SNG) via coal gasification-methanation. The objective of this study is to compare greenhouse gas (GHG), SOx, and NOx life-cycle emissions of electricity generated with NG/LNG/SNG and coal. This life-cycle comparison of air emissions from different fuels can help us better understand the advantages and disadvantages of using coal versus globally sourced NG for electricity generation. Our estimates suggest that with the current fleet of power plants, a mix of domestic NG, LNG, and SNG would have lower GHG emissions than coal. If advanced technologies with carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) are used, however, coal and a mix of domestic NG, LNG, and SNG would have very similar life-cycle GHG emissions. For SOx and NOx we find there are significant emissions in the upstream stages of the NG/LNG life-cycles, which contribute to a larger range in SOx and NOx emissions for NG/LNG than for coal and SNG. 38 refs., 3 figs., 2 tabs.

  7. Total integrated NOx compliance for existing pulverized coal-fired units

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Camody, G.; Lewis, R.; Cohen, M.B.; Buschmann, J.; Hilton, R.; Larsson, A.C.; Tobiasz, R.

    1999-07-01

    The EPA Title 1 NOx emission limits along with the corresponding OTR regulations are mandating coal-fired NOx emission levels below 0.15 lb/MBtu. For tangentially fired units, experience has shown that the technology is currently available to achieve these limits. The question for each unit owner-operator becomes; what is the most economical technology or combination of technologies to achieve the required results? This paper provides a brief overview of Combustion Engineering, Inc.'s (ABB C-E) latest NOx control technologies, both in-furnace and post-combustion, for tangential coal-fired steam generators. The paper further reviews options of both stand-alone and combined multiple technologies to achieve the most cost-effective NOx compliance, while maintaining the high levels of unit efficiency and performance that is required to by successful in their deregulated power industry. Current operational data of both in-furnace and SCR NOx reduction systems are presented, as well as the latest historical cost data for the systems.

  8. "End Use","Total","Electricity(a)","Fuel Oil","Diesel Fuel(b...

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

    for Table 5.6;" " Unit: Percents." " "," ",," ","Distillate"," "," ",," " " ",,,,"Fuel Oil",,,"Coal" " "," ","Net","Residual","and",,"LPG and","(excluding Coal"," " "End ...

  9. Coal sector profile

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-06-05

    Coal is our largest domestic energy resource with recoverable reserves estimated at 268 billion short tons or 5.896 quads Btu equivalent. This is approximately 95 percent of US fossil energy resources. It is relatively inexpensive to mine, and on a per Btu basis it is generally much less costly to produce than other energy sources. Its chief drawbacks are the environmental, health and safety concerns that must be addressed in its production and consumption. Historically, coal has played a major role in US energy markets. Coal fueled the railroads, heated the homes, powered the factories. and provided the raw materials for steel-making. In 1920, coal supplied over three times the amount of energy of oil, gas, and hydro combined. From 1920 until the mid 1970s, coal production remained fairly constant at 400 to 600 million short tons a year. Rapid increases in overall energy demands, which began during and after World War II were mostly met by oil and gas. By the mid 1940s, coal represented only half of total energy consumption in the US. In fact, post-war coal production, which had risen in support of the war effort and the postwar Marshall plan, decreased approximately 25 percent between 1945 and 1960. Coal demand in the post-war era up until the 1970s was characterized by increasing coal use by the electric utilities but decreasing coal use in many other markets (e.g., rail transportation). The oil price shocks of the 1970s, combined with natural gas shortages and problems with nuclear power, returned coal to a position of prominence. The greatly expanded use of coal was seen as a key building block in US energy strategies of the 1970s. Coal production increased from 613 million short tons per year in 1970 to 950 million short tons in 1988, up over 50 percent.

  10. Total

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

    Cell shipments Total Inventory, start-of-year 328,658 Manufactured during reporting year ... Table 5. Source and disposition of photovoltaic cell shipments, 2013 (peak kilowatts) ...

  11. Proximate analysis of coal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Donahue, C.J.; Rais, E.A.

    2009-02-15

    This lab experiment illustrates the use of thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) to perform proximate analysis on a series of coal samples of different rank. Peat and coke are also examined. A total of four exercises are described. These are dry exercises as students interpret previously recorded scans. The weight percent moisture, volatile matter, fixed carbon, and ash content are determined for each sample and comparisons are made. Proximate analysis is performed on a coal sample from a local electric utility. From the weight percent sulfur found in the coal (determined by a separate procedure the Eschka method) and the ash content, students calculate the quantity of sulfur dioxide emissions and ash produced annually by a large coal-fired electric power plant.

  12. Time evolution of the total electric-field strength in multimode lasers

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brunner, W.; Fischer, R.; Paul, H.

    1988-05-01

    Our previous numerical studies of the output characteristics of multimode lasers are extended to include the evolution of the total electric-field strength. The regular or irregular behavior of the system, which becomes manifest in the evolution of the amplitudes and the phases in the different modes, is reflected also in the evolution of the total electric-field strength in a stroboscopic view. (The total electric-field strength, with its high-frequency time dependence suppressed, is considered at times t, t+..delta..t, t+2..delta..t,..., where ..delta..t is a multiple of the round-trip time in the resonator.) Moreover, it is demonstrated that the evolution of the system is very sensitive to slight changes in the initial conditions. This finding supports the view that the irregularity falls in the class of the so-called deterministic chaos.

  13. U.S. coal outlook in Asia

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Johnson, C.J.

    1997-02-01

    Coal exports from the US to Asia are declining over time as a result of (1) increased competition from coal suppliers within the Asia-Pacific region, (2) changing steel making technologies, (3) decreased emphasis on security of coal supplies, and (4) deregulation of the energy industry--particularly electric utilities. There are no major changes on the horizon that are likely to alter the role of the US as a modest coal supplier to the Asia-Pacific region. The downward trend in US coal exports to Asia is expected to continue over the 1997--2010 period. But economic and policy changes underway in Asia are likely to result in periodic coal shortages, lasting a few months to a year, and short term increased export opportunities for US coal. US coal exports to Asia are projected to fluctuate within the following ranges over the 2000--2010 period: 10--17 million tons in total exports, 6--12 million tons in thermal coal exports, and 4--9 million tons in coking coal exports. The most important role for US coal, from the perspective of Asian coal importing countries, is to ensure a major alternative source of coal supplies that can be turned to in the event of unforeseen disruptions in coal supplies from the Asia-Pacific region or South Africa. However, the willingness of consumers to pay a premium to ensure US export capacity is declining, with increased emphasis on obtaining the lowest cost coal supplies.

  14. Total............................................................

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

    Total................................................................... 111.1 2,033 1,618 1,031 791 630 401 Total Floorspace (Square Feet) Fewer than 500............................................... 3.2 357 336 113 188 177 59 500 to 999....................................................... 23.8 733 667 308 343 312 144 1,000 to 1,499................................................. 20.8 1,157 1,086 625 435 409 235 1,500 to 1,999................................................. 15.4 1,592

  15. Planning India's long-term energy shipment infrastructures for electricity and coal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brian H. Bowen; Devendra Canchi; Vishal Agarwal Lalit; Paul V. Precke; F.T. Sparrow; Marty W. Irwin

    2010-01-15

    The Purdue Long-Term Electricity Trading and Capacity Expansion Planning Model simultaneously optimizes both the expansion of transmission and generation capacity. Most commercial electricity system planning software is limited to only transmission planning. An application of the model to India's national power grid, for 2008-2028, indicates substantial transmission expansion is the cost-effective means of meeting the needs of the nation's growing economy. An electricity demand growth rate of 4% over the 20-year planning horizon requires more than a 50% increase in the Government's forecasted transmission capacity expansion, and 8% demand growth requires more than a six-fold increase in the planned transmission capacity expansion. The model minimizes the long-term expansion costs (operational and capital) for the nation's five existing regional power grids and suggests the need for large increases in load-carrying capability between them. Changes in coal policy affect both the location of new thermal power plants and the optimal pattern inter-regional transmission expansions. 15 refs., 10 figs., 7 tabs.

  16. Table 11a. Coal Prices to Electric Generating Plants, Projected vs. Actual

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

    a. Coal Prices to Electric Generating Plants, Projected vs. Actual" "Projected Price in Constant Dollars" " (constant dollars per million Btu in ""dollar year"" specific to each AEO)" ,"AEO $ Year",1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010,2011,2012,2013 "AEO 1994",1992,1.4699,1.4799,1.53,1.57,1.58,1.57,1.61,1.63,1.68,1.69,1.7,1.72,1.7,1.76,1.79,1.81,1.88,1.92 "AEO

  17. Table 11a. Coal Prices to Electric Generating Plants, Projected vs. Actual

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

    a. Coal Prices to Electric Generating Plants, Projected vs. Actual Projected Price in Constant Dollars (constant dollars per million Btu in "dollar year" specific to each AEO) AEO $ Year 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 AEO 1994 1992 1.47 1.48 1.53 1.57 1.58 1.57 1.61 1.63 1.68 1.69 1.70 1.72 1.70 1.76 1.79 1.81 1.88 1.92 AEO 1995 1993 1.39 1.39 1.38 1.40 1.40 1.39 1.39 1.42 1.41 1.43 1.44 1.45 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.47

  18. Methodology for comparing the health effects of electricity generation from uranium and coal fuels

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rhyne, W.R.; El-Bassioni, A.A.

    1981-12-08

    A methodology was developed for comparing the health risks of electricity generation from uranium and coal fuels. The health effects attributable to the construction, operation, and decommissioning of each facility in the two fuel cycle were considered. The methodology is based on defining (1) requirement variables for the materials, energy, etc., (2) effluent variables associated with the requirement variables as well as with the fuel cycle facility operation, and (3) health impact variables for effluents and accidents. The materials, energy, etc., required for construction, operation, and decommissioning of each fuel cycle facility are defined as primary variables. The materials, energy, etc., needed to produce the primary variable are defined as secondary requirement variables. Each requirement variable (primary, secondary, etc.) has associated effluent variables and health impact variables. A diverging chain or tree is formed for each primary variable. Fortunately, most elements reoccur frequently to reduce the level of analysis complexity. 6 references, 11 figures, 6 tables.

  19. Total..........................................................

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

    14.7 7.4 12.5 12.5 18.9 18.6 17.3 9.2 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500...... 3.2 0.7 Q 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.6 0.3 Q 500 to ...

  20. Total

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

    Product: Total Crude Oil Liquefied Petroleum Gases Propane/Propylene Normal Butane/Butylene Other Liquids Oxygenates Fuel Ethanol MTBE Other Oxygenates Biomass-based Diesel Other Renewable Diesel Fuel Other Renewable Fuels Gasoline Blending Components Petroleum Products Finished Motor Gasoline Reformulated Gasoline Conventional Gasoline Kerosene-Type Jet Fuel Kerosene Distillate Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil, 15 ppm Sulfur and Under Distillate Fuel Oil, Greater than 15 ppm to 500 ppm Sulfur

  1. Total...................................................................

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

    15.2 7.8 1.0 1.2 3.3 1.9 For Two Housing Units............................. 0.9 Q N Q 0.6 N Heat Pump.................................................. 9.2 7.4 0.3 Q 0.7 0.5 Portable Electric Heater............................... 1.6 0.8 Q Q Q 0.3 Other Equipment......................................... 1.9 0.7 Q Q 0.7 Q Fuel Oil........................................................... 7.7 5.5 0.4 0.8 0.9 0.2 Steam or Hot Water System........................ 4.7 2.9 Q 0.7 0.8 N For One Housing

  2. Total..........................................................................

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

    . 111.1 20.6 15.1 5.5 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500................................................... 3.2 0.9 0.5 0.4 500 to 999........................................................... 23.8 4.6 3.6 1.1 1,000 to 1,499..................................................... 20.8 2.8 2.2 0.6 1,500 to 1,999..................................................... 15.4 1.9 1.4 0.5 2,000 to 2,499..................................................... 12.2 2.3 1.7 0.5 2,500 to

  3. Total..........................................................................

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

    5.6 17.7 7.9 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500................................................... 3.2 0.5 0.3 Q 500 to 999........................................................... 23.8 3.9 2.4 1.5 1,000 to 1,499..................................................... 20.8 4.4 3.2 1.2 1,500 to 1,999..................................................... 15.4 3.5 2.4 1.1 2,000 to 2,499..................................................... 12.2 3.2 2.1 1.1 2,500 to

  4. Total..........................................................................

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

    0.7 21.7 6.9 12.1 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500................................................... 3.2 0.9 0.6 Q Q 500 to 999........................................................... 23.8 9.0 4.2 1.5 3.2 1,000 to 1,499..................................................... 20.8 8.6 4.7 1.5 2.5 1,500 to 1,999..................................................... 15.4 6.0 2.9 1.2 1.9 2,000 to 2,499..................................................... 12.2 4.1 2.1 0.7

  5. Total..........................................................................

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

    4.2 7.6 16.6 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500................................................... 3.2 1.0 0.2 0.8 500 to 999........................................................... 23.8 6.3 1.4 4.9 1,000 to 1,499..................................................... 20.8 5.0 1.6 3.4 1,500 to 1,999..................................................... 15.4 4.0 1.4 2.6 2,000 to 2,499..................................................... 12.2 2.6 0.9 1.7 2,500 to

  6. Total..........................................................................

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

    7.1 19.0 22.7 22.3 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500................................................... 3.2 2.1 0.6 Q 0.4 500 to 999........................................................... 23.8 13.6 3.7 3.2 3.2 1,000 to 1,499..................................................... 20.8 9.5 3.7 3.4 4.2 1,500 to 1,999..................................................... 15.4 6.6 2.7 2.5 3.6 2,000 to 2,499..................................................... 12.2 5.0 2.1

  7. "Code(a)","End Use","Total","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Diesel...

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

    Relative Standard Errors for Table 5.2;" " Unit: Percents." ,,,,,"Distillate" ,,,,,"Fuel Oil",,,"Coal" "NAICS",,,"Net","Residual","and",,"LPG and","(excluding Coal" "Code(a)","End ...

  8. Total................................................

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

    .. 111.1 86.6 2,522 1,970 1,310 1,812 1,475 821 1,055 944 554 Total Floorspace (Square Feet) Fewer than 500............................. 3.2 0.9 261 336 162 Q Q Q 334 260 Q 500 to 999.................................... 23.8 9.4 670 683 320 705 666 274 811 721 363 1,000 to 1,499.............................. 20.8 15.0 1,121 1,083 622 1,129 1,052 535 1,228 1,090 676 1,500 to 1,999.............................. 15.4 14.4 1,574 1,450 945 1,628 1,327 629 1,712 1,489 808 2,000 to

  9. Total..........................................................

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

    .. 111.1 24.5 1,090 902 341 872 780 441 Total Floorspace (Square Feet) Fewer than 500...................................... 3.1 2.3 403 360 165 366 348 93 500 to 999.............................................. 22.2 14.4 763 660 277 730 646 303 1,000 to 1,499........................................ 19.1 5.8 1,223 1,130 496 1,187 1,086 696 1,500 to 1,999........................................ 14.4 1.0 1,700 1,422 412 1,698 1,544 1,348 2,000 to 2,499........................................ 12.7

  10. Total...................................................................

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

    Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500............................................ 3.2 0.4 Q 0.6 1.7 0.4 500 to 999................................................... 23.8 4.8 1.4 4.2 10.2 3.2 1,000 to 1,499............................................. 20.8 10.6 1.8 1.8 4.0 2.6 1,500 to 1,999............................................. 15.4 12.4 1.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 2,000 to 2,499............................................. 12.2 10.7 1.0 0.2 Q Q 2,500 to

  11. Total.........................................................................

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

    Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 2 Fewer than 500.................................................. 3.2 Q 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.5 500 to 999.......................................................... 23.8 1.5 5.4 5.5 6.1 5.3 1,000 to 1,499.................................................... 20.8 1.4 4.0 5.2 5.0 5.2 1,500 to 1,999.................................................... 15.4 1.4 3.1 3.5 3.6 3.8 2,000 to 2,499.................................................... 12.2 1.4 3.2 3.0 2.3 2.3

  12. Total..........................................................................

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

    25.6 40.7 24.2 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500................................................... 3.2 0.9 0.5 0.9 1.0 500 to 999........................................................... 23.8 4.6 3.9 9.0 6.3 1,000 to 1,499..................................................... 20.8 2.8 4.4 8.6 5.0 1,500 to 1,999..................................................... 15.4 1.9 3.5 6.0 4.0 2,000 to 2,499..................................................... 12.2 2.3 3.2 4.1

  13. Total..........................................................................

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

    7.1 7.0 8.0 12.1 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500................................................... 3.2 0.4 Q Q 0.5 500 to 999........................................................... 23.8 2.5 1.5 2.1 3.7 1,000 to 1,499..................................................... 20.8 1.1 2.0 1.5 2.5 1,500 to 1,999..................................................... 15.4 0.5 1.2 1.2 1.9 2,000 to 2,499..................................................... 12.2 0.7 0.5 0.8 1.4

  14. Total...........................................................

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

    26.7 28.8 20.6 13.1 22.0 16.6 38.6 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500................................... 3.2 1.9 0.9 Q Q Q 1.3 2.3 500 to 999........................................... 23.8 10.5 7.3 3.3 1.4 1.2 6.6 12.9 1,000 to 1,499..................................... 20.8 5.8 7.0 3.8 2.2 2.0 3.9 8.9 1,500 to 1,999..................................... 15.4 3.1 4.2 3.4 2.0 2.7 1.9 5.0 2,000 to 2,499..................................... 12.2 1.7 2.7 2.9 1.8 3.2 1.1 2.8

  15. Table 8.4a Consumption for Electricity Generation by Energy Source: Total (All Sectors), 1949-2011 (Sum of Tables 8.4b and 8.4c; Billion Btu)

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

    a Consumption for Electricity Generation by Energy Source: Total (All Sectors), 1949-2011 (Sum of Tables 8.4b and 8.4c; Billion Btu) Year Fossil Fuels Nuclear Electric Power 5 Renewable Energy Other 9 Electricity Net Imports 10 Total Coal 1 Petroleum 2 Natural Gas 3 Other Gases 4 Total Conventional Hydroelectric Power 5 Biomass Geo- thermal 5 Solar/PV 5,8 Wind 5 Total Wood 6 Waste 7 1949 1,995,055 414,632 569,375 NA 2,979,062 0 1,424,722 5,803 NA NA NA NA 1,430,525 NA 5,420 4,415,007 1950

  16. Table A41. Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity

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

    A41. Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity" " Generation by Census Region, Industry Group, Selected Industries, and Type of" " Energy Management Program, 1991" " (Estimates in Trillion Btu)" ,,," Census Region",,,,"RSE" "SIC","Industry Groups",," -------------------------------------------",,,,"Row" "Code(a)","and

  17. Table A50. Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generatio

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

    A50. Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generation" " by Census Region, Industry Group, Selected Industries, and Type of" " Energy-Management Program, 1994" " (Estimates in Trillion Btu)" ,,,," Census Region",,,"RSE" "SIC",,,,,,,"Row" "Code(a)","Industry Group and

  18. Table A26. Components of Total Electricity Demand by Census Region, Census Di

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

    Components of Total Electricity Demand by Census Region, Census Division, and" " Economic Characteristics of the Establishment, 1994" " (Estimates in Million Kilowatthours)" " "," "," "," ","Sales/"," ","RSE" " "," ","Transfers","Onsite","Transfers"," ","Row" "Economic

  19. Delineating coal market regions

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Solomon, B.D.; Pyrdol, J.J.

    1986-04-01

    This study addresses the delineation of US coal market regions and their evolution since the 1973 Arab oil embargo. Dichotomizing into compliance (low sulfur) and high sulfur coal deliveries, market regions are generated for 1973, 1977, and 1983. Focus is restricted to steam coal shipments to electric utilities, which currently account for over 80% of the total domestic market. A two-stage method is used. First, cluster analyses are performed on the origin-destination shipments data to generate baseline regions. This is followed by multiple regression analyses on CIF delivered price data for 1983. Sensitivity analysis on the configuration of the regions is also conducted, and some thoughts on the behavior of coal markets conclude the paper. 37 references, 6 figures, 2 tables.

  20. Table 11b. Coal Prices to Electric Generating Plants, Projected vs. Actual

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

    b. Coal Prices to Electric Generating Plants, Projected vs. Actual Projected Price in Nominal Dollars (nominal dollars per million Btu) 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 AEO 1994 1.50 1.55 1.64 1.73 1.78 1.82 1.92 2.01 2.13 2.22 2.30 2.41 2.46 2.64 2.78 2.90 3.12 3.30 AEO 1995 1.42 1.46 1.49 1.55 1.59 1.62 1.67 1.76 1.80 1.89 1.97 2.05 2.13 2.21 2.28 2.38 2.50 AEO 1996 1.35 1.35 1.37 1.39 1.42 1.46 1.50 1.56 1.62 1.67 1.75

  1. Environmental data energy technology characterizations: coal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1980-04-01

    This document describes the activities leading to the conversion of coal to electricity. Specifically, the activities consist of coal mining and beneficiation, coal transport, electric power generation, and power transmission. To enhance the usefulness of the material presented, resource requirements, energy products, and residuals for each activity area are normalized in terms of 10/sup 12/ Btus of energy produced. Thus, the total effect of producing electricity from coal can be determined by combining the residuals associated with the appropriate activity areas. Emissions from the coal cycle are highly dependent upon the type of coal consumed as well as the control technology assigned to the activity area. Each area is assumed to be equipped with currently available control technologies that meet environmental regulations. The conventional boiler, for example, has an electrostatic precipitator and a flue gas desulfurization scrubber. While this results in the removal of most of the particulate matter and sulfur dioxide in the flue gas stream, it creates other new environmental residuals -- solid waste, sludge, and ash. There are many different types of mined coal. For informational purposes, two types from two major producing regions, the East and the West, are characterized here. The eastern coal is typical of the Northern Appalachian coal district with a high sulfur and heat content. The western coal, from the Powder River Basin, has much less sulfur, but also has a substantially lower heating value.

  2. Quarterly coal report, January--March 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-08-20

    The United States produced 242 million short tons of coal in the first quarter of 1993, a decrease of 6 percent (14 million short tons) from the amount produced during the first quarter of 1992. The decrease was due to a decline in production east of the Mississippi River. All major coal-producing States in this region had lower coal production levels led by West Virginia, which produced 5 million short tons less coal. The principal reasons for the overall drop in coal output compared to a year earlier were: A decrease in demand for US coal in foreign markets; a slower rate of producer/distributor stock build-up; and a drawn-down of electric utility coal stocks. Distribution of US coal in the first quarter of 1993 was 10 million short tons lower than in the first quarter of 1992, with 5 million short tons less distributed to both electric utilities and overseas markets. The average price of coal delivered to electric utilities during the first quarter of 1993 was $28.65 per short ton, the lowest value since the first quarter of 1980. Coal consumption in the first quarter of 1993 was 230 million short tons, 4 percent higher than in the first quarter of 1992, due primarily to a 5-percent increase in consumption at electric utility plants. Total consumer stocks, at 153 million short tons, and electric utility stocks, at 144 million short tons, were at their lowest quarterly level since the end of 1989. US. coal exports totaled 19 million short tons, 6 million short tons less than in the first quarter of 1992, and the lowest quarterly level since 1988. The decline was primarily due to a 1-million-short-ton drop in exports to each of the following destinations: Italy, France, Belgium and Luxembourg, and Canada.

  3. U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2014

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    U.S. Coal Stocks, 2008 - 2014 (thousand short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2014 Table 37. U.S. Coal Stocks, 2008 - 2014 (thousand short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2014 Coal Consumers Last Day of Quarter Electric Power Sector 1 Coke Plants Other Industrial 2 Commercial and Institutional Users Total Coal Producers and Distributors Total 2008 March 31 146,497 1,462 4,818 448 153,225 34,876

  4. Review of a Proposed Quarterly Coal Publication

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1981-01-01

    This Review of a Proposed Quartery Coal Publication contains findings and recommendations regarding the content of a new summary Energy Information Administration (EIA) coal and coke publication entitled The Quarterly Coal Review (QCR). It is divided into five sections: results of interviews with selected EIA data users; identification of major functions of the coal and coke industries; analysis of coal and coke data collection activities; evaluation of issues conerning data presentation including recommendations for the content of the proposed QCR; and comparison of the proposed QCR with other EIA publications. Major findings and recommendations are as follows: (1) User interviews indicate a definite need for a compehensive publication that would support analyses and examine economic, supply and demand trends in the coal industry; (2) the organization of the publication should reflect the natural order of activities of the coal and coke industries. Based on an analysis of the industries, these functions are: production, stocks, imports, exports, distribution, and consumption; (3) current EIA coal and coke surveys collect sufficient data to provide a summary of the coal and coke industries on a quarterly basis; (4) coal and coke data should be presented separately. Coke data could be presented as an appendix; (5) three geographic aggregations are recommended in the QCR. These are: US total, coal producing districts, and state; (6) coal consumption data should be consolidated into four major consumer categories: electric utilities, coke plants, other industrial, and residential commercial; (7) several EIA publications could be eliminated by the proposed QCR.

  5. FE Clean Coal News | Department of Energy

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

    Electricity from Innovative DOE-Supported Clean Coal Project An innovative clean coal technology project in Texas will supply electricity to the largest municipally owned...

  6. U.S. monthly coal production increases

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

    The turnaround comes as power plants are using more coal to generate electricity, reflecting higher electricity demand....and the fact that coal prices this year are more ...

  7. ADVANCED FLUE GAS CONDITIONING AS A RETROFIT UPGRADE TO ENHANCE PM COLLECTION FROM COAL-FIRED ELECTRIC UTILITY BOILERS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    C. Jean Bustard; Kenneth E. Baldrey; Richard Schlager

    2000-04-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy and ADA Environmental Solutions has begun a project to develop commercial flue gas conditioning additives. The objective is to develop conditioning agents that can help improve particulate control performance of smaller or under-sized electrostatic precipitators on utility coal-fired boilers. The new chemicals will be used to control both the electrical resistivity and the adhesion or cohesivity of the flyash. There is a need to provide cost-effective and safer alternatives to traditional flue gas conditioning with SO{sub 3} and ammonia. Preliminary testing has identified a class of common deliquescent salts that effectively control flyash resistivity on a variety of coals. A method to evaluate cohesive properties of flyash in the laboratory has been selected and construction of an electrostatic tensiometer test fixture is underway. Preliminary selection of a variety of chemicals that will be screened for effect on flyash cohesion has been completed.

  8. Quarterly coal report, April--June 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-11-26

    In the second quarter of 1993, the United States produced 235 million short tons of coal. This brought the total for the first half of 1993 to 477 million short tons, a decrease of 4 percent (21 million short tons) from the amount produced during the first half of 1992. The decrease was due to a 26-million-short-ton decline in production east of the Mississippi River, which was partially offset by a 5-million-short-ton increase in coal production west of the Mississippi River. Compared with the first 6 months of 1992, all States east of the Mississippi River had lower coal production levels, led by West Virginia and Illinois, which produced 9 million short tons and 7 million short tons less coal, respectively. The principal reasons for the drop in coal output for the first 6 months of 1993 compared to a year earlier were: a decrease in demand for US coal in foreign markets, particularly the steam coal markets; a draw-down of electric utility coal stocks to meet the increase in demand for coal-fired electricity generation; and a lower producer/distributor stock build-up. Distribution of US coal in the first half of 1993 was 15 million short tons lower than in the first half of 1992, with 13 million short tons less distributed to overseas markets and 2 million short tons less distributed to domestic markets.

  9. Annual Energy Outlook 2016 2nd Coal Working Group

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

    2 nd Coal Working Group Coal and Uranium Analysis Team February 9, 2016| Washington, D.C. WORKING GROUP PRESENTATION FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. DO NOT QUOTE OR CITE AS AEO2016 MODELING ASSUMPTIONS AND INPUTS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. Key results for the AEO2016 Reference case 2 * Coal-fired generation, production, and capacity are all lower in the preliminary AEO2016 Reference case - Coal's share of total electricity generation falls from 38% in 2014 to 18% by 2040, compared to 33% in AEO2015 - Coal

  10. EIA projections of coal supply and demand

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Klein, D.E.

    1989-10-23

    Contents of this report include: EIA projections of coal supply and demand which covers forecasted coal supply and transportation, forecasted coal demand by consuming sector, and forecasted coal demand by the electric utility sector; and policy discussion.

  11. Coal industry annual 1997

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-12-01

    Coal Industry Annual 1997 provides comprehensive information about US coal production, number of mines, prices, productivity, employment, productive capacity, and recoverable reserves. US Coal production for 1997 and previous years is based on the annual survey EIA-7A, Coal Production Report. This report presents data on coal consumption, coal distribution, coal stocks, coal prices, and coal quality for Congress, Federal and State agencies, the coal industry, and the general public. Appendix A contains a compilation of coal statistics for the major coal-producing States. This report includes a national total coal consumption for nonutility power producers that are not in the manufacturing, agriculture, mining, construction, or commercial sectors. 14 figs., 145 tabs.

  12. JV Task 126 - Mercury Control Technologies for Electric Utilities Burning Bituminous Coal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jason Laumb; John Kay; Michael Jones; Brandon Pavlish; Nicholas Lentz; Donald McCollor; Kevin Galbreath

    2009-03-29

    The EERC developed an applied research consortium project to test cost-effective mercury (Hg) control technologies for utilities burning bituminous coals. The project goal was to test innovative Hg control technologies that have the potential to reduce Hg emissions from bituminous coal-fired power plants by {ge}90% at costs of one-half to three-quarters of current estimates for activated carbon injection (ACI). Hg control technology evaluations were performed using the EERC's combustion test facility (CTF). The CTF was fired on pulverized bituminous coals at 550,000 Btu/hr (580 MJ/hr). The CTF was configured with the following air pollution control devices (APCDs): selective catalytic reduction (SCR) unit, electrostatic precipitator (ESP), and wet flue gas desulfurization system (WFDS). The Hg control technologies investigated as part of this project included ACI (three Norit Americas, Inc., and eleven Envergex sorbents), elemental mercury (Hg{sup 0}) oxidation catalysts (i.e., the noble metals in Hitachi Zosen, Cormetech, and Hitachi SCR catalysts), sorbent enhancement additives (SEAs) (a proprietary EERC additive, trona, and limestone), and blending with a Powder River Basin (PRB) subbituminous coal. These Hg control technologies were evaluated separately, and many were also tested in combination.

  13. Coal | Department of Energy

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

    Coal Coal Coal Coal is the largest domestically produced source of energy in America and is used to generate a significant chunk of our nation's electricity. The Energy Department is working to develop technologies that make coal cleaner, so we can ensure it plays a part in our clean energy future. The Department is also investing in development of carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS) technologies, also referred to as carbon capture, utilization and sequestration. Featured Energy

  14. Using Electricity",,,"Electricity Consumption",,,"Electricity...

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

    . Total Electricity Consumption and Expenditures, 2003" ,"All Buildings* Using Electricity",,,"Electricity Consumption",,,"Electricity Expenditures" ,"Number of Buildings...

  15. Through its Clean Coal Research Program, FE

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    its inception as part of DOE in 1977, FE's R&D mission has continued to evolve to reflect the nation's key energy supply, security and environmental needs. Coal represents 93 percent of total U.S. fossil fuel reserves and is the largest single source (45 percent) of electricity generation, both currently and projected for the foreseeable future. It also is among the most carbon- intensive energy resources. Continuing the legacy of previous successes in the Clean Coal Technology Development

  16. " Electricity Generation by Census Region, Industry...

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

    ...,"Distillate","Natural Gas(d)"," ","Coal","and Breeze"," ","RSE" "SIC"," ","Total","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(c)","(billion","LPG","(1000","(1000","Other(e)","Row" ...

  17. 1983 annual outlook for US coal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Paull, M.K.

    1983-11-01

    This report highlights projections and discusses them in relation to coal's future domestic uses; the report also examines factors affecting coal's future growth. Coal was the primary source of energy in the United States from the mid-1800's until after World War II. After that war, coal lost most of its markets to oil and natural gas. In the 1960's, coal development was also hampered by environmental and mine safety concerns, and by the emergence of nuclear power. The 1973-74 oil embargo, however, demonstrated that the United States could no longer depend on imported oil to fuel its energy growth. Through 1990, coal is projected to meet an increasing share of total US energy demand. The projections for the 1985 to 1990 time period show an increased growth in coal consumption, particularly in the electric utility sector where new coal-fired power plants are coming on line. The projected growth in coal production, however, is subject to a series of potential constraints and/or obstacles that must be overcome. These potential constraints and obstacles are described after the history of coal supply and demand is reviewed and future projections are discussed.

  18. District of Columbia Total Electric Power Industry Net Generation, by Energy Source

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

    District of Columbia" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",81,75,72,35,200 " Coal","-","-","-","-","-" " Petroleum",81,75,72,35,200 " Natural Gas","-","-","-","-","-" " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-"

  19. District of Columbia Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    District of Columbia" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",806,806,790,790,790 " Coal","-","-","-","-","-" " Petroleum",806,806,790,790,790 " Natural Gas","-","-","-","-","-" " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-"

  20. Co-production of electricity and alternate fuels from coal. Final report, August 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-12-31

    The Calderon process and its process development unit, PDU, were originally conceived to produce two useful products from a bituminous coal: a desulfurized medium BTU gas containing primarily CO, H{sub 2}, CH{sub 4}, CO{sub 2}, and H{sub 2}O; and a desulfurized low BTU gas containing these same constituents plus N{sub 2} from the air used to provide heat for the process through the combustion of a portion of the fuel. The process was viewed as a means for providing both a synthesis gas for liquid fuel production (perhaps CH{sub 3}OH, alternatively CH{sub 4} or NH{sub 3}) and a pressurized, low BTU fuel gas, for gas turbine based power generation. The Calderon coal process comprises three principle sections which perform the following functions: coal pyrolysis in a continuous, steady flow unit based on coke oven technology; air blown, slagging, coke gasification in a moving bed unit based on a blast furnace technology; and a novel, lime pebble based, product gas processing in which a variety of functions are accomplished including the cracking of hydrocarbons and the removal of sulfur, H{sub 2}S, and of particulates from both the medium and low BTU gases. The product gas processing unit, based on multiple moving beds, has also been conceived to regenerate the lime pebbles and recover sulfur as elemental S.

  1. Energy Information Administration quarterly coal report, October--December 1992

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-05-21

    The United States produced just over 1 billion short tons of coal in 1992, 0.4 percent more than in 1991. Most of the 4-million-short-ton increase in coal production occurred west of the Mississippi River, where a record level of 408 million short tons of coal was produced. The amount of coal received by domestic consumers in 1992 totaled 887 million short tons. This was 7 million short tons more than in 1991, primarily due to increased coal demand from electric utilities. The average price of delivered coal to each sector declined by about 2 percent. Coal consumption in 1992 was 893 million short tons, only 1 percent higher than in 1991, due primarily to a 1-percent increase in consumption at electric utility plants. Consumer coal stocks at the end of 1992 were 163 million short tons, a decrease of 3 percent from the level at the end of 1991, and the lowest year-end level since 1989. US coal exports fell 6 percent from the 1991 level to 103 million short tons in 1992. Less coal was exported to markets in Europe, Asia, and South America, but coal exports to Canada increased 4 million short tons.

  2. Weekly Coal Production Estimation Methodology

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

    Weekly Coal Production Estimation Methodology Step 1 (Estimate total amount of weekly U.S. coal production) U.S. coal production for the current week is estimated using a ratio ...

  3. EIS-0105: Conversion to Coal, Baltimore Gas & Electric Company, Brandon Shores Generating Station Units 1 and 2, Anne Arundel County, Maryland

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The U.S. Department of Energy’s Economic Regulatory Administration Office of Fuels Program, Coal and Electricity Division prepared this statement to assess the potential environmental and socioeconomic impacts associated with prohibiting the use of petroleum products as a primary energy source for Units 1 and 2 of the Brandon Shores Generating Station, located in Anne Arundel County, Maryland.

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

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

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

  5. New York Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    York" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",28071,27582,26726,27022,26653 " Coal",4014,3570,2899,2804,2781 " Petroleum",7241,7286,7273,7335,6421 " Natural Gas",16816,16727,16554,16882,17407 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-",45 "Nuclear",5156,5156,5264,5262,5271 "Renewables",5027,5087,5433,6013,6033 "Pumped Storage",1297,1297,1297,1374,1400

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

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

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

  7. North Carolina Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Carolina" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",19673,20247,20305,20230,20081 " Coal",13113,13068,13069,12952,12766 " Petroleum",563,564,558,560,573 " Natural Gas",5997,6616,6679,6718,6742 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",4975,4975,4958,4958,4958 "Renewables",2292,2301,2294,2294,2499 "Pumped Storage",84,84,90,86,86

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

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

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

  9. North Dakota Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Dakota" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",4222,4212,4212,4243,4247 " Coal",4127,4119,4119,4148,4153 " Petroleum",77,75,75,71,71 " Natural Gas",10,10,10,15,15 " Other Gases",8,8,8,8,8 "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",617,879,1272,1720,1941 "Pumped Storage","-","-","-","-","-"

  10. Ohio Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Ohio" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",31582,31418,31154,31189,30705 " Coal",22264,22074,21815,21858,21360 " Petroleum",1057,1075,1047,1047,1019 " Natural Gas",8161,8169,8192,8184,8203 " Other Gases",100,100,100,100,123 "Nuclear",2120,2124,2124,2134,2134 "Renewables",175,213,214,216,231 "Pumped Storage","-","-","-","-","-"

  11. Oklahoma Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Oklahoma" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",18301,18083,18364,18532,18350 " Coal",5372,5364,5302,5330,5330 " Petroleum",75,70,71,71,69 " Natural Gas",12854,12649,12985,13125,12951 " Other Gases","-","-",6,6,"-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",1524,1618,1637,2057,2412 "Pumped

  12. Oregon Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Oregon" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",3349,3686,3653,3626,3577 " Coal",585,585,585,585,585 " Petroleum","-","-","-","-","-" " Natural Gas",2764,3101,3068,3041,2992 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-"

  13. Pennsylvania Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Pennsylvania" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",32893,32751,32654,32663,32530 " Coal",18771,18581,18513,18539,18481 " Petroleum",4664,4660,4540,4533,4534 " Natural Gas",9349,9410,9507,9491,9415 " Other Gases",110,100,94,101,100 "Nuclear",9234,9305,9337,9455,9540 "Renewables",1365,1529,1619,1971,1984 "Pumped Storage",1513,1521,1521,1521,1521

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

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

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

  15. Rhode Island Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Rhode Island" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",1743,1754,1754,1754,1754 " Coal","-","-","-","-","-" " Petroleum",31,29,26,16,16 " Natural Gas",1712,1725,1728,1738,1738 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-"

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

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

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

  17. South Carolina Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Carolina" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",12100,12682,13281,13189,13207 " Coal",6088,6641,7242,7210,7230 " Petroleum",685,685,705,669,670 " Natural Gas",5327,5355,5335,5311,5308 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",6472,6472,6472,6486,6486 "Renewables",1594,1587,1592,1580,1623 "Pumped Storage",2616,2826,2666,2716,2666

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

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

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

  19. South Dakota Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Dakota" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",1374,1364,1449,1448,1401 " Coal",492,492,497,497,497 " Petroleum",232,226,230,230,228 " Natural Gas",649,645,722,722,676 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",1559,1506,1656,1914,2223 "Pumped

  20. Louisiana Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Louisiana" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",23904,23379,23207,23087,23906 " Coal",3453,3482,3482,3482,3417 " Petroleum",285,346,346,346,881 " Natural Gas",19980,19384,19345,19225,19574 " Other Gases",186,167,34,34,34 "Nuclear",2119,2127,2154,2142,2142 "Renewables",525,586,586,579,517 "Pumped Storage","-","-","-","-","-"

  1. Maine Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Maine" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",2770,2751,2761,2738,2738 " Coal",85,85,85,85,85 " Petroleum",1030,1031,1031,1008,1008 " Natural Gas",1655,1636,1645,1645,1645 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",1418,1462,1478,1606,1692 "Pumped

  2. Maryland Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Maryland" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",10071,10028,10125,10050,10012 " Coal",4958,4958,4944,4876,4886 " Petroleum",3140,2965,2991,2986,2933 " Natural Gas",1821,1953,2038,2035,2041 " Other Gases",152,152,152,152,152 "Nuclear",1735,1735,1735,1705,1705 "Renewables",693,723,725,727,799 "Pumped Storage","-","-","-","-","-"

  3. Massachusetts Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Massachusetts" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",11050,10670,10621,10770,10763 " Coal",1743,1744,1662,1668,1669 " Petroleum",3219,3137,3120,3125,3031 " Natural Gas",6089,5789,5839,5977,6063 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",685,685,685,685,685 "Renewables",554,560,557,564,566 "Pumped Storage",1643,1643,1643,1680,1680

  4. Michigan Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Michigan" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",23693,23826,23805,23691,23205 " Coal",11860,11910,11921,11794,11531 " Petroleum",1499,673,667,684,640 " Natural Gas",10322,11242,11218,11214,11033 " Other Gases",12,"-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",4006,3969,3969,3953,3947 "Renewables",618,638,773,792,807 "Pumped Storage",1872,1872,1872,1872,1872

  5. Mississippi Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Mississippi" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",15125,14707,14454,14340,14205 " Coal",2548,2542,2555,2555,2526 " Petroleum",36,36,36,35,35 " Natural Gas",12537,12125,11859,11746,11640 " Other Gases",4,4,4,4,4 "Nuclear",1266,1268,1259,1251,1251 "Renewables",229,229,229,229,235 "Pumped Storage","-","-","-","-","-"

  6. Missouri Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Missouri" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",18197,18099,18126,18101,18861 " Coal",11299,11259,11240,11231,12070 " Petroleum",1279,1287,1282,1272,1212 " Natural Gas",5619,5553,5604,5598,5579 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",1190,1190,1190,1190,1190 "Renewables",555,612,734,880,1030 "Pumped Storage",657,657,657,657,657

  7. Montana Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Montana" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",2671,2671,2682,2701,2782 " Coal",2460,2458,2442,2442,2442 " Petroleum",57,59,57,57,54 " Natural Gas",154,154,181,200,284 " Other Gases","-","-",2,2,2 "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",2766,2809,2932,3078,3085 "Pumped

  8. Nebraska Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Nebraska" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",5478,5423,5459,6123,6169 " Coal",3204,3204,3204,3871,3932 " Petroleum",642,330,382,387,387 " Natural Gas",1632,1889,1874,1864,1849 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",1238,1240,1252,1252,1245 "Renewables",355,308,313,393,443 "Pumped

  9. Nevada Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Nevada" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",8412,8638,9942,9950,9914 " Coal",2657,2689,2916,2916,2873 " Petroleum",45,45,45,45,45 " Natural Gas",5711,5905,6982,6990,6996 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",1236,1316,1355,1446,1507 "Pumped

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

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

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

  11. New Hampshire Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    New Hampshire" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",2411,2371,2235,2226,2262 " Coal",528,528,528,528,546 " Petroleum",529,503,503,501,501 " Natural Gas",1354,1341,1205,1198,1215 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",1244,1245,1245,1247,1247 "Renewables",685,663,694,691,671 "Pumped

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

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

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

  13. New Jersey Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Jersey" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",14363,13741,13771,13759,13676 " Coal",2124,2054,2054,2065,2036 " Petroleum",1810,1345,1514,1362,1351 " Natural Gas",10385,10298,10159,10288,10244 " Other Gases",44,44,44,44,44 "Nuclear",3984,3984,4108,4108,4108 "Renewables",212,215,219,221,230 "Pumped Storage",400,400,400,400,400 "Other",11,11,11,11,11

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

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

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

  15. New Mexico Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Mexico" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",6520,6620,7366,7308,7312 " Coal",3957,3957,3957,3977,3990 " Petroleum",28,28,28,28,24 " Natural Gas",2535,2634,3381,3302,3298 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",582,582,584,686,818 "Pumped

  16. Alabama Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Alabama" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",21804,21784,22372,22540,23519 " Coal",11557,11544,11506,11486,11441 " Petroleum",43,43,43,43,43 " Natural Gas",10104,10098,10724,10912,11936 " Other Gases",100,100,100,100,100 "Nuclear",5008,4985,4985,4985,5043 "Renewables",3852,3846,3865,3863,3855 "Pumped Storage","-","-","-","-","-"

  17. Alaska Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Alaska" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",1485,1561,1593,1591,1618 " Coal",105,105,112,111,111 " Petroleum",575,622,643,644,663 " Natural Gas",805,834,838,836,845 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",400,400,403,422,422 "Pumped

  18. Arizona Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Arizona" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",18784,18756,18942,19351,19338 " Coal",5830,5818,5818,6227,6233 " Petroleum",90,93,93,93,93 " Natural Gas",12864,12845,13031,13031,13012 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",3872,3872,3942,3942,3937 "Renewables",2736,2736,2762,2826,2901 "Pumped Storage",216,216,216,216,216

  19. Arkansas Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Arkansas" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",10965,11807,11756,11753,12451 " Coal",3846,3846,3861,3864,4535 " Petroleum",23,22,22,22,22 " Natural Gas",7096,7939,7873,7867,7894 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",1824,1838,1839,1835,1835 "Renewables",1691,1623,1643,1659,1667 "Pumped Storage",28,28,28,28,28

  20. California Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    California" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",39351,39961,39950,41443,42654 " Coal",389,389,367,367,374 " Petroleum",789,754,752,734,701 " Natural Gas",38001,38556,38635,40146,41370 " Other Gases",171,262,197,197,209 "Nuclear",4390,4390,4390,4390,4390 "Renewables",15776,15774,15945,16295,16460 "Pumped Storage",3688,3688,3813,3813,3813 "Other",8,"-",7,7,11

  1. Colorado Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Colorado" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",9644,9979,10229,10545,11204 " Coal",4939,4961,4965,5010,5702 " Petroleum",181,182,184,178,178 " Natural Gas",4523,4836,5080,5357,5325 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",950,1746,1753,1931,2010 "Pumped

  2. Connecticut Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Connecticut" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",5498,5361,5466,5582,5845 " Coal",551,551,553,564,564 " Petroleum",2926,2709,2741,2749,2989 " Natural Gas",2020,2100,2171,2268,2292 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",2037,2022,2015,2103,2103 "Renewables",316,285,287,287,281 "Pumped Storage",4,29,29,29,29

  3. Delaware Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Delaware" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",3367,3350,3344,3355,3379 " Coal",1083,1083,1083,1074,1054 " Petroleum",695,698,557,557,563 " Natural Gas",1282,1262,1397,1417,1455 " Other Gases",307,307,307,307,307 "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",7,7,7,7,10 "Pumped

  4. Florida Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Florida" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",48044,50280,50166,53733,53791 " Coal",10333,10297,10265,10261,9975 " Petroleum",11677,11671,13128,12602,12033 " Natural Gas",26035,28312,26773,30870,31563 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-",220 "Nuclear",3902,3902,3924,3924,3924 "Renewables",1008,1048,1046,1093,1182 "Pumped

  5. Georgia Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Georgia" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",28238,28096,28078,28103,28087 " Coal",13438,13275,13256,13211,13230 " Petroleum",2182,2169,2187,2188,2189 " Natural Gas",12618,12652,12635,12705,12668 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",4060,3995,4061,4061,4061 "Renewables",2526,2706,2642,2648,2689 "Pumped

  6. Hawaii Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Hawaii" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",2208,2209,2208,2223,2196 " Coal",180,180,180,180,180 " Petroleum",2019,2020,2019,2034,2007 " Natural Gas","-","-","-","-","-" " Other Gases",9,9,9,9,9 "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",206,227,228,341,340 "Pumped

  7. Idaho Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Idaho" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",667,667,828,834,834 " Coal",17,17,17,17,17 " Petroleum",5,5,5,5,5 " Natural Gas",645,645,805,812,812 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",2528,2514,2535,2909,3140 "Pumped

  8. Illinois Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Illinois" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",30626,30435,30662,30795,30554 " Coal",15731,15582,15653,15852,15551 " Petroleum",1143,1097,1099,1090,1106 " Natural Gas",13705,13709,13870,13806,13771 " Other Gases",47,47,40,47,125 "Nuclear",11379,11379,11379,11441,11441 "Renewables",264,916,1145,1777,2112 "Pumped Storage","-","-","-","-","-"

  9. Indiana Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Indiana" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",26899,26922,26850,26808,26186 " Coal",19718,19759,19721,19757,19096 " Petroleum",503,503,503,503,504 " Natural Gas",6052,6048,6007,6003,5766 " Other Gases",626,612,618,545,819 "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",91,99,229,1141,1452 "Pumped

  10. Iowa Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Iowa" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",9496,10391,10340,10467,10263 " Coal",6097,6967,6928,7107,6956 " Petroleum",1027,1023,1017,1014,1007 " Natural Gas",2371,2402,2395,2346,2299 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",581,580,580,601,601 "Renewables",1067,1316,2791,3511,3728 "Pumped

  11. Kansas Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Kansas" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",9592,9709,10017,10355,10302 " Coal",5203,5208,5190,5180,5179 " Petroleum",565,569,564,564,550 " Natural Gas",3824,3932,4262,4611,4573 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",1166,1166,1160,1160,1160 "Renewables",366,366,815,1014,1082 "Pumped

  12. Kentucky Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Kentucky" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",19177,19088,19016,19268,19560 " Coal",14386,14374,14301,14553,14566 " Petroleum",135,77,77,77,70 " Natural Gas",4656,4638,4638,4638,4924 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",871,880,886,893,893 "Pumped

  13. Tennessee Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Tennessee" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",13051,12974,12999,12982,13517 " Coal",8841,8816,8841,8805,8805 " Petroleum",58,58,58,58,58 " Natural Gas",4153,4101,4101,4120,4655 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",3398,3397,3397,3401,3401 "Renewables",2821,2838,2842,2817,2847 "Pumped Storage",1635,1653,1653,1653,1653

  14. Texas Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Texas" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",92088,91494,91450,87547,92136 " Coal",19843,19817,20189,20247,22335 " Petroleum",220,216,218,221,204 " Natural Gas",71737,71152,70856,66896,69291 " Other Gases",287,308,187,184,306 "Nuclear",4860,4860,4927,4927,4966 "Renewables",3607,5385,8380,10354,10985 "Pumped Storage","-","-","-","-","-"

  15. Utah Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Utah" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",6398,6830,6819,6897,6969 " Coal",4891,4871,4871,4871,4903 " Petroleum",35,25,25,25,23 " Natural Gas",1473,1934,1923,2002,2042 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",282,293,313,521,528 "Pumped

  16. Vermont Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Vermont" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",108,101,101,100,100 " Coal","-","-","-","-","-" " Petroleum",108,101,101,100,100 " Natural Gas","-","-","-","-","-" " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",620,620,620,620,620

  17. Virginia Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Virginia" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",14968,15080,15543,15740,15880 " Coal",5774,5794,5773,5777,5868 " Petroleum",2386,2418,2418,2427,2432 " Natural Gas",6809,6869,7351,7536,7581 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",3432,3404,3404,3404,3501 "Renewables",1251,1347,1368,1403,1487 "Pumped Storage",2997,3161,3161,3241,3241

  18. Washington Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Washington" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",4436,4343,5130,5145,5183 " Coal",1405,1405,1376,1376,1340 " Petroleum",40,4,4,5,15 " Natural Gas",2991,2933,3750,3764,3828 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",1131,1131,1131,1131,1097 "Renewables",22343,22828,22919,23504,23884 "Pumped Storage",314,314,314,314,314

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

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

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

  20. West Virginia Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    West Virginia" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",16113,15769,15756,15766,15779 " Coal",14745,14715,14703,14713,14713 " Petroleum",12,12,11,11,11 " Natural Gas",1357,1042,1042,1042,1056 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",330,330,594,594,715 "Pumped

  1. Wisconsin Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Wisconsin" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",14000,13926,15015,14928,14964 " Coal",7063,6945,7597,7519,8063 " Petroleum",881,949,874,873,790 " Natural Gas",6056,6032,6544,6536,6110 " Other Gases","-","-","-","-","-" "Nuclear",1582,1582,1582,1583,1584 "Renewables",813,836,1003,1212,1267 "Pumped

  2. Wyoming Total Electric Power Industry Net Summer Capacity, by Energy Source

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

    Wyoming" "Energy Source",2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Fossil",6105,6065,6150,6147,6253 " Coal",5847,5847,5932,5929,6035 " Petroleum",6,7,7,7,7 " Natural Gas",160,120,120,120,120 " Other Gases",92,92,92,92,92 "Nuclear","-","-","-","-","-" "Renewables",590,590,983,1408,1722 "Pumped

  3. Table 6. Electric power delivered fuel prices and quality for coal, petroleum, n

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

    Carolina" "Item", 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1998, 1997, 1996, 1995, 1994, 1993, 1992, 1991, 1990 "Coal (dollars per million Btu)",3.64,3.76,3.98,3.85,3.71,3.66,2.89,2.34,2.33,2.17,1.91,1.62,1.59,1.57,1.39,1.42,1.45,1.45,1.47,1.51,1.56,1.57,1.53,1.63,1.72 "Average heat value (Btu per

  4. Table 6. Electric power delivered fuel prices and quality for coal, petroleum, n

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

    Dakota" "Item", 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1998, 1997, 1996, 1995, 1994, 1993, 1992, 1991, 1990 "Coal (dollars per million Btu)",2.09,2,2.19,2.09,1.95,1.76,1.74,1.56,1.51,1.42,1.39,1.34,1.3,1.03,0.99,0.94,0.93,0.92,0.94,1.03,1.08,1.1,1.13,1.13,1.15 "Average heat value (Btu per

  5. Coal | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Assuming no additional constraints on CO2 emissions, coal remains the largest source of electricity generation in the AEO2011 Reference case because of continued reliance on...

  6. EIA - Weekly U.S. Coal Production

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

    rounding. Bituminous and Lignite Total includes bituminous coal, subbituminous coal, and lignite, and Anthracite Total includes Pennsylvania anthracite. The States in...

  7. Energy, Environmental, and Economic Analyses of Design Concepts for the Co-Production of Fuels and Chemicals with Electricity via Co-Gasification of Coal and Biomass

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eric Larson; Robert Williams; Thomas Kreutz; Ilkka Hannula; Andrea Lanzini; Guangjian Liu

    2012-03-11

    The overall objective of this project was to quantify the energy, environmental, and economic performance of industrial facilities that would coproduce electricity and transportation fuels or chemicals from a mixture of coal and biomass via co-gasification in a single pressurized, oxygen-blown, entrained-flow gasifier, with capture and storage of CO{sub 2} (CCS). The work sought to identify plant designs with promising (Nth plant) economics, superior environmental footprints, and the potential to be deployed at scale as a means for simultaneously achieving enhanced energy security and deep reductions in U.S. GHG emissions in the coming decades. Designs included systems using primarily already-commercialized component technologies, which may have the potential for near-term deployment at scale, as well as systems incorporating some advanced technologies at various stages of R&D. All of the coproduction designs have the common attribute of producing some electricity and also of capturing CO{sub 2} for storage. For each of the co-product pairs detailed process mass and energy simulations (using Aspen Plus software) were developed for a set of alternative process configurations, on the basis of which lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions, Nth plant economic performance, and other characteristics were evaluated for each configuration. In developing each set of process configurations, focused attention was given to understanding the influence of biomass input fraction and electricity output fraction. Self-consistent evaluations were also carried out for gasification-based reference systems producing only electricity from coal, including integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) and integrated gasification solid-oxide fuel cell (IGFC) systems. The reason biomass is considered as a co-feed with coal in cases when gasoline or olefins are co-produced with electricity is to help reduce lifecycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for these systems. Storing biomass-derived CO{sub 2} underground represents negative CO{sub 2} emissions if the biomass is grown sustainably (i.e., if one ton of new biomass growth replaces each ton consumed), and this offsets positive CO{sub 2} emissions associated with the coal used in these systems. Different coal:biomass input ratios will produce different net lifecycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for these systems, which is the reason that attention in our analysis was given to the impact of the biomass input fraction. In the case of systems that produce only products with no carbon content, namely electricity, ammonia and hydrogen, only coal was considered as a feedstock because it is possible in theory to essentially fully decarbonize such products by capturing all of the coal-derived CO{sub 2} during the production process.

  8. Co-production of decarbonized synfuels and electricity from coal + biomass with CO{sub 2} capture and storage: an Illinois case study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eric D. Larson; Giulia Fiorese; Guangjian Liu; Robert H. Williams; Thomas G. Kreutz; Stefano Consonni

    2010-07-01

    Energy, carbon, and economic performances are estimated for facilities co-producing Fischer-Tropsch Liquid (FTL) fuels and electricity from a co-feed of biomass and coal in Illinois, with capture and storage of by-product CO{sub 2}. The estimates include detailed modeling of supply systems for corn stover or mixed prairie grasses (MPG) and of feedstock conversion facilities. Biomass feedstock costs in Illinois (delivered at a rate of one million tonnes per year, dry basis) are $ 3.8/GJ{sub HHV} for corn stover and $ 7.2/GJ{sub HHV} for MPG. Under a strong carbon mitigation policy, the economics of co-producing low-carbon fuels and electricity from a co-feed of biomass and coal in Illinois are promising. An extrapolation to the United States of the results for Illinois suggests that nationally significant amounts of low-carbon fuels and electricity could be produced this way.

  9. Methodology and a preliminary data base for examining the health risks of electricity generation from uranium and coal fuels

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    El-Bassioni, A.A.

    1980-08-01

    An analytical model was developed to assess and examine the health effects associated with the production of electricity from uranium and coal fuels. The model is based on a systematic methodology that is both simple and easy to check, and provides details about the various components of health risk. A preliminary set of data that is needed to calculate the health risks was gathered, normalized to the model facilities, and presented in a concise manner. Additional data will become available as a result of other evaluations of both fuel cycles, and they should be included in the data base. An iterative approach involving only a few steps is recommended for validating the model. After each validation step, the model is improved in the areas where new information or increased interest justifies such upgrading. Sensitivity analysis is proposed as the best method of using the model to its full potential. Detailed quantification of the risks associated with the two fuel cycles is not presented in this report. The evaluation of risks from producing electricity by these two methods can be completed only after several steps that address difficult social and technical questions. Preliminary quantitative assessment showed that several factors not considered in detail in previous studies are potentially important. 255 refs., 21 figs., 179 tabs.

  10. Coal production 1985

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1986-11-07

    Coal Production 1985 provides comprehensive information about US coal production, the number of mines, prices, productivity, employment, productive capacity, reserves, and stocks to a wide audience including Congress, Federal and State agencies, the coal industry, and the general public. All data presented in this report, except the total production table presented in the Highlights section, and the demonstrated reserve base data presented in Appendix A, were obtained from form EIA-7A, ''Coal Production Report,'' from companies owning mining operations that produced, processed, or prepared 10,000 or more short tons of coal in 1985. The data cover 4105 of the 5477 US coal mining operations active in 1985. These mining operations accounted for 99.4% of total US coal production and represented 74.9% of all US coal mining operations in 1985. This report also includes data for the demonstrated reserve vase of coal in the US on January 1, 1985.

  11. Development of a Hydrogasification Process for Co-Production of Substitute Natural Gas (SNG) and Electric Power from Western Coals

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sun, Xiaolei; Rink, Nancy

    2011-04-30

    This report presents the results of the research and development conducted on an Advanced Hydrogasification Process (AHP) conceived and developed by Arizona Public Service Company (APS) under U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) contract: DE-FC26-06NT42759 for Substitute Natural Gas (SNG) production from western coal. A double-wall (i.e., a hydrogasification contained within a pressure shell) down-flow hydrogasification reactor was designed, engineered, constructed, commissioned and operated by APS, Phoenix, AZ. The reactor is ASME-certified under Section VIII with a rating of 1150 pounds per square inch gage (psig) maximum allowable working pressure at 1950 degrees Fahrenheit ({degrees}F). The reaction zone had a 1.75 inch inner diameter and 13 feet length. The initial testing of a sub-bituminous coal demonstrated ~ 50% carbon conversion and ~10% methane yield in the product gas under 1625{degrees}F, 1000 psig pressure, with a 11 seconds (s) residence time, and 0.4 hydrogen-to-coal mass ratio. Liquid by-products mainly contained Benzene, Toluene, Xylene (BTX) and tar. Char collected from the bottom of the reactor had 9000-British thermal units per pound (Btu/lb) heating value. A three-dimensional (3D) computational fluid dynamic model simulation of the hydrodynamics around the reactor head was utilized to design the nozzles for injecting the hydrogen into the gasifier to optimize gas-solid mixing to achieve improved carbon conversion. The report also presents the evaluation of using algae for carbon dioxide (CO{sub 2}) management and biofuel production. Nannochloropsis, Selenastrum and Scenedesmus were determined to be the best algae strains for the project purpose and were studied in an outdoor system which included a 6-meter (6M) radius cultivator with a total surface area of 113 square meters (m{sup 2}) and a total culture volume between 10,000 to 15,000 liters (L); a CO{sub 2} on-demand feeding system; an on-line data collection system for temperature, pH, Photosynthetically Activate Radiation (PAR) and dissolved oxygen (DO); and a ~2 gallons per minute (gpm) algae culture dewatering system. Among the three algae strains, Scenedesmus showed the most tolerance to temperature and irradiance conditions in Phoenix and the best self-settling characteristics. Experimental findings and operational strategies determined through these tests guided the operation of the algae cultivation system for the scale-up study. Effect of power plant flue gas, especially heavy metals, on algae growth and biomass adsorption were evaluated as well.

  12. Electricity Monthly Update

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Electric Power Sector Coal Stocks: February 2016 Stocks In February, U.S. coal stockpiles remained relatively flat compared to the previous month, deviating from the normal ...

  13. "2014 Total Electric Industry- Average Retail Price (cents/kWh...

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

    EIA-861U)" "State","Residential","Commercial","Industrial","Transportation","Total" "New England",17.822291,14.699138,11.842263,10.37511,15.452998 "Connecticut",19.748254,15.547557...

  14. Considering the total cost of electricity from sunlight and the alternatives

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2015-04-15

    Photovoltaic (PV) electricity generation has grown to about 17 GW in the United States, corresponding to one tenth of the global capacity. Most deployment in the country has happened during the last 6 years. Reflecting back in time, in early 2008 this author and his collaborators James Mason and Ken Zweibel, published in Scientific American and in Energy Policy a Solar Grand Plan demonstrating the feasibility of renewable energy in providing 69% of the U.S. electricity demand by 2050, while reducing CO2 emissions by 60% from 2005 levels; the PV contribution to this plan was assessed to be 250 GW by 2030, and 2,900 GW by 2050 [1]. The DOE’s more detailed SunShot vision study, released in 2012, showed the possibility of having 300 GW of PV installed in the United States by 2030, and 630 GW by 2050.

  15. Considering the total cost of electricity from sunlight and the alternatives

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2015-04-15

    Photovoltaic (PV) electricity generation has grown to about 17 GW in the United States, corresponding to one tenth of the global capacity. Most deployment in the country has happened during the last 6 years. Reflecting back in time, in early 2008 this author and his collaborators James Mason and Ken Zweibel, published in Scientific American and in Energy Policy a Solar Grand Plan demonstrating the feasibility of renewable energy in providing 69% of the U.S. electricity demand by 2050, while reducing CO2 emissions by 60% from 2005 levels; the PV contribution to this plan was assessed to be 250 GW by 2030, and 2,900 GW by 2050 [1]. The DOEs more detailed SunShot vision study, released in 2012, showed the possibility of having 300 GW of PV installed in the United States by 2030, and 630 GW by 2050.

  16. Considering the total cost of electricity from sunlight and the alternatives

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

    none,

    2015-04-15

    Photovoltaic (PV) electricity generation has grown to about 17 GW in the United States, corresponding to one tenth of the global capacity. Most deployment in the country has happened during the last 6 years. Reflecting back in time, in early 2008 this author and his collaborators James Mason and Ken Zweibel, published in Scientific American and in Energy Policy a Solar Grand Plan demonstrating the feasibility of renewable energy in providing 69% of the U.S. electricity demand by 2050, while reducing CO2 emissions by 60% from 2005 levels; the PV contribution to this plan was assessed to be 250 GWmore » by 2030, and 2,900 GW by 2050 [1]. The DOE’s more detailed SunShot vision study, released in 2012, showed the possibility of having 300 GW of PV installed in the United States by 2030, and 630 GW by 2050.« less

  17. Considering the total cost of electricity from sunlight and the alternatives

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fthenakis, Vasilis

    2015-03-01

    Photovoltaic (PV) electricity generation has grown to about 17 GW in the United States, corresponding to one tenth of the global capacity. Most deployment in the country has happened during the last 6 years. Reflecting back, in early 2008 this author and his collaborators James Mason and Ken Zweibel, published in Scientific American and in Energy Policy a Solar Grand Plan demonstrating the feasibility of renewable energy in providing 69% of the United States electricity demand by 2050, while reducing CO2 emissions by 60% from 2005 levels; the PV contribution to this plan was assessed to be 250 GW by 2030 and 2900 GW by 2050 [1]. The DOE's more detailed SunShot vision study, released in 2012, showed the possibility of having 300 GW of PV installed in the United States by 2030, and 630 GW by 2050. Assessing the sustainability of such rapid growth of photovoltaics necessitates undertaking a careful analysis because PV markets largely are enabled by its promise to produce reliable electricity with minimum environmental burdens. Measurable aspects of sustainability include cost, resource availability, and environmental impact. The question of cost concerns the affordability of solar energy compared to other energy sources throughout the world. Environmental impacts include local-, regional-, and global-effects, as well as the usage of land and water, which must be considered in a comparable context over a long time, multigenerational horizon. As a result, the availability of material resources matters to current and future-generations under the constraint of affordability.

  18. Considering the total cost of electricity from sunlight and the alternatives

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

    Fthenakis, Vasilis

    2015-03-01

    Photovoltaic (PV) electricity generation has grown to about 17 GW in the United States, corresponding to one tenth of the global capacity. Most deployment in the country has happened during the last 6 years. Reflecting back, in early 2008 this author and his collaborators James Mason and Ken Zweibel, published in Scientific American and in Energy Policy a Solar Grand Plan demonstrating the feasibility of renewable energy in providing 69% of the United States electricity demand by 2050, while reducing CO2 emissions by 60% from 2005 levels; the PV contribution to this plan was assessed to be 250 GW bymore » 2030 and 2900 GW by 2050 [1]. The DOE's more detailed SunShot vision study, released in 2012, showed the possibility of having 300 GW of PV installed in the United States by 2030, and 630 GW by 2050. Assessing the sustainability of such rapid growth of photovoltaics necessitates undertaking a careful analysis because PV markets largely are enabled by its promise to produce reliable electricity with minimum environmental burdens. Measurable aspects of sustainability include cost, resource availability, and environmental impact. The question of cost concerns the affordability of solar energy compared to other energy sources throughout the world. Environmental impacts include local-, regional-, and global-effects, as well as the usage of land and water, which must be considered in a comparable context over a long time, multigenerational horizon. As a result, the availability of material resources matters to current and future-generations under the constraint of affordability.« less

  19. Coal Combustion Products | Department of Energy

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

    Coal Combustion Products Coal Combustion Products Coal combustion products (CCPs) are solid materials produced when coal is burned to generate electricity. Since coal provides the largest segment of U.S. electricity generation (45 percent in 2010), finding a sustainable solution for CCPs is an important environmental challenge. PDF icon Fossil Energy Research Benefits - Coal Combustion Products More Documents & Publications EIS-0146: Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Guide to

  20. U.S. Domestic and Foreign Coal Distribution by State of Origin

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

    (thousand short tons) Coal Exports Coal Origin State and Region Domestic Distribution By Coal Mines By Brokers & Traders* Total Exports Total Distribution Alabama 10,679.56...

  1. STEO December 2012 - coal demand

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

    meet their electricity and industrial needs. But, U.S. coal exports are likely to decline next year due to an expected weaker European economy and lower international coal prices.

  2. Method of generating electricity using an endothermic coal gasifier and MHD generator

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Marchant, David D.; Lytle, John M.

    1982-01-01

    A system and method of generating electrical power wherein a mixture of carbonaceous material and water is heated to initiate and sustain the endothermic reaction of carbon and water thereby providing a gasified stream containing carbon monoxide, hydrogen and nitrogen and waste streams of hydrogen sulfide and ash. The gasified stream and an ionizing seed material and pressurized air from a preheater go to a burner for producing ionized combustion gases having a temperature of about 5000.degree. to about 6000.degree. F. which are accelerated to a velocity of about 1000 meters per second and passed through an MHD generator to generate DC power and thereafter through a diffuser to reduce the velocity. The gases from the diffuser go to an afterburner and from there in heat exchange relationship with the gasifier to provide heat to sustain the endothermic reaction of carbon and water and with the preheater to preheat the air prior to combustion with the gasified stream. Energy from the afterburner can also be used to energize other parts of the system.

  3. Using Electricity",,,"Electricity Consumption",,,"Electricity...

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

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

  4. Electricity",,,"Electricity Consumption",,,"Electricity Expenditures...

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

    C9. Total Electricity Consumption and Expenditures, 1999" ,"All Buildings Using Electricity",,,"Electricity Consumption",,,"Electricity Expenditures" ,"Number of Buildings...

  5. Electricity",,,"Electricity Consumption",,,"Electricity Expenditures...

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

    DIV. Total Electricity Consumption and Expenditures by Census Division, 1999" ,"All Buildings Using Electricity",,,"Electricity Consumption",,,"Electricity Expenditures" ,"Number...

  6. Trace elements in coal by glow discharge mass spectrometry

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jacobs, M.L.; Wilson, C.R.; Pestovich, J. Jr.

    1995-08-01

    A need and a demand exist for determining trace elements in coal and coal related by-products, especially those elements which may potentially be a health hazard. The provisions of the 1990 clean air act require that the EPA evaluate the emissions of electric utilities for trace elements and other potentially hazardous organic compounds. The coal fired electric utility industry supplies roughly 60% of the total generating capacity of 2,882,525 million kilowatt hours (nearly 3 trillion kilowatt hours) generated in the U.S. This is accomplished by 414 power plants scattered across the country that burned 813,508,000 short tons of coal in 1993. The relative volatility of some inorganic constituents in coal makes them more prone to be emitted to the atmosphere following combustion. The production of analytical data for trace elements is known to be a difficult task in coal and by-products of coal combustion (fly ash, bottom ash, gas streams, etc.), in terms of both sample collection and analytical determinations. There are several common analytical methods available to the analyst to determine trace elements in coal and coal by-products. In general analytical germs, the material to be analyzed can be totally solubilized (or extracted), or the elements analytes can be determined in the material as a solid. A relatively new elemental technique, Glow Discharge Mass Spectrometry (GDMS) can be used with solids as well. This new analytical technique had never before been applied directly to coal. The radio frequency-glow discharge quadropole mass spectrometer was used to analyze coal directly for the first time ever by rf-GDMS. The rf-GDMS technique is described.

  7. 2014 Total Electric Industry- Average Retail Price (cents/kWh)

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

    Average Retail Price (cents/kWh) (Data from forms EIA-861- schedules 4A-D, EIA-861S and EIA-861U) State Residential Commercial Industrial Transportation Total New England 17.82 14.70 11.84 10.38 15.45 Connecticut 19.75 15.55 12.92 13.08 17.05 Maine 15.27 12.70 8.95 0.00 12.65 Massachusetts 17.39 14.68 12.74 8.76 15.35 New Hampshire 17.53 14.34 11.93 0.00 15.22 Rhode Island 17.17 14.56 12.86 14.89 15.41 Vermont 17.47 14.56 10.23 0.00 14.57 Middle Atlantic 16.39 13.65 7.61 12.28 13.41 New Jersey

  8. Coal Production 1992

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-10-29

    Coal Production 1992 provides comprehensive information about US coal production, the number of mines, prices, productivity, employment, productive capacity, and recoverable reserves to a wide audience including Congress, Federal and State agencies, the coal industry, and the general public. In 1992, there were 3,439 active coal mining operations made up of all mines, preparation plants, and refuse operations. The data in Table 1 cover the 2,746 mines that produced coal, regardless of the amount of production, except for bituminous refuse mines. Tables 2 through 33 include data from the 2,852 mining operations that produced, processed, or prepared 10 thousand or more short tons of coal during the period, except for bituminous refuse, and includes preparation plants with 5 thousand or more employee hours. These mining operations accounted for over 99 percent of total US coal production and represented 83 percent of all US coal mining operations in 1992.

  9. State coal profiles, January 1994

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-02-02

    The purpose of State Coal Profiles is to provide basic information about the deposits, production, and use of coal in each of the 27 States with coal production in 1992. Although considerable information on coal has been published on a national level, there is a lack of a uniform overview for the individual States. This report is intended to help fill that gap and also to serve as a framework for more detailed studies. While focusing on coal output, State Coal Profiles shows that the coal-producing States are major users of coal, together accounting for about three-fourths of total US coal consumption in 1992. Each coal-producing State is profiled with a description of its coal deposits and a discussion of the development of its coal industry. Estimates of coal reserves in 1992 are categorized by mining method and sulfur content. Trends, patterns, and other information concerning production, number of mines, miners, productivity, mine price of coal, disposition, and consumption of coal are detailed in statistical tables for selected years from 1980 through 1992. In addition, coal`s contribution to the State`s estimated total energy consumption is given for 1991, the latest year for which data are available. A US summary of all data is provided for comparing individual States with the Nation as a whole. Sources of information are given at the end of the tables.

  10. 2014,"AK","Total Electric Power Industry","All Sources",10,6,59.1,52.9

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

    "Planned Year","State Code","Producer Type","Fuel Source","Generators","Facilities","Nameplate Capacity (Megawatts)","Summer Capacity (Megawatts)" 2014,"AK","Total Electric Power Industry","All Sources",10,6,59.1,52.9 2014,"AK","Total Electric Power Industry","Hydroelectric",2,1,4.8,4.8 2014,"AK","Total Electric Power

  11. Industrial innovations for tomorrow: Advances in industrial energy-efficiency technologies. Commercial power plant tests blend of refuse-derived fuel and coal to generate electricity

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-11-01

    MSW can be converted to energy in two ways. One involves the direct burning of MSW to produce steam and electricity. The second converts MSW into refuse-derived fuel (RDF) by reducing the size of the MSW and separating metals, glass, and other inorganic materials. RDF can be densified or mixed with binders to form fuel pellets. As part of a program sponsored by DOE`s Office of Industrial Technologies, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory participated in a cooperative research and development agreement to examine combustion of binder-enhanced, densified refuse-derived fuel (b-d RDF) pellets with coal. Pelletized b-d RDF has been burned in coal combustors, but only in quantities of less than 3% in large utility systems. The DOE project involved the use of b-d RDF in quantities up to 20%. A major goal was to quantify the pollutants released during combustion and measure combustion performance.

  12. Appalachian recapitalization: United Coal comes full circle

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fiscor, S.

    2006-05-15

    The article recounts the recent history of the United Coal Co. which exited from the coal business between 1992 and 1997 and has recently returned. More coal reserves have been added by its four companies Sapphire Coal, Carter Roag Coal, Pocahontas Coal and Wellmore, bringing the grand total to 222.6 Mtons. United Coal's developments and investment strategy are discussed. The company headquarters are in Bristol, Va., USA. 1 tab., 7 photos.

  13. Blackout: coal, climate and the last energy crisis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Heinberg, R. [Post Carbon Institute in California, CA (United States)

    2009-07-15

    Coal fuels more than 30 per cent of UK electricity production, and about 50 per cent in the US, providing a significant portion of total energy output. China and India's recent ferocious economic growth has been based almost entirely on coal-generated electricity. Coal currently looks like a solution to many of our fast-growing energy problems. However, while coal advocates are urging us full steam ahead, the increasing reliance on this dirtiest of all fossil fuels has crucial implications for energy policy, pollution levels, the global climate, world economy and geopolitics. Drawbacks to a coal-based energy strategy include: Scarcity - new studies suggest that the peak of world coal production may actually be less than two decades away; Cost - the quality of produced coal is declining, while the expense of transportation is rising, leading to spiralling costs and increasing shortages; and, Climate impacts - our ability to deal with the historic challenge of climate change may hinge on reducing coal consumption in future years.

  14. Electricity Monthly Update

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    cheap price of natural gas reduced coals share of electricity production. Days of Burn Days of burn Coal capacity The average number of days of burn held at electric power...

  15. U.S. Coal Reserves

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

    plants Transportation costs to electric power sector International All coal data reports Analysis & Projections Major Topics Most popular Consumption Environment Imports & ...

  16. Coal Markets

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

    Coal Markets | Archive Coal Markets Weekly production Dollars per short ton Dollars per mmbtu Average weekly coal commodity spot prices dollars per short ton Week ending Week ago ...

  17. Total energy cycle assessment of electric and conventional vehicles: an energy and environmental analysis. Volume 1: technical report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cuenca, R.; Formento, J.; Gaines, L.; Marr, B.; Santini, D.; Wang, M.; Adelman, S.; Kline, D.; Mark, J.; Ohi, J.; Rau, N.; Freeman, S.; Humphreys, K.; Placet, M.

    1998-01-01

    This report compares the energy use, oil use and emissions of electric vehicles (EVs) with those of conventional, gasoline-powered vehicles (CVs) over the total life cycle of the vehicles. The various stages included in the vehicles` life cycles include vehicle manufacture, fuel production, and vehicle operation. Disposal is not included. An inventory of the air emissions associated with each stage of the life cycle is estimated. Water pollutants and solid wastes are reported for individual processes, but no comprehensive inventory is developed. Volume I contains the major results, a discussion of the conceptual framework of the study, and summaries of the vehicle, utility, fuel production, and manufacturing analyses. It also contains summaries of comments provided by external peer reviewers and brief responses to these comments.

  18. U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Distribution...

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

    ...... 1 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal ... Coal Origin State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants ...

  19. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

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

    United States Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (United States) Item Value Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 1,068,422 Electric ...

  20. Upgrading coal plant damper drives

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hood, N.R.; Simmons, K. [Alamaba Power (United States)

    2009-11-15

    The replacement of damper drives on two coal-fired units at the James H. Miller Jr. electric generating plant by Intelligent Contrac electric rotary actuators is discussed. 2 figs.

  1. Economics of coal fines utilization

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hathi, V.; McHale, E.; Ramezan, M.; Winslow, J.

    1995-12-31

    In the twentieth century, coal has become the major fuel for electric power generation in the U.S. and most of the nonpetroleum-producing countries of the world. In 1998, the world coal-fired capacity for electric power generation was about 815 GW, consuming large quantities of coals of all ranks. Today, coal provides a third of the world`s energy requirements. In fact, coal use for power generation has grown steadily since the oil embargo in 1973 and has seen an even faster rate of growth in recent years. It has been reported that the global demand for new coal will increase by more than 1500 million tons by the year 2000. However, this increased production of coal has its drawbacks, including the concomitant production of coal waste. Reported estimates indicate that billions of tons of coal waste have already been disposed of in waste impoundments throughout the U.S. Further, in the U.S. today, about 20-25 % of each ton of mined coal is discarded by preparation plants as gob and plant tailings. It appears that the most economical near-term approach to coal waste recovery is to utilize the waste coal fines currently discarded with the refuse stream, rather than attempt to recover coal from waste impoundments that require careful prior evaluation and site preparation. A hypothetical circuit was designed to examine the economics of recovery and utilization of waste coal fines. The circuit recovers products from 100 tons per hour (tph) of coal waste feed recovering 70 tph of fine coal that can be used in coal-fired boilers. The present analysis indicates that the coal waste recovery is feasible and economical. In addition, significant environmental benefits can be expected.

  2. Chemicals, fuels and electricity from coal. A proposed tri-generation concept for utilization of CO{sub 2} from power plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Song, C.

    1999-07-01

    A tri-generation concept is proposed for the 21st century for making liquid fuels and chemicals along with electricity using CO{sub 2} from flue gases of coal-based electric power plants. The CO{sub 2} from flue gas in the power plant can be converted with CH{sub 4} (natural gas) to form synthesis gas (CO and H{sub 2} mixture) using the waste heat in the power plant. The H{sub 2}O and O{sub 2} in the flue gas will be used as co-reactants and need not be separated from the flue gas. The hot synthesis gas can be used as feedstock for fuel cells for electricity generation (such as MCFC and SOFC). The hot synthesis gas can also be used for gas turbines to generate electricity. The synthesis gas at moderate temperature can be converted into chemicals and fuels, e.g., methanol and mixed alcohols for chemical and fuel uses, dimethylether (DME) and mixed ethers for diesel fuel, dimethyl carbonate and acetic acid for chemicals. The fuels thus produced may be used either for conventional IC engines or in fuel cell-driven vehicles. This concept could also be applied, in principle, for natural gas-based power plants and IGCC power plants.

  3. Clean coal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Liang-Shih Fan; Fanxing Li

    2006-07-15

    The article describes the physics-based techniques that are helping in clean coal conversion processes. The major challenge is to find a cost- effective way to remove carbon dioxide from the flue gas of power plants. One industrially proven method is to dissolve CO{sub 2} in the solvent monoethanolamine (MEA) at a temperature of 38{sup o}C and then release it from the solvent in another unit when heated to 150{sup o}C. This produces CO{sub 2} ready for sequestration. Research is in progress with alternative solvents that require less energy. Another technique is to use enriched oxygen in place of air in the combustion process which produces CO{sub 2} ready for sequestration. A process that is more attractive from an energy management viewpoint is to gasify coal so that it is partially oxidized, producing a fuel while consuming significantly less oxygen. Several IGCC schemes are in operation which produce syngas for use as a feedstock, in addition to electricity and hydrogen. These schemes are costly as they require an air separation unit. Novel approaches to coal gasification based on 'membrane separation' or chemical looping could reduce the costs significantly while effectively capturing carbon dioxide. 1 ref., 2 figs., 1 photo.

  4. Role of coal in the world and Asia

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Johnson, C.J.; Li, B.

    1994-10-01

    This paper examines the changing role of coal in the world and in Asia. Particular attention is given to the rapidly growing demand for coal in electricity generation, the importance of China as a producer and consumer of coal, and the growing environmental challenge to coal. Attention is given to the increasing importance of low sulfur coal and Clean Coal Technologies in reducing the environmental impacts of coal burning.

  5. Development of a Hydrogasification Process for Co-Production of Substitute Natural Gas (SNG) and Electric Power from Western Coals-Phase I

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Raymond Hobbs

    2007-05-31

    The Advanced Hydrogasification Process (AHP)--conversion of coal to methane--is being developed through NETL with a DOE Grant and has successfully completed its first phase of development. The results so far are encouraging and have led to commitment by DOE/NETL to begin a second phase--bench scale reactor vessel testing, expanded engineering analysis and economic perspective review. During the next decade new means of generating electricity, and other forms of energy, will be introduced. The members of the AHP Team envision a need for expanded sources of natural gas or substitutes for natural gas, to fuel power generating plants. The initial work the team has completed on a process to use hydrogen to convert coal to methane (pipeline ready gas) shows promising potential. The Team has intentionally slanted its efforts toward the needs of US electric utilities, particularly on fuels that can be used near urban centers where the greatest need for new electric generation is found. The process, as it has evolved, would produce methane from coal by adding hydrogen. The process appears to be efficient using western coals for conversion to a highly sought after fuel with significantly reduced CO{sub 2} emissions. Utilities have a natural interest in the preservation of their industry, which will require a dramatic reduction in stack emissions and an increase in sustainable technologies. Utilities tend to rank long-term stable supplies of fuel higher than most industries and are willing to trade some ratio of cost for stability. The need for sustainability, stability and environmentally compatible production are key drivers in the formation and progression of the AHP development. In Phase II, the team will add a focus on water conservation to determine how the basic gasification process can be best integrated with all the plant components to minimize water consumption during SNG production. The process allows for several CO{sub 2} reduction options including consumption of the CO{sub 2} in the original process as converted to methane. The process could under another option avoid emissions following the conversion to SNG through an adjunct algae conversion process. The algae would then be converted to fuels or other products. An additional application of the algae process at the end use natural gas fired plant could further reduce emissions. The APS team fully recognizes the competition facing the process from natural gas and imported liquid natural gas. While we expect those resources to set the price for methane in the near-term, the team's work to date indicates that the AHP process can be commercially competitive, with the added benefit of assuring long-term energy supplies from North American resources. Conversion of coal to a more readily transportable fuel that can be employed near load centers with an overall reduction of greenhouses gases is edging closer to reality.

  6. Natural gas beats coal in power generation

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

    Natural gas beats coal in power generation The amount of U.S. electricity generated by natural gas is expected to exceed the output from coal-fired power plants this year and in ...

  7. Table 11.5b Emissions From Energy Consumption for Electricity Generation and Useful Thermal Output: Electric Power Sector, 1989-2010 (Subset of Table 11.5a; Metric Tons of Gas)

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

    b Emissions From Energy Consumption for Electricity Generation and Useful Thermal Output: Electric Power Sector, 1989-2010 (Subset of Table 11.5a; Metric Tons of Gas) Year Carbon Dioxide 1 Sulfur Dioxide Nitrogen Oxides Coal 2 Natural Gas 3 Petroleum 4 Geo- thermal 5 Non- Biomass Waste 6 Total Coal 2 Natural Gas 3 Petroleum 4 Other 7 Total Coal 2 Natural Gas 3 Petroleum 4 Other 7 Total 1989 1,520,229,870 169,653,294 133,545,718 363,247 4,365,768 1,828,157,897 13,815,263 832 809,873 6,874

  8. NETL: Coal

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

    Coal In response to concerns of climate change, the United States is contemplating a ... The integrated Coal Program focuses on retaining the benefits of continuing to use coal to ...

  9. Quarterly Coal Report - Energy Information Administration

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

    Coal Glossary › FAQS › Overview Data Coal Data Browser (interactive query tool with charting and mapping) Summary Prices Reserves Consumption Production Stocks Imports, exports & distribution Coal-fired electric power plants Transportation costs to electric power sector International All coal data reports Analysis & Projections Major Topics Most popular Consumption Environment Imports & exports Industry characteristics Prices Production Projections Recurring Reserves Stocks All

  10. Annual Coal Distribution Report - Energy Information Administration

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

    Coal Glossary › FAQS › Overview Data Coal Data Browser (interactive query tool with charting and mapping) Summary Prices Reserves Consumption Production Stocks Imports, exports & distribution Coal-fired electric power plants Transportation costs to electric power sector International All coal data reports Analysis & Projections Major Topics Most popular Consumption Environment Imports & exports Industry characteristics Prices Production Projections Recurring Reserves Stocks All

  11. Coal Markets

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

    Coal Glossary FAQS Overview Data Coal Data Browser (interactive query tool with charting and mapping) Summary Prices Reserves Consumption Production Stocks Imports, exports ...

  12. Electricity Monthly Update

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

    Electric Power Sector Coal Stocks: February 2014 Stocks Extreme cold throughout the winter continued in February, leading to a 13.4 million ton decline in coal inventories from...

  13. Underground gasification of coal

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Pasini, III, Joseph; Overbey, Jr., William K.; Komar, Charles A.

    1976-01-20

    There is disclosed a method for the gasification of coal in situ which comprises drilling at least one well or borehole from the earth's surface so that the well or borehole enters the coalbed or seam horizontally and intersects the coalbed in a direction normal to its major natural fracture system, initiating burning of the coal with the introduction of a combustion-supporting gas such as air to convert the coal in situ to a heating gas of relatively high calorific value and recovering the gas. In a further embodiment the recovered gas may be used to drive one or more generators for the production of electricity.

  14. Coal resources of Kyrgyzstan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Landis, E.R.; Bostick, N.H.; Gluskoter, H.J.; Johnson, E.A.; Harrison, C.D.; Huber, D.W.

    1995-12-31

    The rugged, mountainous country of Kyrgyzstan contains about one-half of the known coal resources of central Asia (a geographic and economic region that also includes Uzbekistan, Tadjikistan and Turkmenistan). Coal of Jurassic age is present in eight regions in Kyrgyzstan in at least 64 different named localities. Significant coal occurrences of about the same age are present in the central Asian countries of Kazakhstan, China, and Russia. Separation of the coal-bearing rocks into individual deposits results more than earth movements before and during formation of the present-day mountains and basins of the country than from deposition in separate basins.Separation was further abetted by deep erosion and removal of the coal-bearing rocks from many areas, followed by covering of the remaining coal-bearing rocks by sands and gravels of Cenozoic age. The total resources of coal in Kyrgyzstan have been reported as about 30 billion tons. In some of the reported localities, the coal resources are known and adequately explored. In other parts of the republic, the coal resources are inadequately understood or largely unexplored. The resource and reserve inventory of Kyrgyzstan is at best incomplete; for some purposes, such as short-term local and long-range national planning, it may be inadequate. Less than 8% of the total estimated resources are categorized as recoverable reserves, and the amount that is economically recoverable is unknown. The coal is largely of subbituminous and high-volatile C bituminous rank, most has low and medium ash and sulfur contents, and coals of higher rank (some with coking qualities) are present in one region. It is recommended that appropriate analyses and tests be made during planning for utilization.

  15. U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution...

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

    Coal Origin State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants ... Truck 39 147 260 - 446 - No data reported. Note: Electric Power Sector in this report ...

  16. Coal production, 1987

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1988-12-05

    Coal Production 1987 provides comprehensive information about US coal production, the number of mines, prices, productivity, employment, reserves, and stocks to a wide audience including Congress, federal and state agencies, the coal industry, and the general public. The data presented in this report were collected and published by the Energy Information Administration (EIA), to fulfill its data collection and dissemination responsibilities as specified in the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-275) as amended. The 1987 coal production and related data presented in this report were obtained from Form EIA-7A, ''Coal Production Report,'' from companies owning mining operations that produced, processed, or prepared 10,000 or more short tons of coal in 1987. This survey originated at the Bureau of Mines, US Department of the Interior. In 1977, the responsibility for taking the survey was transferred to the EIA under the Department of Energy Organization Act (P.L. 95-91). The data cover 3667 of the 4770 US coal mining operations active in 1987. These mining operations accounted for over 99 percent of total US coal production and represented 77 percent of all US coal mining operations in 1987. This issue is the 12th annual report published by EIA and continues the series formerly included as a chapter in the Minerals Yearbook published by the Bureau of Mines. This report also includes data for the demonstrated reserve base of coal in the United States on January 1, 1988. This is the eighth annual summary on minable coal, pursuant to Section 801 of Public Law 95-620. 18 figs., 105 tabs.

  17. Beluga Coal Gasification - ISER

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Steve Colt

    2008-12-31

    ISER was requested to conduct an economic analysis of a possible 'Cook Inlet Syngas Pipeline'. The economic analysis was incorporated as section 7.4 of the larger report titled: 'Beluga Coal Gasification Feasibility Study, DOE/NETL-2006/1248, Phase 2 Final Report, October 2006, for Subtask 41817.333.01.01'. The pipeline would carry CO{sub 2} and N{sub 2}-H{sub 2} from a synthetic gas plant on the western side of Cook Inlet to Agrium's facility. The economic analysis determined that the net present value of the total capital and operating lifecycle costs for the pipeline ranges from $318 to $588 million. The greatest contributor to this spread is the cost of electricity, which ranges from $0.05 to $0.10/kWh in this analysis. The financial analysis shows that the delivery cost of gas may range from $0.33 to $0.55/Mcf in the first year depending primarily on the price for electricity.

  18. Table 8.11c Electric Net Summer Capacity: Electric Power Sector by Plant Type, 1989-2011 (Breakout of Table 8.11b; Kilowatts)

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

    c Electric Net Summer Capacity: Electric Power Sector by Plant Type, 1989-2011 (Breakout of Table 8.11b; Kilowatts) Year Fossil Fuels Nuclear Electric Power Hydro- electric Pumped Storage Renewable Energy Other 8 Total Coal 1 Petroleum 2 Natural Gas 3 Other Gases 4 Total Conventional Hydroelectric Power Biomass Geo- thermal Solar/PV 7 Wind Total Wood 5 Waste 6 Electricity-Only Plants 9<//td> 1989 296,541,828 77,966,348 119,304,288 364,000 494,176,464 98,160,610 18,094,424 73,579,794

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

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

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

  20. National Coal Quality Inventory (NACQI)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Robert Finkelman

    2005-09-30

    The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) conducted the National Coal Quality Inventory (NaCQI) between 1999 and 2005 to address a need for quality information on coals that will be mined during the next 20-30 years. Collaboration between the USGS, State geological surveys, universities, coal burning utilities, and the coal mining industry plus funding support from the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) permitted collection and submittal of coal samples for analysis. The chemical data (proximate and ultimate analyses; major, minor and trace element concentrations) for 729 samples of raw or prepared coal, coal associated shale, and coal combustion products (fly ash, hopper ash, bottom ash and gypsum) from nine coal producing States are included. In addition, the project identified a new coal reference analytical standard, to be designated CWE-1 (West Elk Mine, Gunnison County, Colorado) that is a high-volatile-B or high-volatile-A bituminous coal with low contents of ash yield and sulfur, and very low, but detectable contents of chlorine, mercury and other trace elements.

  1. Development of an Advanced Fine Coal Suspension Dewatering Process

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    B. K. Parekh; D. P. Patil

    2008-04-30

    With the advancement in fine coal cleaning technology, recovery of fine coal (minus 28 mesh) has become an attractive route for the U.S. coal industry. The clean coal recovered using the advanced flotation technology i.e. column flotation, contains on average 20% solids and 80% water, with an average particle size of 35 microns. Fine coal slurry is usually dewatered using a vacuum dewatering technique, providing a material with about 25 to 30 percent moisture. The process developed in this project will improve dewatering of fine (0.6mm) coal slurry to less than 20 percent moisture. Thus, thermal drying of dewatered wet coal will be eliminated. This will provide significant energy savings for the coal industry along with some environmental benefits. A 1% increase in recovery of coal and producing a filter cake material of less than 20 % moisture will amount to energy savings of 1900 trillion Btu/yr/unit. In terms of the amount of coal it will be about 0.8% of the total coal being used in the USA for electric power generation. It is difficult to dewater the fine clean coal slurry to about 20% moisture level using the conventional dewatering techniques. The finer the particle, the larger the surface area and thus, it retains large amounts of moisture on the surface. The coal industry has shown some reluctance in using the advanced coal recovery techniques, because of unavailability of an economical dewatering technique which can provide a product containing less than 20% moisture. The U.S.DOE and Industry has identified the dewatering of coal fines as a high priority problem. The goal of the proposed program is to develop and evaluate a novel two stage dewatering process developed at the University of Kentucky, which involves utilization of two forces, namely, vacuum and pressure for dewatering of fine coal slurries. It has been observed that a fine coal filter cake formed under vacuum has a porous structure with water trapped in the capillaries. When this porous cake is subjected to pressure for a short time, the free water present is released from the filter cake. Laboratory studies have shown that depending on the coal type a filter cake containing about 15% moisture could be obtained using the two-stage filtration technique. It was also noted that applying intermittent breaks in vacuum force during cake formation, which disturbed the cake structure, helped in removing moisture from the filter cakes. In this project a novel approach of cleaning coal using column flotation was also developed. With this approach the feed capacity of the column is increased significantly, and the column was also able to recover coarser size coal which usually gets lost in the process. The outcome of the research benefits the coal industry, utility industry, and indirectly the general public. The benefits can be counted in terms of clean energy, cleaner environment, and lower cost power.

  2. Electric trade in the United States 1994

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-08-01

    Wholesale trade in electricity plays an important role for the US electric utility industry. Wholesale, or bulk power, transactions allow electric utilities to reduce power costs, increase power supply options, and improve reliability. In 1994, the wholesale trade market totaled 1.9 trillion kilowatthours, about 66% of total sales to ultimate consumers. This publication, Electric Trade in the United States 1994 (ELECTRA), is the fifth in a series of reports on wholesale power transactions prepared by the Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels, Energy Information Administration (EIA). The electric trade data are published biennially. The first report presented 1986 data, and this report provides information on the electric power industry during 1994.

  3. Coal pump

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Bonin, John H.; Meyer, John W.; Daniel, Jr., Arnold D.

    1983-01-01

    A device for pressurizing pulverized coal and circulating a carrier gas is disclosed. This device has utility in a coal gasification process and eliminates the need for a separate collection hopper and eliminates the separate compressor.

  4. Application of Pulsed Electrical Fields for Advanced Cooling and Water Recovery in Coal-Fired Power Plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Young Cho; Alexander Fridman

    2009-04-02

    The overall objective of the present work was to develop technologies to reduce freshwater consumption in a cooling tower of coal-based power plant so that one could significantly reduce the need of make-up water. The specific goal was to develop a scale prevention technology based an integrated system of physical water treatment (PWT) and a novel filtration method so that one could reduce the need for the water blowdown, which accounts approximately 30% of water loss in a cooling tower. The present study investigated if a pulsed spark discharge in water could be used to remove deposits from the filter membrane. The test setup included a circulating water loop and a pulsed power system. The present experiments used artificially hardened water with hardness of 1,000 mg/L of CaCO{sub 3} made from a mixture of calcium chloride (CaCl{sub 2}) and sodium carbonate (Na{sub 2}CO{sub 3}) in order to produce calcium carbonate deposits on the filter membrane. Spark discharge in water was found to produce strong shockwaves in water, and the efficiency of the spark discharge in cleaning filter surface was evaluated by measuring the pressure drop across the filter over time. Results showed that the pressure drop could be reduced to the value corresponding to the initial clean state and after that the filter could be maintained at the initial state almost indefinitely, confirming the validity of the present concept of pulsed spark discharge in water to clean dirty filter. The present study also investigated the effect of a plasma-assisted self-cleaning filter on the performance of physical water treatment (PWT) solenoid coil for the mitigation of mineral fouling in a concentric counterflow heat exchanger. The self-cleaning filter utilized shockwaves produced by pulse-spark discharges in water to continuously remove scale deposits from the surface of the filter, thus keeping the pressure drop across the filter at a relatively low value. Artificial hard water was used in the present fouling experiments for three different cases: no treatment, PWT coil only, and PWT coil plus self-cleaning filter. Fouling resistances decreased by 59-72% for the combined case of PWT coil plus filter compared with the values for no-treatment cases. SEM photographs showed much smaller particle sizes for the combined case of PWT coil plus filter as larger particles were continuously removed from circulating water by the filter. The x-ray diffraction data showed calcite crystal structures for all three cases.

  5. Healy Clean Coal Project: A DOE Assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    National Energy Technology Laboratory

    2003-09-01

    The goal of the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Clean Coal Technology (CCT) Program is to provide the energy marketplace with advanced, more efficient, and environmentally responsible coal utilization options by conducting demonstrations of new technologies. These demonstration projects are intended to establish the commercial feasibility of promising advanced coal technologies that have been developed to a level at which they are ready for demonstration testing under commercial conditions. This document serves as a DOE post-project assessment (PPA) of the Healy Clean Coal Project (HCCP), selected under Round III of the CCT Program, and described in a Report to Congress (U.S. Department of Energy, 1991). The desire to demonstrate an innovative power plant that integrates an advanced slagging combustor, a heat recovery system, and both high- and low-temperature emissions control processes prompted the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA) to submit a proposal for this project. In April 1991, AIDEA entered into a cooperative agreement with DOE to conduct this project. Other team members included Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA), host and operator; Usibelli Coal Mine, Inc., coal supplier; TRW, Inc., Space & Technology Division, combustor technology provider; Stone & Webster Engineering Corp. (S&W), engineer; Babcock & Wilcox Company (which acquired the assets of Joy Environmental Technologies, Inc.), supplier of the spray dryer absorber technology; and Steigers Corporation, provider of environmental and permitting support. Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation supplied the boiler. GVEA provided oversight of the design and provided operators during demonstration testing. The project was sited adjacent to GVEA's Healy Unit No. 1 in Healy, Alaska. The objective of this CCT project was to demonstrate the ability of the TRW Clean Coal Combustion System to operate on a blend of run-of-mine (ROM) coal and waste coal, while meeting strict environmental requirements. DOE provided $117,327,000 of the total project cost of $282,300,000, or 41.6 percent. Construction for the demonstration project was started in May 1995, and completed in November 1997. Operations were initiated in January 1998, and completed in December 1999. The evaluation contained herein is based primarily on information from the AIDEA's Final Report (Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority, 2001), as well as other references cited.

  6. ELECTRIC

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    you nay give us will be greatly uppreckted. VPry truly your23, 9. IX. Sin0j3, Mtinager lclectronics and Nuclear Physics Dept. omh , WESTINGHOUSE-THE NAT KING IN ELECTRICITY

  7. Quality characteristics of Kentucky coal from a utility perspective

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eble, C.F.; Hoover, J.C.

    1999-07-01

    Coal in Kentucky has been, and continues to be, a valuable energy source, especially for the electric utility industry. However, Federal mandates in Titles III and IV of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, and more recently proposed ``greenhouse gas'' emission reductions, have placed increasingly stringent demands on the type and grade of coal that can be burned in an environmentally-accepted manner. Therefore, a greater understanding of the spatial and temporal distribution of thickness and quality parameters, and the geological factors that control their distribution, is critical if Kentucky will continue to be a major producer of high quality coal. Information from the Kentucky Geological Survey's Coal Resource Information System data base (KCRIS) is used in this paper to document the geological and stratigraphic distribution of important factors such as bed thickness, calorific value, ash yield, and total sulfur content. The distribution of major and minor elements that naturally occur in Kentucky coal is also discussed as some of these elements contribute to slagging and fouling in coal-fired furnaces; others may require monitoring with passage of Title III of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.

  8. Impact of total ionizing dose irradiation on electrical property of ferroelectric-gate field-effect transistor

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Yan, S. A.; Tang, M. H. Xiao, Y. G.; Zhang, W. L.; Ding, H.; Chen, J. W.; Zhou, Y. C.; Xiong, Y.; Li, Z.; Zhao, W.; Guo, H. X.

    2014-05-28

    P-type channel metal-ferroelectric-insulator-silicon field-effect transistors (FETs) with a 300?nm thick SrBi{sub 2}Ta{sub 2}O{sub 9} ferroelectric film and a 10?nm thick HfTaO layer on silicon substrate were fabricated and characterized. The prepared FeFETs were then subjected to {sup 60}Co gamma irradiation in steps of three dose levels. Irradiation-induced degradation on electrical characteristics of the fabricated FeFETs was observed after 1 week annealing at room temperature. The possible irradiation-induced degradation mechanisms were discussed and simulated. All the irradiation experiment results indicated that the stability and reliability of the fabricated FeFETs for nonvolatile memory applications will become uncontrollable under strong irradiation dose and/or long irradiation time.

  9. Level: National Data; Row: End Uses within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity;

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

    2 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: End Uses within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity; Unit: Trillion Btu. Distillate Fuel Oil Coal NAICS Net Residual and LPG and (excluding Coal Code(a) End Use Total Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(c) Natural Gas(d) NGL(e) Coke and Breeze) Other(f) Total United States 311 - 339 ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION 15,658 2,850 251 129 5,512 79 1,016 5,820 Indirect Uses-Boiler Fuel --

  10. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: End Uses; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity;

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

    5 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: End Uses; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity; Unit: Physical Units or Btu. Distillate Coal Fuel Oil (excluding Coal Net Residual and Natural Gas(c) LPG and Coke and Breeze) Total Electricity(a) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(b) (billion NGL(d) (million Other(e) End Use (trillion Btu) (million kWh) (million bbl) (million bbl) cu ft) (million bbl) short tons) (trillion Btu) Total United States TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION

  11. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: End Uses; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity;

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

    6 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: End Uses; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity; Unit: Trillion Btu. Distillate Fuel Oil Coal Net Residual and LPG and (excluding Coal End Use Total Electricity(a) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(b) Natural Gas(c) NGL(d) Coke and Breeze) Other(e) Total United States TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION 15,658 2,850 251 129 5,512 79 1,016 5,820 Indirect Uses-Boiler Fue -- 41 133 23 2,119 8 547 -- Conventional Boiler Use 41 71 17

  12. Summary of coal export project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1987-01-01

    Through the international coal project and related activities, SSEB has called attention to the problems and potential of the US coal industry. The program has provided an excellent format for frank discussions on the problems facing US coal exports. Every effort must be made to promote coal and its role in the southern economy. Coal is enjoying its best years in the domestic market. While the export market is holding its own, there is increased competition in the world market from Australia, Columbia, China and, to a lesser extent, Russia. This is coming at a time when the US has enacted legislation and plans are underway to deepen ports. In addition there is concern that increased US coal and electricity imports are having a negative impact on coal production. These limiting factors suggest the US will remain the swing supplier of coal on the world market in the near future. This presents a challenge to the US coal and related industry to maintain the present market and seek new markets as well as devote research to new ways to use coal more cleanly and efficiently.

  13. Total energy cycle assessment of electric and conventional vehicles: an energy and environmental analysis. Volume 2: appendices A-D to technical report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-01-01

    This report compares the energy use, oil use and emissions of electric vehicles (EVs) with those of conventional, gasoline- powered vehicles (CVs) over the total life cycle of the vehicles. The various stages included in the vehicles` life cycles include vehicle manufacture, fuel production, and vehicle operation. Disposal is not included. An inventory of the air emissions associated with each stage of the life cycle is estimated. Water pollutants and solid wastes are reported for individual processes, but no comprehensive inventory is developed. Volume II contains additional details on the vehicle, utility, and materials analyses and discusses several details of the methodology.

  14. Total energy cycle assessment of electric and conventional vehicles: an energy and environmental analysis. Volume 4: peer review comments on technical report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-01-01

    This report compares the energy use, oil use and emissions of electric vehicles (EVs) with those of conventional, gasoline-powered vehicles (CVs) over the total life cycle of the vehicles. The various stages included in the vehicles` life cycles include vehicle manufacture, fuel production, and vehicle operation. Disposal is not included. An inventory of the air emissions associated with each stage of the life cycle is estimated. Water pollutants and solid wastes are reported for individual processes, but no comprehensive inventory is developed. Volume IV includes copies of all the external peer review comments on the report distributed for review in July 1997.

  15. Electric Power Generation Systems | netl.doe.gov

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

    Electric Power Generation Systems Coal gasification-based power plants Coal combustion-based power plants Natural gas-fueled power plants Turbines Fuel cells Existing power plants...

  16. Table 8.11b Electric Net Summer Capacity: Electric Power Sector, 1949-2011 (Subset of Table 8.11a; Kilowatts)

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

    b Electric Net Summer Capacity: Electric Power Sector, 1949-2011 (Subset of Table 8.11a; Kilowatts) Year Fossil Fuels Nuclear Electric Power Hydro- electric Pumped Storage Renewable Energy Other 9 Total Coal 1 Petroleum 2 Natural Gas 3 Other Gases 4 Total Conventional Hydroelectric Power 5 Biomass Geo- thermal Solar/PV 8 Wind Total Wood 6 Waste 7 1949 NA NA NA NA 44,887,000 0 [5] 18,500,000 13,000 [10] NA NA NA 18,513,000 NA 63,400,000 1950 NA NA NA NA 49,987,000 0 [5] 19,200,000 13,000 [10] NA

  17. Coal production, 1991

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1992-10-01

    Coal production in the United States in 1991 declined to a total of 996 million short tons, ending the 6-year upward trend in coal production that began in 1985. The 1991 figure is 33 million short tons below the record level of 1.029 billion short tons produced in 1990 (Table 1). Tables 2 through 33 in this report include data from mining operations that produced, prepared, and processed 10,000 or more short tons during the year. These mines yielded 993 million short tons, or 99.7 percent of the total coal production in 1991, and their summary statistics are discussed below. The majority of US coal (587 million short tons) was produced by surface mining (Table 2). Over half of all US surface mine production occurred in the Western Region, though the 60 surface mines in this area accounted for only 5 percent of the total US surface mines. The high share of production was due to the very large surface mines in Wyoming, Texas and Montana. Nearly three quarters of underground production was in the Appalachian Region, which accounted for 92 percent of underground mines. Continuous mining methods produced the most coal among those underground operations that responded. Of the 406 million short tons, 59 percent (239 million short tons) was produced by continuous mining methods, followed by longwall (29 percent, or 119 million short tons), and conventional methods (11 percent, or 46 million short tons).

  18. Coal production 1984. [USA; 1984

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1984-01-01

    Coal Production 1984 provides comprehensive information about US coal production, the number of mines, prices, productivity, employment, productive capacity, reserves, and stocks to a wide audience including Congress, federal and state agencies, the coal industry, and the general public. The data were collected and published by the Energy Information Administration (EIA), to fulfill its data collection and dissemination responsibilities as specified in the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974 (PL 93-275) as amended. All data presented in this report, except the total production table presented in the Highlights section, the demonstrated reserve base data presented in Appendix A, and the 1983 coal preparation and shipments data presented in Appendix C, were obtained from Form EIA-7A, ''Coal Production Report,'' from companies owning mining operations that produced, processed, or prepared 10,000 or more short tons of coal in 1984. These mining operations accounted for 99.4% of total US coal production and represented 76.3% of all US coal mining operations in 1984. This report also includes data for the demonstrated reserve base of coal in the United States on January 1, 1984.

  19. Innovative Drying Technology Extracts More Energy from High Moisture Coal

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    An innovative coal-drying technology that will extract more energy from high moisture coal at less cost and simultaneously reduce potentially harmful emissions is ready for commercial use after successful testing at a Minnesota electric utility.

  20. Coal Ash Contaminants in Wetlands | SREL Research

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

    Information Administration (EIA) Analysis & Projections ‹ See all Coal Reports U.S. Coal Supply and Demand: 2010 Year in Review Release Date: June 1, 2011 | Next Release Date: Periodically | full report Consumption Preliminary data shows that total coal consumption rebounded in 2010, increasing by 5.1 percent from the 2009 level. Total U.S. coal consumption was 1,048.3 million short tons, an increase of 50.8 million short tons, with all coal-consuming sectors, except commercial and

  1. U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Report 2014

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

    6. U.S. Coal Consumption by End Use Sector, Census Division, and State, 2014 and 2013 (thousand short tons) 2014 2013 Total Census Division and State Electric Power 1 Other Industrial Coke Commercial and Institutional Electric Power 1 Other Industrial Coke Commercial and Institutional 2014 2013 Percent Change New England 2,340 90 - - 2,791 87 - - 2,430 2,878 -15.6 Connecticut 499 - - - 419 - - - 499 419 19.3 Maine 53 33 - - 38 27 - - 85 66 30.3 Massachusetts 1,244 57 - - 1,718 59 - - 1,301 1,778

  2. U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Report 2014

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

    7. Year-End Coal Stocks by Sector, Census Division, and State, 2014 and 2013 (thousand short tons) 2014 2013 Total Census Division and State Electric Power 1 Other Industrial Coke Commercial and Institutional Producer and Distributor Electric Power 1 Other Industrial Coke Commercial and Institutional Producer and Distributor 2014 2013 Percent Change New England 1,611 9 - - 281 1,129 13 - - 481 1,900 1,623 17.1 Connecticut w - - - - w - - - - w w 82.5 Maine s 1 - - - s 5 - - - 1 5 -82.7

  3. Coal - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

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

    Coal Glossary › FAQS › Overview Data Coal Data Browser (interactive query tool with charting and mapping) Summary Prices Reserves Consumption Production Stocks Imports, exports & distribution Coal-fired electric power plants Transportation costs to electric power sector International All coal data reports Analysis & Projections Major Topics Most popular Consumption Environment Imports & exports Industry characteristics Prices Production Projections Recurring Reserves Stocks All

  4. ELECTRIC

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    ELECTRIC cdrtrokArJclaeT 3 I+ &i, y$ \I &OF I*- j< t j,fci..- ir )(yiT !E-li, ( \-,v? Cl -p/4.4 RESEARCH LABORATORIES EAST PITTSBURGH, PA. 8ay 22, 1947 Mr. J. Carrel Vrilson General ?!!mager Atomic Qxzgy Commission 1901 Constitution Avenue Kashington, D. C. Dear Sir: In the course of OUT nuclenr research we are planning to study the enc:ri;y threshold anti cross section for fission. For thib program we require a s<>piAroted sample of metallic Uranium 258 of high purity. A

  5. U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Report 2014

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

    5. Recoverable Coal Reserves at Producing Mines, Estimated Recoverable Reserves, and Demonstrated Reserve Base by Mining Method, 2014 (million short tons) Underground - Minable Coal Surface - Minable Coal Total Coal-Resource State Recoverable Reserves at Producing Mines Estimated Recoverable Reserves Demonstrated Reserve Base Recoverable Reserves at Producing Mines Estimated Recoverable Reserves Demonstrated Reserve Base Recoverable Reserves at Producing Mines Estimated Recoverable Reserves

  6. Annual Coal Distribution Tables

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

    and Foreign Distribution of U.S. Coal by State of Origin, 2001 State Region Domestic Foreign Total Alabama 14,828 4,508 19,336 Alaska 825 698 1,524 Arizona 13,143 - 13,143...

  7. Level: National Data; Row: End Uses within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity;

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

    1 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: End Uses within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity; Unit: Physical Units or Btu. Distillate Coal Fuel Oil (excluding Coal Net Residual and Natural Gas(d) LPG and Coke and Breeze) NAICS Total Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(c) (billion NGL(e) (million Other(f) Code(a) End Use (trillion Btu) (million kWh) (million bbl) (million bbl) cu ft) (million bbl) short tons) (trillion Btu) Total United States

  8. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: End Uses; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Demand for Electricity;

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

    7 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: End Uses; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Demand for Electricity; Unit: Physical Units or Btu. Distillate Coal Fuel Oil (excluding Coal Net Demand Residual and Natural Gas(c) LPG and Coke and Breeze) for Electricity(a) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(b) (billion NGL(d) (million End Use (million kWh) (million bbl) (million bbl) cu ft) (million bbl) short tons) Total United States TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION 977,338 40 22 5,357 21

  9. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: End Uses; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Demand for Electricity;

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

    Next MECS will be conducted in 2010 Table 5.8 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: End Uses; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Demand for Electricity; Unit: Trillion Btu. Distillate Fuel Oil Coal Net Demand Residual and LPG and (excluding Coal End Use for Electricity(a) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(b) Natural Gas(c) NGL(d) Coke and Breeze) Total United States TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION 3,335 251 129 5,512 79 1,016 Indirect Uses-Boiler Fuel 84 133 23 2,119 8 547

  10. Florida's electric industry and solar electric technologies

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Camejo, N.

    1983-12-01

    The Florida Electric Industry is in a process of diversifying its generation technology and its fuel mix. This is being done in an effort to reduce oil consumption, which in 1981 accounted for 46.5% of the electric generation by fuel type. This does not compare well with the rest of the nation where oil use is lower. New coal and nuclear units are coming on line, and probably more will be built in the near future. However, eventhough conservation efforts may delay their construction, new power plants will have to be built to accomodate the growing demand for electricity. Other alternatives being considered are renewable energy resources. The purpose of this paper is to present the results of a research project in which 10 electric utilities in Florida and the Florida Electric Power Coordinating Group rated six Solar Electric options. The Solar Electric options considered are: 1) Wind, 2) P.V., 3) Solar thermal-electric, 4) OTEC, 5) Ocean current, and 6) Biomass. The questionaire involved rating the economic and technical feasibility, as well as, the potential environmental impact of these options in Florida. It also involved rating the difficulty in overcoming institutional barriers and assessing the status of each option. A copy of the questionaire is included after the references. The combined capacity of the participating utilities represent over 90% of the total generating capacity in Florida. A list of the participating utilities is also included. This research was done in partial fulfillment for the Mater's of Science Degree in Coastal Zone Management. This paper is complementary to another paper (in these condensed conference proceedings) titled COASTAL ZONE ENERGY MANAGEMENT: A multidisciplinary approach for the integration of Solar Electric Systems with Florida's power generation system, which present a summary of the Master's thesis.

  11. EIA's Energy in Brief: What is the role of coal in the United States?

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    What is the role of coal in the United States? Last Updated: January 19, 2016 The United States has the world's largest estimated recoverable reserves of coal, and it is a net exporter of coal. In 2014, U.S. coal mines produced about 1 billion short tons of coal, the first increase in annual coal output in three years. More than 90% of the coal produced in the United States was used by U.S. power plants to generate electricity. Although coal has been the largest source of electricity generation

  12. Gasoline Hybrid Electric Delivery Vehicles Reduce Tailpipe Emissions While

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

    Gasification Gasification The Wabash River Clean Coal Power Plant The Wabash River Clean Coal Power Plant Gasification Technology R&D Coal gasification offers one of the most versatile and clean ways to convert coal into electricity, hydrogen, and other valuable energy products. Coal gasification electric power plants are now operating commercially in the United States and in other nations, and many experts predict that coal gasification will be at the heart of future generations of clean

  13. Coal: Energy for the future

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-05-01

    This report was prepared in response to a request by the US Department of energy (DOE). The principal objectives of the study were to assess the current DOE coal program vis-a-vis the provisions of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPACT), and to recommend the emphasis and priorities that DOE should consider in updating its strategic plan for coal. A strategic plan for research, development, demonstration, and commercialization (RDD and C) activities for coal should be based on assumptions regarding the future supply and price of competing energy sources, the demand for products manufactured from these sources, technological opportunities, and the need to control the environmental impact of waste streams. These factors change with time. Accordingly, the committee generated strategic planning scenarios for three time periods: near-term, 1995--2005; mid-term, 2006--2020; and, long-term, 2021--2040. The report is divided into the following chapters: executive summary; introduction and scope of the study; overview of US DOE programs and planning; trends and issues for future coal use; the strategic planning framework; coal preparation, coal liquid mixtures, and coal bed methane recovery; clean fuels and specialty products from coal; electric power generation; technology demonstration and commercialization; advanced research programs; conclusions and recommendations; appendices; and glossary. 174 refs.

  14. Zero emission coal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ziock, H.; Lackner, K.

    2000-08-01

    We discuss a novel, emission-free process for producing hydrogen or electricity from coal. Even though we focus on coal, the basic design is compatible with any carbonaceous fuel. The process uses cyclical carbonation of calcium oxide to promote the production of hydrogen from carbon and water. The carbonation of the calcium oxide removes carbon dioxide from the reaction products and provides the additional energy necessary to complete hydrogen production without additional combustion of carbon. The calcination of the resulting calcium carbonate is accomplished using the high temperature waste heat from solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC), which generate electricity from hydrogen fuel. Converting waste heat back to useful chemical energy allows the process to achieve very high conversion efficiency from fuel energy to electrical energy. As the process is essentially closed-loop, the process is able to achieve zero emissions if the concentrated exhaust stream of CO{sub 2} is sequestered. Carbon dioxide disposal is accomplished by the production of magnesium carbonate from ultramafic rock. The end products of the sequestration process are stable naturally occurring minerals. Sufficient rich ultramafic deposits exist to easily handle all the world's coal.

  15. Hydroliquefaction of coal

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Sze, Morgan C.; Schindler, Harvey D.

    1982-01-01

    Coal is catalytically hydroliquefied by passing coal dispersed in a liquefaction solvent and hydrogen upwardly through a plurality of parallel expanded catalyst beds, in a single reactor, in separate streams, each having a cross-sectional flow area of no greater than 255 inches square, with each of the streams through each of the catalyst beds having a length and a liquid and gas superficial velocity to maintain an expanded catalyst bed and provide a Peclet Number of at least 3. If recycle is employed, the ratio of recycle to total feed (coal and liquefaction solvent) is no greater than 2:1, based on volume. Such conditions provide for improved selectivity to liquid product to thereby reduce hydrogen consumption. The plurality of beds are formed by partitions in the reactor.

  16. Materials challenges in advanced coal conversion technologies

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Powem, C.A.; Morreale, B.D.

    2008-04-15

    Coal is a critical component in the international energy portfolio, used extensively for electricity generation. Coal is also readily converted to liquid fuels and/or hydrogen for the transportation industry. However, energy extracted from coal comes at a large environmental price: coal combustion can produce large quantities of ash and CO{sub 2}, as well as other pollutants. Advanced technologies can increase the efficiencies and decrease the emissions associated with burning coal and provide an opportunity for CO{sub 2} capture and sequestration. However, these advanced technologies increase the severity of plant operating conditions and thus require improved materials that can stand up to the harsh operating environments. The materials challenges offered by advanced coal conversion technologies must be solved in order to make burning coal an economically and environmentally sound choice for producing energy.

  17. EIA - Coal Distribution

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

    Coal > Annual Coal Distribution Report > Annual Coal Distribution Archives Annual Coal Distribution Archive Release Date: February 17, 2011 Next Release Date: December 2011 Domestic coal distribution by origin State, destination State, consumer category, method of transportation; foreign coal distribution by major coal-exporting state and method of transportation; and domestic and foreign coal distribution by origin state. Year Domestic and foreign distribution of U.S. coal by State of

  18. Coal Market Module

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    power generation, industrial steam generation, coal-to-liquids production, coal coke manufacturing, residentialcommercial consumption, and coal exports) within the CMM. By...

  19. Coal industry annual 1994

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-10-01

    This report presents data on coal consumption, distribution, coal stocks, quality, prices, coal production information, and emissions for a wide audience.

  20. Coal Distribution Database, 2008

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

    Processing Coal Plants and Commercial and Institutional Coal Users" and Form EIA-7A, "Coal Production and Preparation Report." Appendix A Assigning Missing Data to EIA-923...

  1. China's Coal: Demand, Constraints, and Externalities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Aden, Nathaniel; Fridley, David; Zheng, Nina

    2009-07-01

    This study analyzes China's coal industry by focusing on four related areas. First, data are reviewed to identify the major drivers of historical and future coal demand. Second, resource constraints and transport bottlenecks are analyzed to evaluate demand and growth scenarios. The third area assesses the physical requirements of substituting coal demand growth with other primary energy forms. Finally, the study examines the carbon- and environmental implications of China's past and future coal consumption. There are three sections that address these areas by identifying particular characteristics of China's coal industry, quantifying factors driving demand, and analyzing supply scenarios: (1) reviews the range of Chinese and international estimates of remaining coal reserves and resources as well as key characteristics of China's coal industry including historical production, resource requirements, and prices; (2) quantifies the largest drivers of coal usage to produce a bottom-up reference projection of 2025 coal demand; and (3) analyzes coal supply constraints, substitution options, and environmental externalities. Finally, the last section presents conclusions on the role of coal in China's ongoing energy and economic development. China has been, is, and will continue to be a coal-powered economy. In 2007 Chinese coal production contained more energy than total Middle Eastern oil production. The rapid growth of coal demand after 2001 created supply strains and bottlenecks that raise questions about sustainability. Urbanization, heavy industrial growth, and increasing per-capita income are the primary interrelated drivers of rising coal usage. In 2007, the power sector, iron and steel, and cement production accounted for 66% of coal consumption. Power generation is becoming more efficient, but even extensive roll-out of the highest efficiency units would save only 14% of projected 2025 coal demand for the power sector. A new wedge of future coal consumption is likely to come from the burgeoning coal-liquefaction and chemicals industries. If coal to chemicals capacity reaches 70 million tonnes and coal-to-liquids capacity reaches 60 million tonnes, coal feedstock requirements would add an additional 450 million tonnes by 2025. Even with more efficient growth among these drivers, China's annual coal demand is expected to reach 3.9 to 4.3 billion tonnes by 2025. Central government support for nuclear and renewable energy has not reversed China's growing dependence on coal for primary energy. Substitution is a matter of scale: offsetting one year of recent coal demand growth of 200 million tonnes would require 107 billion cubic meters of natural gas (compared to 2007 growth of 13 BCM), 48 GW of nuclear (compared to 2007 growth of 2 GW), or 86 GW of hydropower capacity (compared to 2007 growth of 16 GW). Ongoing dependence on coal reduces China's ability to mitigate carbon dioxide emissions growth. If coal demand remains on a high growth path, carbon dioxide emissions from coal combustion alone would exceed total US energy-related carbon emissions by 2010. Within China's coal-dominated energy system, domestic transportation has emerged as the largest bottleneck for coal industry growth and is likely to remain a constraint to further expansion. China has a low proportion of high-quality reserves, but is producing its best coal first. Declining quality will further strain production and transport capacity. Furthermore, transporting coal to users has overloaded the train system and dramatically increased truck use, raising transportation oil demand. Growing international imports have helped to offset domestic transport bottlenecks. In the long term, import demand is likely to exceed 200 million tonnes by 2025, significantly impacting regional markets.

  2. Table 11.5c Emissions From Energy Consumption for Electricity Generation and Useful Thermal Output: Commercial and Industrial Sectors, 1989-2010 (Subset of Table 11.5a; Metric Tons of Gas)

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

    c Emissions From Energy Consumption for Electricity Generation and Useful Thermal Output: Commercial and Industrial Sectors, 1989-2010 (Subset of Table 11.5a; Metric Tons of Gas) Year Carbon Dioxide 1 Sulfur Dioxide Nitrogen Oxides Coal 2 Natural Gas 3 Petroleum 4 Geo- thermal 5 Non- Biomass Waste 6 Total Coal 2 Natural Gas 3 Petroleum 4 Other 7 Total Coal 2 Natural Gas 3 Petroleum 4 Other 7 Total Commercial Sector 8<//td> 1989 2,319,630 1,542,083 637,423 [ –] 803,754 5,302,890 37,398 4

  3. U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Report 2014

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

    9. Average Sales Price of Coal by State and Underground Mining Method, 2014 (dollars per short ton) Coal-Producing State Continuous 1 Conventional and Other 2 Longwall 3 Total ...

  4. U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Report 2014

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

    8. Average Sales Price of Coal by State and Mine Type, 2014 and 2013 (dollars per short ton) 2014 2013 Percent Change Coal-Producing State Underground Surface Total Underground ...

  5. Coal reserves are plentiful but unevenly distributed

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jeremic, M.L.

    1981-07-01

    There is plenty of coal in Canada. The estimated coal resources are more than 360,000,000,000 tons with most of this coal located in the western provinces. The estimated minable coal reserves are more than 16,000,000,000 tons and the recoverable coal is more than 6,000,000,000 tons. The latter figure reflects the lack of current development in many coalfields. Very recent and current exploration for coal as well as for oil and gas has indicated coal resources in addition to those already estimated. Incremental additions to coal resources can be expected in northern and eastern Canada. In the latter region, more than 85 percent of the total coal resources are beneath the ocean. The main coal deposits in western Canada are very far from the large industrial markets of Ontario and Quebec. They are closer, yet still quite distant, from export ports on the Pacific Ocean. Current efforts to improve coal transportation are expected to decrease the disadvantages of the unfavorable location of the western coalfields. This will increase the coal reserves in the region as further exploration will surely follow.

  6. Coal and nuclear power: Illinois' energy future

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1982-01-01

    This conference was sponsored by the Energy Resources Center, University of Illinois at Chicago; the US Department of Energy; the Illinois Energy Resources Commission; and the Illinois Department of Energy and Natural Resources. The theme for the conference, Coal and Nuclear Power: Illinois' Energy Future, was based on two major observations: (1) Illinois has the largest reserves of bituminous coal of any state and is surpassed in total reserves only by North Dakota, and Montana; and (2) Illinois has made a heavy commitment to the use of nuclear power as a source of electrical power generation. Currently, nuclear power represents 30% of the electrical energy produced in the State. The primary objective of the 1982 conference was to review these two energy sources in view of the current energy policy of the Reagan Administration, and to examine the impact these policies have on the Midwest energy scene. The conference dealt with issues unique to Illinois as well as those facing the entire nation. A separate abstract was prepared for each of the 30 individual presentations.

  7. Coal: America's energy future. Volume I

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2006-03-15

    Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman requested the National Coal Council in April 2005 a report identifying the challenges and opportunities of more fully exploring the USA's domestic coal resources to meet the nations' future energy needs. This resultant report addresses the Secretary's request in the context of the President's focus, with eight findings and recommendations that would use technology to leverage the USA's extensive coal assets and reduce dependence on imported energy. Volume I outlines these findings and recommendations. Volume II provides technical data and case histories to support the findings and recommendations. Chapter headings of Volume I are: Coal-to-Liquids to Produce 2.6 MMbbl/d; Coal-to-Natural Gas to Produce 4.0 Tcf Per Year; Coal-to-Clean Electricity; Coal to Produce Ethanol; Coal-to-Hydrogen; Enhanced Oil and Gas (Coalbed Methane); Recovery as Carbon Management Strategies; Delineate U.S. Coal Reserves and Transportation Constraints as Part of an Effort to Maximize U.S. Coal Production; and Penn State Study, 'Economic Benefits of Coal Conversion Investments'.

  8. Level: National Data; Row: End Uses within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Demand for Electricity;

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

    4 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: End Uses within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Demand for Electricity; Unit: Trillion Btu. Distillate Fuel Oil Coal NAICS Net Demand Residual and LPG and (excluding Coal Code(a) End Use for Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(c) Natural Gas(d) NGL(e) Coke and Breeze) Total United States 311 - 339 ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION 3,335 251 129 5,512 79 1,016 Indirect Uses-Boiler Fuel 84 133 23

  9. Coal Transportation Rate Sensitivity Analysis

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2005-01-01

    On December 21, 2004, the Surface Transportation Board (STB) requested that the Energy Information Administration (EIA) analyze the impact of changes in coal transportation rates on projected levels of electric power sector energy use and emissions. Specifically, the STB requested an analysis of changes in national and regional coal consumption and emissions resulting from adjustments in railroad transportation rates for Wyoming's Powder River Basin (PRB) coal using the National Energy Modeling System (NEMS). However, because NEMS operates at a relatively aggregate regional level and does not represent the costs of transporting coal over specific rail lines, this analysis reports on the impacts of interregional changes in transportation rates from those used in the Annual Energy Outlook 2005 (AEO2005) reference case.

  10. Keystone coal industry manual

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-01-01

    The 1994 Keystone Coal Industry Manual is presented. Keystone has served as the one industry reference authority for the many diverse organizations concerned with the supply and utilization of coal in the USA and Canada. Through the continuing efforts of coal producers, buyers, users, sellers, and equipment designers and manufacturers, the coal industry supplies an abundant and economical fuel that is indispensable in meeting the expanding energy needs of North America. The manual is divided into the following sections: coal sales companies, coal export, transportation of coal, consumer directories, coal associations and groups, consulting and financial firms, buyers guide, industry statistics and ownership, coal preparation, coal mine directory, and coal seams.

  11. By Coal Origin State

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Annual Coal Distribution Report 2010 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Distribution Report 2010 Alabama ...

  12. Electric trade in the United States, 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-12-01

    Wholesale trade in electricity plays an important role for the US electric utility industry. Wholesale, or bulk power, transactions allow electric utilities to reduce power costs, increase power supply options, and improve reliability. In 1996, the wholesale trade market totaled 2.3 trillion kilowatthours, over 73% of total sales to ultimate consumers. This publication, Electric Trade in the United States 1996 (ELECTRA), is the sixth in a series of reports on wholesale power transactions prepared by the Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels, Energy Information Administration (EIA). The electric trade data are published biennially. The first report presented 1986 data, and this report provides information on the electric power industry during 1996. The electric trade data collected and presented in this report furnish important information on the wholesale structure found within the US electric power industry. The patterns of interutility trade in the report support analyses of wholesale power transactions and provide input for a broader understanding of bulk power market issues that define the emerging national electric energy policies. The report includes information on the quantity of power purchased, sold, exchanged, and wheeled; the geographical locations of transactions and ownership classes involved; and the revenues and costs. 1 fig., 43 tabs.

  13. Virginia coal industry: a study of the infrastructure

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hibbard, W.R. Jr.; Chisholm, R.H.; Valdes, R.M.

    1985-01-01

    A study of the Virginia coal industry concludes that since coal quality from Virginia, West Virginia, and Kentucky is similar, then delivered cost is the key to steam coal sales to Virginia electric utilities. While the future looks good for the industry, coal from eastern Kentucky and West Virginia was delivered at a lower cost, which put Virginia coal at a disadvantage. Increased Virginia coal sales require the close cooperation of coal suppliers, transporters, and users. Negotiators directly representing the governor might be able to help bring this about. The report concludes with several recommendations, including the expansion of the Norfolk Southern railroad system, the requirement that state installations use state coal, consultation services to small operators, and the publication and dissemination of information to coal users. 3 figures, 26 tables.

  14. Total number of longwall faces drops below 50

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fiscor, S.

    2009-02-15

    For the first time since Coal Age began its annual Longwall Census the number of faces has dropped below 50. A total of five mines operate two longwall faces. CONSOL Energy remains the leader with 12 faces. Arch Coal operates five longwall mines; Robert E. Murray owns five longwall mines. West Virginia has 13 longwalls, followed by Pennsylvania (8), Utah (6) and Alabama (6). A detailed table gives for each longwall installation, the ownership, seam height, cutting height, panel width and length, overburden, number of gate entries, depth of cut, model of equipment used (shearer, haulage system, roof support, face conveyor, stage loader, crusher, electrical controls and voltage to face). 2 tabs., 1 photo.

  15. Levelized Cost of Electricity and Levelized Avoided Cost of Electricity Methodology Supplement

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    32,080 134,757 130,374 133,976 134,320 127,472 1980

    0 Capability to Switch Coal to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; Level: National Data and Regional Totals; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Thousand Short Tons. NAICS Total Not Electricity Natural Distillate Residual Code(a) Subsector and Industry Consumed(c) Switchable Switchable Receipts(d) Gas Fuel Oil Fuel Oil LPG Other(e) Total United States 311 Food 6,603 1,013 5,373 27 981 303 93

  16. Low-rank coal study. Volume 4. Regulatory, environmental, and market analyses

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1980-11-01

    The regulatory, environmental, and market constraints to development of US low-rank coal resources are analyzed. Government-imposed environmental and regulatory requirements are among the most important factors that determine the markets for low-rank coal and the technology used in the extraction, delivery, and utilization systems. Both state and federal controls are examined, in light of available data on impacts and effluents associated with major low-rank coal development efforts. The market analysis examines both the penetration of existing markets by low-rank coal and the evolution of potential markets in the future. The electric utility industry consumes about 99 percent of the total low-rank coal production. This use in utility boilers rose dramatically in the 1970's and is expected to continue to grow rapidly. In the late 1980's and 1990's, industrial direct use of low-rank coal and the production of synthetic fuels are expected to start growing as major new markets.

  17. Novel Fuel Cells for Coal Based Systems

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thomas Tao

    2011-12-31

    The goal of this project was to acquire experimental data required to assess the feasibility of a Direct Coal power plant based upon an Electrochemical Looping (ECL) of Liquid Tin Anode Solid Oxide Fuel Cell (LTA-SOFC). The objective of Phase 1 was to experimentally characterize the interaction between the tin anode, coal fuel and cell component electrolyte, the fate of coal contaminants in a molten tin reactor (via chemistry) and their impact upon the YSZ electrolyte (via electrochemistry). The results of this work will provided the basis for further study in Phase 2. The objective of Phase 2 was to extend the study of coal impurities impact on fuel cell components other than electrolyte, more specifically to the anode current collector which is made of an electrically conducting ceramic jacket and broad based coal tin reduction. This work provided a basic proof-of-concept feasibility demonstration of the direct coal concept.

  18. Coal liquefaction process

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Maa, Peter S.

    1978-01-01

    A process for liquefying a particulate coal feed to produce useful petroleum-like liquid products which comprises contacting; in a series of two or more coal liquefaction zones, or stages, graded with respect to temperature, an admixture of a polar compound; or compounds, a hydrogen donor solvent and particulate coal, the total effluent being passed in each instance from a low temperature zone, or stage to the next succeeding higher temperature zone, or stage, of the series. The temperature within the initial zone, or stage, of the series is maintained about 70.degree. F and 750.degree. F and the temperature within the final zone, or stage, is maintained between about 750.degree. F and 950.degree. F. The residence time within the first zone, or stage, ranges, generally, from about 20 to about 150 minutes and residence time within each of the remaining zones, or stages, of the series ranges, generally, from about 10 minutes to about 70 minutes. Further steps of the process include: separating the product from the liquefaction zone into fractions inclusive of a liquid solvent fraction; hydrotreating said liquid solvent fraction in a hydrogenation zone; and recycling the hydrogenated liquid solvent mixture to said coal liquefaction zones.

  19. Coal Preparation Plant Simulation

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    1992-02-25

    COALPREP assesses the degree of cleaning obtained with different coal feeds for a given plant configuration and mode of operation. It allows the user to simulate coal preparation plants to determine an optimum plant configuration for a given degree of cleaning. The user can compare the performance of alternative plant configurations as well as determine the impact of various modes of operation for a proposed configuration. The devices that can be modelled include froth flotationmore » devices, washers, dewatering equipment, thermal dryers, rotary breakers, roll crushers, classifiers, screens, blenders and splitters, and gravity thickeners. The user must specify the plant configuration and operating conditions and a description of the coal feed. COALPREP then determines the flowrates within the plant and a description of each flow stream (i.e. the weight distribution, percent ash, pyritic sulfur and total sulfur, moisture, BTU content, recoveries, and specific gravity of separation). COALPREP also includes a capability for calculating the cleaning cost per ton of coal.« less

  20. Coal Preparation Plant Simulation

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    1992-02-25

    COALPREP assesses the degree of cleaning obtained with different coal feeds for a given plant configuration and mode of operation. It allows the user to simulate coal preparation plants to determine an optimum plant configuration for a given degree of cleaning. The user can compare the performance of alternative plant configurations as well as determine the impact of various modes of operation for a proposed configuration. The devices that can be modelled include froth flotationmore » devices, washers, dewatering equipment, thermal dryers, rotary breakers, roll crushers, classifiers, screens, blenders and splitters, and gravity thickeners. The user must specify the plant configuration and operating conditions and a description of the coal feed. COALPREP then determines the flowrates within the plant and a description of each flow stream (i.e. the weight distribution, percent ash, pyritic sulfur and total sulfur, moisture, BTU content, recoveries, and specific gravity of separation). COALPREP also includes a capability for calculating the cleaning cost per ton of coal. The IBM PC version contains two auxiliary programs, DATAPREP and FORLIST. DATAPREP is an interactive preprocessor for creating and editing COALPREP input data. FORLIST converts carriage-control characters in FORTRAN output data to ASCII line-feed (X''0A'') characters.« less

  1. Outlook and Challenges for Chinese Coal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Aden, Nathaniel T.; Fridley, David G.; Zheng, Nina

    2008-06-20

    China has been, is, and will continue to be a coal-powered economy. The rapid growth of coal demand since 2001 has created deepening strains and bottlenecks that raise questions about supply security. Although China's coal is 'plentiful,' published academic and policy analyses indicate that peak production will likely occur between 2016 and 2029. Given the current economic growth trajectory, domestic production constraints will lead to a coal gap that is not likely to be filled with imports. Urbanization, heavy industry growth, and increasing per-capita consumption are the primary drivers of rising coal usage. In 2006, the power sector, iron and steel, and cement accounted for 71% of coal consumption. Power generation is becoming more efficient, but even extensive roll-out of the highest efficiency units could save only 14% of projected 2025 coal demand. If China follows Japan, steel production would peak by 2015; cement is likely to follow a similar trajectory. A fourth wedge of future coal consumption is likely to come from the burgeoning coal-liquefaction and chemicals industries. New demand from coal-to-liquids and coal-to-chemicals may add 450 million tonnes of coal demand by 2025. Efficient growth among these drivers indicates that China's annual coal demand will reach 4.2 to 4.7 billion tonnes by 2025. Central government support for nuclear and renewable energy has not been able to reduce China's growing dependence on coal for primary energy. Few substitution options exist: offsetting one year of recent coal demand growth would require over 107 billion cubic meters of natural gas, 48 GW of nuclear, or 86 GW of hydropower capacity. While these alternatives will continue to grow, the scale of development using existing technologies will be insufficient to substitute significant coal demand before 2025. The central role of heavy industry in GDP growth and the difficulty of substituting other fuels suggest that coal consumption is inextricably entwined with China's economy in its current mode of growth. Ongoing dependence on coal reduces China's ability to mitigate carbon dioxide emissions growth. If coal demand remains on its current growth path, carbon dioxide emissions from coal combustion alone would exceed total US energy-related carbon emissions by 2010. Broadening awareness of the environmental costs of coal mining, transport, and combustion is raising the pressure on Chinese policy makers to find alternative energy sources. Within China's coal-dominated energy system, domestic transportation has emerged as the largest bottleneck for coal industry growth and is likely to remain a constraint to further expansion. China is short of high-quality reserves, but is producing its best coal first. Declining quality will further strain production and transport. Transporting coal to users has overloaded the train system and dramatically increased truck use, raising transport oil demand. Growing international imports have helped to offset domestic transport bottlenecks. In the long term, import demand is likely to exceed 200 mt by 2025, significantly impacting regional markets. The looming coal gap threatens to derail China's growth path, possibly undermining political, economic, and social stability. High coal prices and domestic shortages will have regional and global effects. Regarding China's role as a global manufacturing center, a domestic coal gap will increase prices and constrain growth. Within the Asia-Pacific region, China's coal gap is likely to bring about increased competition with other coal-importing countries including Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and India. As with petroleum, China may respond with a government-supported 'going-out' strategy of resource acquisition and vertical integration. Given its population and growing resource constraints, China may favor energy security, competitiveness, and local environmental protection over global climate change mitigation. The possibility of a large coal gap suggests that Chinese and international policy makers should maximize institutional and financial support to moderate demand and improve energy efficiency.

  2. Comparing Statewide Economic Impacts of New Generation from Wind, Coal, and Natural Gas in Arizona, Colorado, and Michigan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tegen, S.

    2006-05-01

    Report comparing the impacts to states from equivalent new electrical generation from wind, natural gas, and coal.

  3. Clean coal technology: selective catalytic reduction (SCR) technology for the control of nitrogen oxide emissions from coal-fired boilers

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2005-05-01

    The report discusses a project carried out under the US Clean Coal Technology (CCT) Demonstration Program which demonstrated selective catalytic reduction (SCR) technology for the control of NOx emissions from high-sulphur coal-fired boilers under typical boilers conditions in the United States. The project was conducted by Southern Company Services, Inc., who served as a co-funder and as the host at Gulf Power Company's Plant Crist. The SCR process consists of injecting ammonia (NH{sub 3}) into boiler flue gas and passing the flue gas through a catalyst bed where the Nox and NH{sub 3} react to form nitrogen and water vapor. The results of the CCTDP project confirmed the applicability of SCR for US coal-fired power plants. In part as a result of the success of this project, a significant number of commercial SCR units have been installed and are operating successfully in the United States. By 2007, the total installed SCR capacity on US coal-fired units will number about 200, representing about 100,000 MWe of electric generating capacity. This report summarizes the status of SCR technology. 21 refs., 3 figs., 2 tabs., 10 photos.

  4. 1990,"AK","Total Electric Power Industry","All Sources",4208809,18741,12562

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

    State","Producer Type","Energy Source","CO2 (Metric Tons)","SO2 (Metric Tons)","NOx (Metric Tons)" 1990,"AK","Commercial Cogen","All Sources",824004,13198,3011 1990,"AK","Commercial Cogen","Coal",821929,13191,3009 1990,"AK","Commercial Cogen","Petroleum",2075,6,2 1990,"AK","Commercial Non-Cogen","All Sources",0,149,42

  5. Electric sales and revenue 1994

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-11-01

    The Electric Sales and Revenue is prepared by the Coal and Electric Data and Renewables Division; Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels; Energy Information Administration (EIA); US Department of Energy. Information is provided on electricity sales, associated revenue, average revenue per kilowatthour sold, and number of consumers throughout the United States. The data provided in the Electric Sales and Revenue are presented at the national, Census division, State, and electric utility levels. The information is based on annual data reported by electric utilities for the calendar year ending December 31, 1994.

  6. Electric vehicles

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-03-01

    Quiet, clean, and efficient, electric vehicles (EVs) may someday become a practical mode of transportation for the general public. Electric vehicles can provide many advantages for the nation's environment and energy supply because they run on electricity, which can be produced from many sources of energy such as coal, natural gas, uranium, and hydropower. These vehicles offer fuel versatility to the transportation sector, which depends almost solely on oil for its energy needs. Electric vehicles are any mode of transportation operated by a motor that receives electricity from a battery or fuel cell. EVs come in all shapes and sizes and may be used for different tasks. Some EVs are small and simple, such as golf carts and electric wheel chairs. Others are larger and more complex, such as automobile and vans. Some EVs, such as fork lifts, are used in industries. In this fact sheet, we will discuss mostly automobiles and vans. There are also variations on electric vehicles, such as hybrid vehicles and solar-powered vehicles. Hybrid vehicles use electricity as their primary source of energy, however, they also use a backup source of energy, such as gasoline, methanol or ethanol. Solar-powered vehicles are electric vehicles that use photovoltaic cells (cells that convert solar energy to electricity) rather than utility-supplied electricity to recharge the batteries. This paper discusses these concepts.

  7. Coal Gasification and Transportation Fuels Magazine

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

    Information Administration (EIA) Analysis & Projections ‹ See all Coal Reports U.S. Coal Supply and Demand: 2010 Year in Review Release Date: June 1, 2011 | Next Release Date: Periodically | full report Exports and Imports Exports Total U.S. coal exports for 2010 increased by 38.3 percent to 81.7 million short tons (Figure 8). Figure Data This increase was largely due to two factors. First, heavy rains and flooding in Australia, Indonesia, and Colombia reduced world coal supply and

  8. Coal Industry Annual 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-10-01

    This report presents data on coal consumption, coal distribution, coal stocks, coal prices, coal quality, and emissions for Congress, Federal and State agencies, the coal industry, and the general public. Appendix A contains a compilation of coal statistics for the major coal-producing States. This report does not include coal consumption data for nonutility power producers that are not in the manufacturing, agriculture, mining, construction, or commercial sectors. Consumption for nonutility power producers not included in this report is estimated to be 21 million short tons for 1995.

  9. Coal industry annual 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1997-11-01

    This report presents data on coal consumption, coal distribution, coal stocks, coal prices, and coal quality, and emissions for Congress, Federal and State agencies, the coal industry, and the general public. Appendix A contains a compilation of coal statistics for the major coal-producing States.This report does not include coal consumption data for nonutility power producers that are not in the manufacturing, agriculture, mining, construction, or commercial sectors. Consumption for nonutility power producers not included in this report is estimated to be 24 million short tons for 1996. 14 figs., 145 tabs.

  10. Energy Policy Act transportation rate study: Interim report on coal transportation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-10-01

    The primary purpose of this report is to examine changes in domestic coal distribution and railroad coal transportation rates since enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA90). From 1988 through 1993, the demand for low-sulfur coal increased, as a the 1995 deadline for compliance with Phase 1 of CAAA90 approached. The shift toward low-sulfur coal came sooner than had been generally expected because many electric utilities switched early from high-sulfur coal to ``compliance`` (very low-sulfur) coal. They did so to accumulate emissions allowances that could be used to meet the stricter Phase 2 requirements. Thus, the demand for compliance coal increased the most. The report describes coal distribution and sulfur content, railroad coal transportation and transportation rates, and electric utility contract coal transportation trends from 1979 to 1993 including national trends, regional comparisons, distribution patterns and regional profiles. 14 figs., 76 tabs.

  11. Microbial solubilization of coal

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Strandberg, G.W.; Lewis, S.N.

    1988-01-21

    The present invention relates to a cell-free preparation and process for the microbial solubilization of coal into solubilized coal products. More specifically, the present invention relates to bacterial solubilization of coal into solubilized coal products and a cell-free bacterial byproduct useful for solubilizing coal. 5 tabs.

  12. Reducing the moisture content of clean coals

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kehoe, D. )

    1992-12-01

    Coal moisture content can profoundly effect the cost of burning coal in utility boilers. Because of the large effect of coal moisture, the Empire State Electric Energy Research Corporation (ESEERCO) contracted with the Electric Power Research Institute to investigate advanced coal dewatering methods at its Coal Quality Development Center. This report contains the test result on the high-G solid-bowl centrifuge, the second of four devices to be tested. The high-G solid-bowl centrifuge removes water for coal by spinning the coal/water mixture rapidly in a rotating bowl. This causes the coal to cling to the sides of the bowl where it can be removed, leaving the water behind. Testing was performed at the CQDC to evaluate the effect of four operating variables (G-ratio, feed solids concentration, dry solids feed rate, and differential RPM) on the performance of the high-G solid-bowl centrifuge. Two centrifuges of different bowl diameter were tested to establish the effect of scale-up of centrifuge performance. Testing of the two centrifuges occurred from 1985 through 1987. CQDC engineers performed 32 tests on the smaller of the two centrifuges, and 47 tests on the larger. Equations that predict the performance of the two centrifuges for solids recovery, moisture content of the produced coal, and motor torque were obtained. The equations predict the observed data well. Traditional techniques of establishing the performance of centrifuge of different scale did not work well with the two centrifuges, probably because of the large range of G-ratios used in the testing. Cost of operating a commercial size bank of centrifuges is approximately $1.72 per ton of clean coal. This compares well with thermal drying, which costs $1.82 per ton of clean coal.

  13. U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report...

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

    4. U.S. Coal Exports and Imports, 2009 - 2015 (thousand short tons) January - March April - June July - September October - December Total Year Exports Imports Exports Imports ...

  14. How and why Tampa Electric Company selected IGCC for its next generating capacity addition

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pless, D.E. )

    1992-01-01

    As the title indicates, the purpose of this paper is to relate how and why Tampa Electric Company decided to select the Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) for their next capacity addition at Polk Power Station, Polk Unit No. 1. For a complete understanding of this process, it is necessary to review the history related to the initial formulation of the IGCC concept as it was proposed to the Department of Energy (DOE) Clean Coal Initiative Round Three. Further, it is important to understand the relationship between Tampa Electric Company and TECO Pay Services Corporation (TPS). TECO Energy, Inc. is an energy related holding company with headquarters in Tampa, Florida. Tampa Electric Company is the principal, wholly-owned subsidiary of TECO Energy, Inc. Tampa Electric Company is an investor-owned electric utility with about 3200 MW of generation capacity of which 97% is coal fired. Tampa Electric Company serves about 2,000 square miles and approximately 470,000 customers, in west central Florida, primarily in and around Hillsborough County and Tampa, Florida. Tampa Electric Company generating units consist of coal fired units ranging in size from a 110 MW coal fired cyclone unit installed in 1957 to a 450 MW pulverized coal unit with wet limestone flue gas desulfurization installed in 1985. In addition, Tampa Electric Company has six (6) No. 6 oil fired steam units totaling approximately 220 MW. Five (5) of these units, located at the Hookers Point Station, were installed in the late 1940's and early 1950's. Tampa Electric also has about 150 MW of No. 2 oil fired start-up and peaking combustion turbines. The company also owns a 1966 vintage 12 MW natural gas fired steam plant (Dinner Lake) and two nO. 6 oil fired diesel units with heat recovery equipment built in 1983 (Phillips Plant).

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

    Buildings Energy Data Book [EERE]

    5 2010 Impacts of Saving an Electric Quad (1) Utility Average-Sized Aggregate Number of Units Fuel Input Utility Unit (MW) to Provide the Fuel's Share Plant Fuel Type Shares (%) in 2010 of the Electric Quad (2) Coal 49% 36 Petroleum 1% 96 Natural Gas 19% 141 Nuclear 22% 3 Renewable (3) 10% 184 Total 100% 460 Note(s): Source(s): EIA, Electric Power Annual 2010, Feb. 2012, Table 1.2; and EIA, Annual Energy Outlook 2012 Early Release, Jan. 2012, Table A2 for consumption and Table A8 for electricity

  16. EIA -Quarterly Coal Distribution

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

    U.S. domestic coal distribution by coal origin, coal destination, mode of transportation ... YearQuarters By origin State By destination State Report Data File Report Data File 2009 ...

  17. By Coal Destination State

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

    Destination State ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 1st Quarter 2012 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 1st Quarter 2012 Alabama _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table DS-1. Domestic coal

  18. By Coal Origin State

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

    Origin State ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 1st Quarter 2012 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 1st Quarter 2012 Alabama ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table OS-1. Domestic coal

  19. Coal liquefaction and hydrogenation

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Schindler, Harvey D.; Chen, James M.

    1985-01-01

    Disclosed is a coal liquefaction process using two stages. The first stage liquefies the coal and maximizes the product while the second stage hydrocracks the remainder of the coal liquid to produce solvent.

  20. Coal industry annual 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-12-06

    Coal Industry Annual 1993 replaces the publication Coal Production (DOE/FIA-0125). This report presents additional tables and expanded versions of tables previously presented in Coal Production, including production, number of mines, Productivity, employment, productive capacity, and recoverable reserves. This report also presents data on coal consumption, coal distribution, coal stocks, coal prices, coal quality, and emissions for a wide audience including the Congress, Federal and State agencies, the coal industry, and the general public. In addition, Appendix A contains a compilation of coal statistics for the major coal-producing States. This report does not include coal consumption data for nonutility Power Producers who are not in the manufacturing, agriculture, mining, construction, or commercial sectors. This consumption is estimated to be 5 million short tons in 1993.

  1. X-ray Computed Tomography of coal: Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Maylotte, D.H.; Spiro, C.L.; Kosky, P.G.; Lamby, E.J.

    1986-12-01

    X-ray Computed Tomography (CT) is a method of mapping with x-rays the internal structures of coal. The technique normally produces 2-D images of the internal structures of an object. These images can be recast to create pseudo 3-D representations. CT of coal has been explored for a variety of different applications to coal and coal processing technology. In a comparison of CT data with conventional coal analyses and petrography, CT was found to offer a good indication of the total ash content of the coal. The spatial distribution of the coal mineral matter as seen with CT has been suggested as an indicator of coal washability. Studies of gas flow through coal using xenon gas as a tracer have shown the extremely complicated nature of the modes of penetration of gas through coal, with significant differences in the rates at which the gas can pass along and across the bedding planes of coal. In a special furnace designed to allow CT images to be taken while the coal was being heated, the pyrolysis and gasification of coal have been studied. Gasification rates with steam and CO/sub 2/ for a range of coal ranks have been obtained, and the location of the gasification reactions within the piece of coal can be seen. Coal drying and the progress of the pyrolysis wave into coal have been examined when the coal was subjected to the kind of sudden temperature jump that it might experience in fixed bed gasifier applications. CT has also been used to examine stable flow structures within model fluidized beds and the accessibility of lump coal to microbial desulfurization. 53 refs., 242 figs., 26 tabs.

  2. ELECTROKINETIC DENSIFICATION OF COAL FINES IN WASTE PONDS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    E. James Davis

    1999-12-18

    The objective of this research was to demonstrate that electrokinetics can be used to remove colloidal coal and mineral particles from coal-washing ponds and lakes without the addition of chemical additives such as salts and polymeric flocculants. The specific objectives were: Design and develop a scaleable electrophoresis apparatus to clarify suspensions of colloidal coal and clay particles; Demonstrate the separation process using polluted waste water from the coal-washing facilities at the coal-fired power plants in Centralia, WA; Develop a mathematical model of the process to predict the rate of clarification and the suspension electrical properties needed for scale up.

  3. Coal and Coal-Biomass to Liquids

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

    and Coal-Biomass to Liquids Turning coal into liquid fuels like gasoline, diesel and jet fuel, with biomass to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, is the main goal of the Coal and Coal-Biomass to Liquids program. The program also aims to reduce the cost of these low-emission fuels, and will take advantage of carbon capture and sequestration technologies to further reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Other Coal and Coal-Biomass to Liquids (C&CBTL) Program Activities: The C&CBTL Program

  4. AEO2016 Electricity Working Group

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

    Office of Electricity, Coal, Nuclear, and Renewables Analysis December 8, 2015 | Washington, DC AEO2016 Electricity Working Group WORKING GROUP PRESENTATION FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES DO NOT QUOTE OR CITE AS RESULTS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE What to look for: Electricity sector in AEO2016 * Inclusion of EPA final Clean Power Plan in Reference Case * Updated cost estimates for new generating technologies * Major data update on existing coal plant status: MATS- compliant technology or retirement

  5. Coal quality trends and distribution of Title III trace elements in Eastern Kentucky coals

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eble, C.F.; Hower, J.C.

    1995-12-31

    The quality characteristics of eastern Kentucky coal beds vary both spatially and stratigraphically. Average total sulfur contents are lowest, and calorific values highest, in the Big Sandy and Upper Cumberland Reserve Districts. Average coal thickness is greatest in these two districts as well. Conversely, the thinnest coal with the highest total sulfur content, and lowest calorific value, on average, occurs in the Princess and Southwest Reserve Districts. Several Title III trace elements, notably arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, and nickel, mirror this distribution (lower average concentrations in the Big Sandy and Upper Cumberland Districts, higher average concentrations in the Princess and Southwest Districts), probably because these elements are primarily associated with sulfide minerals in coal. Ash yields and total sulfur contents are observed to increase in a stratigraphically older to younger direction. Several Title III elements, notably cadmium, chromium, lead, and selenium follow this trend, with average concentrations being higher in younger coals. Average chlorine concentration shows a reciprocal distribution, being more abundant in older coals. Some elements, such as arsenic, manganese, mercury, cobalt, and, to a lesser extent, phosphorus show concentration spikes in coal beds directly above, or below, major marine zones. With a few exceptions, average Title III trace element concentrations for eastern Kentucky coals are comparable with element distributions in other Appalachian coal-producing states.

  6. Coal-Producing Region

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

    . Coal Production by State (thousand short tons) Year to Date Coal-Producing Region and State October - December 2015 July - September 2015 October - December 2014 2015 2014 ...

  7. By Coal Origin State

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

    Table OS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by origin State, 1st Quarter 2010 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State...

  8. By Coal Origin State

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

    Table OS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by origin State, 4th Quarter 2011 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State...

  9. By Coal Destination State

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

    Table DS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by destination State, 3rd Quarter 2011 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State...

  10. By Coal Origin State

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

    Table OS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by origin State, 3rd Quarter 2011 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State...

  11. By Coal Destination State

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

    Table DS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by destination State, 4th Quarter 2011 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State...

  12. By Coal Destination State

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

    Table DS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by destination State, 3rd Quarter 2010 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State...

  13. By Coal Origin State

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

    Table OS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by origin State, 4th Quarter 2010 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State...

  14. By Coal Origin State

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

    Table OS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by origin State, 2nd Quarter 2011 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State...

  15. By Coal Origin State

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

    Table OS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by origin State, 3rd Quarter 2010 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State...

  16. By Coal Destination State

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

    Table DS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by destination State, 4th Quarter 2010 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State...

  17. By Coal Origin State

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

    Table OS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by origin State, 1st Quarter 2011 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State...

  18. Coal Distribution Database, 2006

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

    Domestic Distribution of U.S. Coal by Origin State, Consumer, Destination and Method of Transportation, 2009 Final February 2011 2 Overview of 2009 Coal Distribution Tables...

  19. By Coal Destination State

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

    Table DS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by destination State, 1st Quarter 2011 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State...

  20. By Coal Origin State

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

    Table OS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by origin State, 2nd Quarter 2010 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State...

  1. By Coal Destination State

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

    Table DS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by destination State, 1st Quarter 2010 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State...

  2. By Coal Destination State

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

    Table DS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by destination State, 2nd Quarter 2010 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State...

  3. By Coal Destination State

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

    Table DS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by destination State, 2nd Quarter 2011 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State...

  4. Annual Coal Distribution Report

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

    Annual Coal Distribution Report Release Date: April 16, 2015 | Next Release Date: March 2016 | full report | RevisionCorrection Revision to the Annual Coal Distribution Report ...

  5. Clean Coal Program Research Activities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Larry Baxter; Eric Eddings; Thomas Fletcher; Kerry Kelly; JoAnn Lighty; Ronald Pugmire; Adel Sarofim; Geoffrey Silcox; Phillip Smith; Jeremy Thornock; Jost Wendt; Kevin Whitty

    2009-03-31

    Although remarkable progress has been made in developing technologies for the clean and efficient utilization of coal, the biggest challenge in the utilization of coal is still the protection of the environment. Specifically, electric utilities face increasingly stringent restriction on the emissions of NO{sub x} and SO{sub x}, new mercury emission standards, and mounting pressure for the mitigation of CO{sub 2} emissions, an environmental challenge that is greater than any they have previously faced. The Utah Clean Coal Program addressed issues related to innovations for existing power plants including retrofit technologies for carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) or green field plants with CCS. The Program focused on the following areas: simulation, mercury control, oxycoal combustion, gasification, sequestration, chemical looping combustion, materials investigations and student research experiences. The goal of this program was to begin to integrate the experimental and simulation activities and to partner with NETL researchers to integrate the Program's results with those at NETL, using simulation as the vehicle for integration and innovation. The investigators also committed to training students in coal utilization technology tuned to the environmental constraints that we face in the future; to this end the Program supported approximately 12 graduate students toward the completion of their graduate degree in addition to numerous undergraduate students. With the increased importance of coal for energy independence, training of graduate and undergraduate students in the development of new technologies is critical.

  6. H-coal pilot plant. Phase II. Construction. Phase III. Operation. Annual report No. 3

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1981-02-04

    At the request of DOE Oak Ridge, ASFI agreed to assume responsibility for completion of Plant construction in December, 1979, at which time Badger Plants' on-site work was ended. This construction effort consisted of electric heat tracing and insulation of piping and instrumentation. At the close of the reporting period the work was completed, or was projected to be completed, within the ASFI budgeted amounts and by dates that will not impact Plant operations. Engineering design solutions were completed for problems encountered with such equipment as the High Pressure Letdown Valves; Slurry Block Valves; Slurry Pumps; the Bowl Mill System; the Dowtherm System; and the Ebullating Pump. A Corrosion Monitoring Program was established. With the exception of Area 500, the Antisolvent Deashing Unit, all operating units were commissioned and operated during the reporting period. Coal was first introduced into the Plant on May 29, 1980, with coal operations continuing periodically through September 30, 1980. The longest continuous coal run was 119 hours. A total of 677 tons of Kentucky No. 11 Coal were processed during the reporting period. The problems encountered were mechanical, not process, in nature. Various Environmental and Health programs were implemented to assure worker safety and protection and to obtain data from Plant operations for scientific analysis. These comprehensive programs will contribute greatly in determining the acceptability of long term H-Coal Plant operations.

  7. Coal liquefaction

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Schindler, Harvey D.

    1985-01-01

    In a two-stage liquefaction wherein coal, hydrogen and liquefaction solvent are contacted in a first thermal liquefaction zone, followed by recovery of an essentially ash free liquid and a pumpable stream of insoluble material, which includes 850.degree. F.+ liquid, with the essentially ash free liquid then being further upgraded in a second liquefaction zone, the liquefaction solvent for the first stage includes the pumpable stream of insoluble material from the first liquefaction stage, and 850.degree. F.+ liquid from the second liquefaction stage.

  8. Compare All CBECS Activities: Electricity Use

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

    Electricity Use Compare Activities by ... Electricity Use Total Electricity Consumption by Building Type Commercial buildings in the U.S. used a total of approximately 908 billion...

  9. Table 8.11d Electric Net Summer Capacity: Commercial and Industrial Sectors, 1989-2011 (Subset of Table 8.11a; Kilowatts)

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

    d Electric Net Summer Capacity: Commercial and Industrial Sectors, 1989-2011 (Subset of Table 8.11a; Kilowatts) Year Fossil Fuels Nuclear Electric Power Hydro- electric Pumped Storage Renewable Energy Other 8 Total Coal 1 Petroleum 2 Natural Gas 3 Other Gases 4 Total Conventional Hydroelectric Power Biomass Geo- thermal Solar/PV 7 Wind Total Wood 5 Waste 6 Commercial Sector 9<//td> 1989 258,193 191,487 578,797 – 1,028,477 [–] – 17,942 13,144 166,392 [–] – – 197,478 – 1,225,955 1990

  10. Table 8.4c Consumption for Electricity Generation by Energy Source: Commercial and Industrial Sectors, 1989-2011 (Subset of Table 8.4a; Billion Btu)

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

    c Consumption for Electricity Generation by Energy Source: Commercial and Industrial Sectors, 1989-2011 (Subset of Table 8.4a; Billion Btu) Year Fossil Fuels Nuclear Electric Power Renewable Energy Other 9 Electricity Net Imports Total Coal 1 Petroleum 2 Natural Gas 3 Other Gases 4 Total Conventional Hydroelectric Power 5 Biomass Geo- thermal Solar/PV 5,8 Wind 5 Total Wood 6 Waste 7 Commercial Sector 10<//td> 1989 9,135 6,901 18,424 1,143 35,603 [–] 685 1,781 9,112 [–] – – 11,578 – –

  11. The Mesaba Energy Project: Clean Coal Power Initiative, Round 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stone, Richard; Gray, Gordon; Evans, Robert

    2014-07-31

    The Mesaba Energy Project is a nominal 600 MW integrated gasification combine cycle power project located in Northeastern Minnesota. It was selected to receive financial assistance pursuant to code of federal regulations (?CFR?) 10 CFR 600 through a competitive solicitation under Round 2 of the Department of Energy?s Clean Coal Power Initiative, which had two stated goals: (1) to demonstrate advanced coal-based technologies that can be commercialized at electric utility scale, and (2) to accelerate the likelihood of deploying demonstrated technologies for widespread commercial use in the electric power sector. The Project was selected in 2004 to receive a total of $36 million. The DOE portion that was equally cost shared in Budget Period 1 amounted to about $22.5 million. Budget Period 1 activities focused on the Project Definition Phase and included: project development, preliminary engineering, environmental permitting, regulatory approvals and financing to reach financial close and start of construction. The Project is based on ConocoPhillips? E-Gas? Technology and is designed to be fuel flexible with the ability to process sub-bituminous coal, a blend of sub-bituminous coal and petroleum coke and Illinois # 6 bituminous coal. Major objectives include the establishment of a reference plant design for Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (?IGCC?) technology featuring advanced full slurry quench, multiple train gasification, integration of the air separation unit, and the demonstration of 90% operational availability and improved thermal efficiency relative to previous demonstration projects. In addition, the Project would demonstrate substantial environmental benefits, as compared with conventional technology, through dramatically lower emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds, carbon monoxide, particulate matter and mercury. Major milestones achieved in support of fulfilling the above goals include obtaining Site, High Voltage Transmission Line Route, and Natural Gas Pipeline Route Permits for a Large Electric Power Generating Plant to be located in Taconite, Minnesota. In addition, major pre-construction permit applications have been filed requesting authorization for the Project to i) appropriate water sufficient to accommodate its worst case needs, ii) operate a major stationary source in compliance with regulations established to protect public health and welfare, and iii) physically alter the geographical setting to accommodate its construction. As of the current date, the Water Appropriation Permits have been obtained.

  12. Environmental and economic challenges to coal`s future in China

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Johnson, C.J.; Li, B.

    1994-11-01

    Coal accounts for approximately 75% of China`s total primary energy consumption, and is by far the largest contributor to air pollution. The highest growth sector for coal consumption is the power sector, accounting for about 36 percent of total coal consumption in 1993. Over the 1994--2010 period most new, large power plants are expected to be coal-fired. Therefore, the availability and price of coal, as well as environmental constraints will be critical to foreign investors evaluating coal and power projects in China. The purpose of this paper is to provide useful technical, economic and environmental information and analysis on coal and the power sectors of China. The target audiences are potential investors and government energy and environmental policy people. This paper suggests a number of important energy and environmental policy issues that need to be addressed in a timely fashion in order to promote adequate levels of investment in coal and power developments in China. Although this paper highlights problems faced by foreign investors in coal and power, it is important to balance these problems against the large investment opportunities developing in these sectors.

  13. Annual Coal Distribution

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2015-01-01

    The Annual Coal Distribution Report (ACDR) provides detailed information on domestic coal distribution by origin state, destination state, consumer category, and method of transportation. Also provided is a summary of foreign coal distribution by coal-producing state. All data for the report year are final and this report supersedes all data in the quarterly distribution reports.

  14. Coal production 1988

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1989-11-22

    Coal Production 1988 provides comprehensive information about US coal production, the number of mines, prices, productivity, employment, reserves, and stocks to a wide audience including Congress, Federal and State agencies, the coal industry, and the general public. This report also includes data for the demonstrated reserve base of coal in the United States on January 1, 1989. 5 figs., 45 tabs.

  15. Clean coal technologies: Research, development, and demonstration program plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-12-01

    The US Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy, has structured an integrated program for research, development, and demonstration of clean coal technologies that will enable the nation to use its plentiful domestic coal resources while meeting environmental quality requirements. The program provides the basis for making coal a low-cost, environmentally sound energy choice for electric power generation and fuels production. These programs are briefly described.

  16. The Black Mesa coal/water slurry pipeline system

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brolick, H.J.

    1994-12-31

    The Black Mesa Pipeline is a 273 mile (439 km) long, 18-inch (457 mm) coal/water slurry pipeline, originating on the Black Mesa in the Northeastern part of Arizona, USA. The system delivers coal from the Peabody Coal Company`s Black Mesa open pit mine to the Mohave Generating Station which is a 1580 mw steam powered electric generating plant located in Laughlin, Nevada.

  17. Table 8.5c Consumption of Combustible Fuels for Electricity Generation: Electric Power Sector by Plant Type, 1989-2011 (Breakout of Table 8.5b)

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

    5c Consumption of Combustible Fuels for Electricity Generation: Electric Power Sector by Plant Type, 1989-2011 (Breakout of Table 8.5b) Year Coal 1 Petroleum Natural Gas 6 Other Gases 7 Biomass Other 10 Distillate Fuel Oil 2 Residual Fuel Oil 3 Other Liquids 4 Petroleum Coke 5 Total 5 Wood 8 Waste 9 Short Tons Barrels Short Tons Barrels Thousand Cubic Feet Billion Btu Billion Btu Billion Btu Electricity-Only Plants 11<//td> 1989 767,378,330 25,574,094 241,960,194 3,460 517,385 270,124,673

  18. Construction Begins on First-of-its-Kind Advanced Clean Coal...

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

    Construction Begins on First-of-its-Kind Advanced Clean Coal Electric Generating Facility ... Integrated Gasification (TRIGTM) technology," said David Ratcliffe, Southern ...

  19. United States: coal's renaissance may be at hand. [Coal; 1970 to 1979

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Quenon, R.H.

    1980-11-01

    During the first half of 1980 steam coal exports from the United States to overseas customers increased nearly eight-fold to more than 5,100,000 tons. Total coal exports for the same period increased by 37 percent to 38,400,000 tons. Despite the recent growth in demand, the United States coal industry still finds itself a seriously demand-constrained industry. As a result, mines have been closed, miners put out of work, and expansion plans shelved. At present, the industry has the capacity to produce about 100,000,000 tons more coal each year than the market is absorbing. This situation exists largely because of capacity expansions begun in the early and mid-1970's following the oil embargo and the expectation of a much more rapid growth in coal use than actually occurred. This excess capacity can be brought on line quickly and additional capacity can be added if there is a greater demand for coal. Since the 1973 oil embargo, United States government policies designed to increase the use of coal have been largely offset by government actions increasing the costs of mining and using coal. In fact, while price and security of supply advantages lead to increased coal use, the rate of increase has been and will continue to be held down by government policies and requirements. The coal industry is continuing to work to bring about greater governmental and political awareness of actions which hold down the rate of increase in coal use. The National Coal Association identified 44 specific problem areas where government policies or requirements are impeding coal production and use. (LTN)

  20. Coal data: A reference

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1995-02-01

    This report, Coal Data: A Reference, summarizes basic information on the mining and use of coal, an important source of energy in the US. This report is written for a general audience. The goal is to cover basic material and strike a reasonable compromise between overly generalized statements and detailed analyses. The section ``Supplemental Figures and Tables`` contains statistics, graphs, maps, and other illustrations that show trends, patterns, geographic locations, and similar coal-related information. The section ``Coal Terminology and Related Information`` provides additional information about terms mentioned in the text and introduces some new terms. The last edition of Coal Data: A Reference was published in 1991. The present edition contains updated data as well as expanded reviews and additional information. Added to the text are discussions of coal quality, coal prices, unions, and strikes. The appendix has been expanded to provide statistics on a variety of additional topics, such as: trends in coal production and royalties from Federal and Indian coal leases, hours worked and earnings for coal mine employment, railroad coal shipments and revenues, waterborne coal traffic, coal export loading terminals, utility coal combustion byproducts, and trace elements in coal. The information in this report has been gleaned mainly from the sources in the bibliography. The reader interested in going beyond the scope of this report should consult these sources. The statistics are largely from reports published by the Energy Information Administration.

  1. STEO November 2012 - coal supplies

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

    Coal exports are expected to decline in 2013, primarily because of continuing economic weakness in Europe, lower international coal prices, and higher coal production in Asia. ...

  2. Economic assessment of coal-burning locomotives: Topical report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1986-02-01

    The General Electric Company embarked upon a study to evaluate various alternatives for the design and manufacture a coal fired locomotive considering various prime movers, but retaining the electric drive transmission. The initial study was supported by the Burlington-Northern and Norfolk-Southern railroads, and included the following alternatives: coal fired diesel locomotive; direct fired gas turbine locomotives; direct fired gas turbine locomotive with steam injection; raw coal gasifier gas turbine locomotive; and raw coal fluid bed steam turbine locomotive. All alternatives use the electric drive transmission and were selected for final evaluation. The first three would use a coal water slurry as a fuel, which must be produced by new processing plants. Therefore, use of a slurry would require a significant plant capital investment. The last two would use classified run-of-the-mine (ROM) coal with much less capital expenditure. Coal fueling stations would be required but are significantly lower in capital cost than a coal slurry plant. For any coal fired locomotive to be commercially viable, it must pass the following criteria: be technically feasible and environmentally acceptable; meet railroads' financial expectations; and offer an attractive return to the locomotive manufacturer. These three criteria are reviewed in the report.

  3. Table 8.4b Consumption for Electricity Generation by Energy Source: Electric Power Sector, 1949-2011 (Subset of Table 8.4a; Billion Btu)

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

    b Consumption for Electricity Generation by Energy Source: Electric Power Sector, 1949-2011 (Subset of Table 8.4a; Billion Btu) Year Fossil Fuels Nuclear Electric Power 5 Renewable Energy Other 9 Electricity Net Imports 10 Total Coal 1 Petroleum 2 Natural Gas 3 Other Gases 4 Total Conventional Hydroelectric Power 5 Biomass Geo- thermal 5 Solar/PV 5,8 Wind 5 Total Wood 6 Waste 7 1949 1,995,055 414,632 569,375 NA 2,979,062 0 1,349,185 5,803 NA NA NA NA 1,354,988 NA 5,420 4,339,470 1950 2,199,111

  4. Quarterly Coal Report, April-June 1985

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1985-10-18

    The Quarterly Coal Report provides comprehensive information about coal production, exports, imports, receipts, consumption, and stocks in the United States. The data presented in this report were collected and published by the Energy Information Administration (EIA) to fulfill its data collection and dissemination responsibilities as specified in the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-275) as amended. This issue shows detailed quarterly data for April-June 1985, aggregated quarterly historical and projected data for 1980 through 1986, and aggregated annual historical and projected data for 1960 through 1995. All data for 1984 and previous years are final. All 1985 data are preliminary and subject to revision. During the first and second quarters of 1985, the US coal industry continued to return to normal operations after the threat of a strike by US coal miners in 1984. For the first 6 months of 1985 the industry showed the following developments: Coal production was only 2.4% less than in the same period of 1984, when it reached a record January-June total. Coal exports were 10.0% higher than their 1984 level for the same time period. The United States imported 52.3% more coal than it did in the first 6 months of 1984, chiefly from Colombia. Domestic coal consumption reached a record-setting level for January-June, 3.6% greater than the previous record in 1984.

  5. Coal and Coal-Biomass to Liquids FAQs

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

    Coal and Coal-Biomass to Liquids FAQs faq-header-big.jpg BASICS Q: How are gasoline and diesel fuel made from coal? A: Gasoline and diesel fuels can be produced from coal in two ...

  6. Country Total

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

    Country Total Percent of U.S. total China 1,461,074 34 Republic of Korea 172,379 4 Taiwan 688,311 16 All others 1,966,263 46 Total 4,288,027 100 Note: All Others includes Canada, Czech Republic, Federal Republic of Germany, Malaysia, Mexico, Philippines and Singapore Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-63B, 'Annual Photovoltaic Cell/Module Shipments Report.' Table 7 . Photovoltaic module import shipments by country, 2013 (peak kilowatts)

  7. "Table A28. Total Expenditures for Purchased Energy Sources...

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

    Total Expenditures for Purchased Energy Sources by Census Region" " and Economic ... "," ","Coke"," ","Row" "Economic Characteristics(a)","Total","Electricity...

  8. Comprehensive Report to Congress Clean Coal Technology Program: Clean power from integrated coal/ore reduction

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-10-01

    This report describes a clean coal program in which an iron making technology is paired with combined cycle power generation to produce 3300 tons per day of hot metal and 195 MWe of electricity. The COREX technology consists of a metal-pyrolyzer connected to a reduction shaft, in which the reducing gas comes directly from coal pyrolysis. The offgas is utilized to fuel a combined cycle power plant.

  9. Assessment of mercury health risks to adults from coal combustion

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lipfert, F.W.; Moskowitz, P.D.; Fthenakis, V.M.; DePhillips, M.P.; Viren, J.; Saroff, L.

    1994-05-01

    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is preparing, for the U.S. Congress, a report evaluating the need to regulate mercury (Hg) emissions from electric utilities. This study, to be completed in 1995, will have important health and economic implications. In support of these efforts, the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy, sponsored a risk assessment project at Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) to evaluate methylmercury (MeHg) hazards independently. In the BNL study, health risks to adults resulting from Hg emissions from a hypothetical 1000 MW{sub e} coal-fired power plant were estimated using probabilistic risk assessment techniques. The approach draws on the extant knowledge in each of the important steps in the calculation chain from emissions to health effects. Estimated results at key points in the chain were compared with actual measurements to help validate the modeled estimates. Two cases were considered: the baseline case (no local impacts), and the impact case (maximum local power-plant impact). The BNL study showed that the effects of emissions of a single power plant may double the background exposures to MeHg resulting from consuming fish obtained from a localized area near the power plant. Many implicit and explicit sources of uncertainty exist in this analysis. Those that appear to be most in need of improvement include data on doses and responses for potentially sensitive subpopulations (e.g., fetal exposures). Rather than considering hypothetical situations, it would also be preferable to assess the risks associated with actual coal-fired power plants and the nearby sensitive water bodies and susceptible subpopulations. Finally, annual total Hg emissions from coal burning and from other anthropogenic sources are still uncertain; this makes it difficult to estimate the effects of U.S. coal burning on global Hg concentration levels, especially over the long term.

  10. Domestic Coal Distribution 2009 Q1 by Origin State: Alabama

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

    Q1 by Origin State: Alabama (1000 Short Tons) 1 58 Domestic Coal Distribution 2009 Q1 by Origin State: Alabama (1000 Short Tons) Destination State Transportation Mode Electricity...

  11. Domestic Coal Distribution 2009 Q2 by Origin State: Alabama

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

    Q2 by Origin State: Alabama (1000 Short Tons) 1 58 Domestic Coal Distribution 2009 Q2 by Origin State: Alabama (1000 Short Tons) Destination State Transportation Mode Electricity...

  12. 2,"Four Corners","Coal","Arizona Public Service Co",1540

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

    gas","Southwestern Public Service Co",466 6,"Rio Grande","Natural gas","El Paso Electric Co",324.2 7,"Escalante","Coal","Tri-State G & T Assn, Inc",247 8,"Afton ...

  13. 1,"Gerald Gentleman","Coal","Nebraska Public Power District"...

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

    Public Power District",318.4 8,"Whelan Energy Center","Coal","City of Hastings - (NE)",309 9,"Rokeby","Natural gas","Lincoln Electric System",258 10,"Beatrice","Natural ...

  14. Upgraded Coal Interest Group

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Evan Hughes

    2009-01-08

    The Upgraded Coal Interest Group (UCIG) is an EPRI 'users group' that focuses on clean, low-cost options for coal-based power generation. The UCIG covers topics that involve (1) pre-combustion processes, (2) co-firing systems and fuels, and (3) reburn using coal-derived or biomass-derived fuels. The UCIG mission is to preserve and expand the economic use of coal for energy. By reducing the fuel costs and environmental impacts of coal-fired power generation, existing units become more cost effective and thus new units utilizing advanced combustion technologies are more likely to be coal-fired.

  15. Coal feed lock

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Pinkel, I. Irving

    1978-01-01

    A coal feed lock is provided for dispensing coal to a high pressure gas producer with nominal loss of high pressure gas. The coal feed lock comprises a rotor member with a diametral bore therethrough. A hydraulically activated piston is slidably mounted in the bore. With the feed lock in a charging position, coal is delivered to the bore and then the rotor member is rotated to a discharging position so as to communicate with the gas producer. The piston pushes the coal into the gas producer. The rotor member is then rotated to the charging position to receive the next load of coal.

  16. Electric Resistance Heating | Department of Energy

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

    Heat & Cool » Home Heating Systems » Electric Resistance Heating Electric Resistance Heating Baseboard heaters are one type of electric resistance heaters. | Photo courtesy of ©iStockphoto/drewhadley Baseboard heaters are one type of electric resistance heaters. | Photo courtesy of ©iStockphoto/drewhadley Electric resistance heating is 100% energy efficient in the sense that all the incoming electric energy is converted to heat. However, most electricity is produced from coal, gas, or

  17. The Economic Impact of Coal Mining in New Mexico

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Peach, James; Starbuck, C.

    2009-06-01

    The economic impact of coal mining in New Mexico is examined in this report. The analysis is based on economic multipliers derived from an input-output model of the New Mexico economy. The direct, indirect, and induced impacts of coal mining in New Mexico are presented in terms of output, value added, employment, and labor income for calendar year 2007. Tax, rental, and royalty income to the State of New Mexico are also presented. Historical coal production, reserves, and price data are also presented and discussed. The impacts of coal-fired electricity generation will be examined in a separate report.

  18. Pelletization of fine coals

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sastry, K.V.S.

    1991-09-01

    The present research project attempts to provide a basis to determine the pelletizability of fine coals, to ascertain the role of additives and binders and to establish a basis for binder selection. Currently, there are no established techniques for determining the quality of coal pellets. Our research is intended to develop a series of tests on coal pellets to measure their storage characteristics, transportability, ease of gasification and rate of combustion. Information developed from this research should be valuable for making knowledgeable decisions for on-time plant design, occasional binder selection and frequent process control during the pelletization of coal fines. During the last quarter, we continued the batch pelletization studies on Upper Freeport coal. The results as presented in that last quarterly report (April 1991) indicated that the surface conditions on the coal particle influenced the pelletizing growth rates. For example, a fresh (run of mine) sample of coal will display different pelletizing growth kinetics than a weathered sample of the same coal. Since coal is a heterogeneous material, the oxidized product of coal is equally variable. We found it to be logistically difficult to consistently produce large quantities of artificially oxidized coal for experimental purposes and as such we have used a naturally weathered coal. We have plans to oxidize coals under controlled oxidizing conditions and be able to establish their pelletizing behavior. The next phase of experiments were directed to study the effect of surface modification, introduced during the coal cleaning steps, on pelletizing kinetics. Accordingly, we initiated studies with two additives commonly used during the flotation of coal: dextrin (coal depressant) and dodecane (coal collector).

  19. International perspectives on coal preparation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1997-12-31

    The report consists of the vugraphs from the presentations which covered the following topics: Summaries of the US Department of Energy`s coal preparation research programs; Preparation trends in Russia; South African coal preparation developments; Trends in hard coal preparation in Germany; Application of coal preparation technology to oil sands extraction; Developments in coal preparation in China; and Coal preparation in Australia.

  20. Regional trends in the take-up of clean coal technologies

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wootten, J.M.

    1997-12-31

    Using surveys of the electricity industry taken in major OECD coal producing/coal consuming regions of North America, Europe, Southern Africa, and Asia/Pacific, this paper reports on the attitudes of power plant operators and developers toward clean coal technologies, the barriers to their use and the policies and measures that might be implemented, if a country or region desired to encourage greater use of clean coal technologies.

  1. Evaluation of technology modifications required to apply clean coal technologies in Russian utilities. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-12-01

    The report describes the following: overview of the Russian power industry; electric power equipment of Russia; power industry development forecast for Russia; clean coal technology demonstration program of the US Department of Energy; reduction of coal TPS (thermal power station) environmental impacts in Russia; and base options of advanced coal thermal power plants. Terms of the application of clean coal technology at Russian TPS are discussed in the Conclusions.

  2. Coal gasification. (Latest citations from the EI compendex*plus database). Published Search

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-03-01

    The bibliography contains citations concerning the development and assessment of coal gasification technology. Combined-cycle gas turbine power plants are reviewed. References also discuss dry-feed gasification, gas turbine interface, coal gasification pilot plants, underground coal gasification, gasification with nuclear heat, and molten bath processes. Clean-coal based electric power generation and environmental issues are examined. (Contains 50-250 citations and includes a subject term index and title list.) (Copyright NERAC, Inc. 1995)

  3. Coal Distribution Database, 2008

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

    4Q 2009 April 2010 Quarterly Coal Distribution Table Format and Data Sources 4Q 2009 In keeping with EIA's efforts to increase the timeliness of its reports, this Quarterly Coal...

  4. Coal Distribution Database, 2008

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

    3Q 2009 February 2010 Quarterly Coal Distribution Table Format and Data Sources 3Q 2009 In keeping with EIA's efforts to increase the timeliness of its reports, this Quarterly Coal...

  5. "Annual Coal Report

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

    Annual Coal Report Data Released: January 20, 2015 Data for: 2013 Re-Release Date: April 23, 2015 (CORRECTION) Annual Coal Report 2013 CorrectionUpdate April 23, 2015 The Annual ...

  6. Microbial solubilization of coal

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Strandberg, Gerald W.; Lewis, Susan N.

    1990-01-01

    This invention deals with the solubilization of coal using species of Streptomyces. Also disclosed is an extracellular component from a species of Streptomyces, said component being able to solubilize coal.

  7. Indonesian coal mining

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2008-11-15

    The article examines the opportunities and challenges facing the Indonesian coal mining industry and how the coal producers, government and wider Indonesian society are working to overcome them. 2 figs., 1 tab.

  8. Chemicals from coal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Harold A. Wittcoff; Bryan G. Reuben; Jeffrey S. Plotkin

    2004-12-01

    This chapter contains sections titled: Chemicals from Coke Oven Distillate; The Fischer-Tropsch Reaction; Coal Hydrogenation; Substitute Natural Gas (SNG); Synthesis Gas Technology; Calcium Carbide; Coal and the Environment; and Notes and References

  9. NETL: Coal Gasification Systems

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

    Gasification Systems Coal Gasification is a process that can turn coal into clean power, chemicals, hydrogen and transportation fuels, and can be used to capture the carbon from the coal for storage or for enhanced oil recovery. To better understand the basic concepts behind Gasification, watch this short video: What is Gasification? The Gasification Systems Program is developing advanced technologies to reduce the cost and increase the efficiency of producing coal syngas. Click on the Graphic

  10. Method for fluorinating coal

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Huston, John L.; Scott, Robert G.; Studier, Martin H.

    1978-01-01

    Coal is fluorinated by contact with fluorine gas at low pressure. After pial fluorination, when the reaction rate has slowed, the pressure is slowly increased until fluorination is complete, forming a solid fluorinated coal of approximate composition CF.sub.1.55 H.sub.0.15. The fluorinated coal and a solid distillate resulting from vacuum pyrolysis of the fluorinated coal are useful as an internal standard for mass spectrometric unit mass assignments from about 100 to over 1500.

  11. Coal gasification apparatus

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Nagy, Charles K.

    1982-01-01

    Coal hydrogenation vessel has hydrogen heating passages extending vertically through its wall and opening into its interior.

  12. Generating power with drained coal mine methane

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2005-09-01

    The article describes the three technologies most commonly used for generating electricity from coal mine methane: internal combustion engines, gas turbines, and microturbines. The most critical characteristics and features of these technologies, such as efficiency, output and size are highlighted. 5 refs.

  13. Flash hydrogenation of coal

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Manowitz, Bernard; Steinberg, Meyer; Sheehan, Thomas V.; Winsche, Warren E.; Raseman, Chad J.

    1976-01-01

    A process for the hydrogenation of coal comprising the contacting of powdered coal with hydrogen in a rotating fluidized bed reactor. A rotating fluidized bed reactor suitable for use in this process is also disclosed. The coal residence time in the reactor is limited to less than 5 seconds while the hydrogen contact time is not in excess of 0.2 seconds.

  14. Coal production 1989

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-11-29

    Coal Production 1989 provides comprehensive information about US coal production, the number of mines, prices, productivity, employment, reserves, and stocks to a wide audience including Congress, federal and state agencies, the coal industry, and the general public. 7 figs., 43 tabs.

  15. List of Geothermal Electric Incentives | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Coal with CCS Concentrating Solar Power Energy Storage Fuel Cells Geothermal Electric Natural Gas Nuclear Tidal Energy Wave Energy Wind energy BiomassBiogas Hydroelectric...

  16. Low-sulfur coal usage alters transportation strategies

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stein, H.

    1995-07-01

    As electricity production has grown, so has the amount of coal burned by US utilities. In order to comply with the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA), many utilities have changed from high-sulfur coal to lower-sulfur coal to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions. The primary mode of transporting coal to utilities remains the railroad, and coal represents the largest freight tonnage shipped - two out of every five tons. Since coal is so important to the railroads, it is logical that as utilities have changed their coal-buying strategies, the railroads` strategies have also changed. The increased demand for Western coal has caused rail lines some capacity problems which they are attempting to meet head-on by buying new railcars and locomotives and expanding track capacities. The new railcars typically have aluminum bodies to reduce empty weight, enabling them to carry larger loads of coal. Train locomotives are also undergoing upgrade changes. Most new locomotives have as motors to drive the wheels which deliver more motive power (traction) to the wheel trucks. In fact the motors are up to 30% more efficient at getting the traction to the trucks. Trackage is also being expanded to alleviate serious congestion on the tracks when moving Western coal.

  17. Electric sales and revenue 1997

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-10-01

    The Electric Sales and Revenue is prepared by the Electric Power Division; Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels; Energy Information Administration (EIA); US Department of Energy. Information is provided on electricity sales, associated revenue, average revenue per kilowatthour sold, and number of consumers throughout the US. The data provided in the Electric Sales and Revenue are presented at the national, Census division, State, and electric utility levels. The information is based on annual data reported by electric utilities for the calendar year ending December 31, 1997. 16 figs., 17 tabs.

  18. Coal recovery process

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Good, Robert J.; Badgujar, Mohan

    1992-01-01

    A method for the beneficiation of coal by selective agglomeration and the beneficiated coal product thereof is disclosed wherein coal, comprising impurities, is comminuted to a particle size sufficient to allow impurities contained therein to disperse in water, an aqueous slurry is formed with the comminuted coal particles, treated with a compound, such as a polysaccharide and/or disaccharide, to increase the relative hydrophilicity of hydrophilic components, and thereafter the slurry is treated with sufficient liquid agglomerant to form a coagulum comprising reduced impurity coal.

  19. Coal Data: A reference

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1991-11-26

    The purpose of Coal Data: A Reference is to provide basic information on the mining and use of coal, an important source of energy in the United States. The report is written for a general audience. The goal is to cover basic material and strike a reasonable compromise between overly generalized statements and detailed analyses. The section ``Coal Terminology and Related Information`` provides additional information about terms mentioned in the text and introduces new terms. Topics covered are US coal deposits, resources and reserves, mining, production, employment and productivity, health and safety, preparation, transportation, supply and stocks, use, coal, the environment, and more. (VC)

  20. An efficient process for recovery of fine coal from tailings of coal washing plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cicek, T.; Cocen, I.; Engin, V.T.; Cengizler, H.

    2008-07-01

    Gravity concentration of hard lignites using conventional jigs and heavy media separation equipment is prone to produce coal-rich fine tailings. This study aims to establish a fine coal recovery process of very high efficiency at reasonable capital investment and operational costs. The technical feasibility to upgrade the properties of the predeslimed fine refuse of a lignite washing plant with 35.9% ash content was investigated by employing gravity separation methods. The laboratory tests carried out with the combination of shaking table and Mozley multi-gravity separator (MGS) revealed that the clean coal with 18% ash content on dry basis could be obtained with 58.9% clean coal recovery by the shaking table stage and 4.1% clean coal recovery by MGS stage, totaling to the sum of 63.0% clean coal recovery from a predeslimed feed. The combustible recovery and the organic efficiency of the shaking table + MGS combination were 79.5% and 95.5%, respectively. Based on the results of the study, a flow sheet of a high-efficiency fine coal recovery process was proposed, which is also applicable to the coal refuse pond slurry of a lignite washing plant.

  1. Wabash River Coal Gasification Repowering Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Amick, P.; Mann, G.J.; Cook, J.J.; Fisackerly, R.; Spears, R.C.

    1992-01-01

    The Destec gasification process features an oxygen-blown, two stage entrained flow gasifier. PSI will procure coal for the Project consistent with the design specification ranges of Destec's coal gasification facility. Destec's plant will be designed to accept coal with a maximum sulfur content of 5.9% (dry basis) and a minimum energy content of 13,5000 BTU/pound (moisture and ash free basis). PSI and Destec will test at least two other coals for significant periods during the demonstration period. In the Destec process, coal is ground with water to form a slurry. It is then pumped into a gasification vessel where oxygen is added to form a hot raw gas through partial combustion. Most of the noncarbon material in the coal melts and flows out the bottom of the vessel forming slag -- a black, glassy, non-leaching, sand-like material. Particulates, sulfur and other impurities are removed from the gas before combustion to make it acceptable fuel for the gas turbine. The synthetic fuel gas (syngas) is piped to a General Electric MS 7001F high temperature combustion turbine generator. A heat recovery steam generator recovers gas turbine exhaust heat to produce high pressure steam. This steam and the steam generated in the gasification process supply an existing steam turbine-generator. The plant will be designed to outperform air emission standards established by the Clean Air Act Amendments for the year 2000.

  2. Wabash River Coal Gasification Repowering Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Amick, P.; Mann, G.J.; Cook, J.J.; Fisackerly, R.; Spears, R.C.

    1992-11-01

    The Destec gasification process features an oxygen-blown, two stage entrained flow gasifier. PSI will procure coal for the Project consistent with the design specification ranges of Destec`s coal gasification facility. Destec`s plant will be designed to accept coal with a maximum sulfur content of 5.9% (dry basis) and a minimum energy content of 13,5000 BTU/pound (moisture and ash free basis). PSI and Destec will test at least two other coals for significant periods during the demonstration period. In the Destec process, coal is ground with water to form a slurry. It is then pumped into a gasification vessel where oxygen is added to form a hot raw gas through partial combustion. Most of the noncarbon material in the coal melts and flows out the bottom of the vessel forming slag -- a black, glassy, non-leaching, sand-like material. Particulates, sulfur and other impurities are removed from the gas before combustion to make it acceptable fuel for the gas turbine. The synthetic fuel gas (syngas) is piped to a General Electric MS 7001F high temperature combustion turbine generator. A heat recovery steam generator recovers gas turbine exhaust heat to produce high pressure steam. This steam and the steam generated in the gasification process supply an existing steam turbine-generator. The plant will be designed to outperform air emission standards established by the Clean Air Act Amendments for the year 2000.

  3. State Total

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

    State Total Percent of U.S. total Alabama 1,652 0.0 Alaska 152 0.0 Arizona 912,975 19.9 Arkansas 2,724 0.1 California 2,239,983 48.8 Colorado 49,903 1.1 Connecticut 33,627 0.7 Delaware 3,080 0.1 District of Columbia 1,746 0.0 Florida 22,061 0.5 Georgia 99,713 2.2 Guam 39 0.0 Hawaii 126,595 2.8 Idaho 1,423 0.0 Illinois 8,176 0.2 Indiana 12,912 0.3 Iowa 4,480 0.1 Kansas 523 0.0 Kentucky 2,356 0.1 Louisiana 27,704 0.6 Maine 993 0.0 Maryland 30,528 0.7 Massachusetts 143,539 3.1 Michigan 3,416 0.1

  4. Innovative clean coal technology (ICCT): demonstration of selective catalytic reduction (SCR) technology for the control of nitrogen oxide (NO{sub x}) emission from high-sulfur, coal-fired boilers - economic evaluation of commercial-scale SCR applications for utility boilers

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Healy, E.C.; Maxwell, J.D.; Hinton, W.S.

    1996-09-01

    This report presents the results of an economic evaluation produced as part of the Innovative Clean Coal Technology project, which demonstrated selective catalytic reduction (SCR) technology for reduction of NO{sub x} emissions from utility boilers burning U.S. high-sulfur coal. The document includes a commercial-scale capital and O&M cost evaluation of SCR technology applied to a new facility, coal-fired boiler utilizing high-sulfur U.S. coal. The base case presented herein determines the total capital requirement, fixed and variable operating costs, and levelized costs for a new 250-MW pulverized coal utility boiler operating with a 60-percent NO{sub x} removal. Sensitivity evaluations are included to demonstrate the variation in cost due to changes in process variables and assumptions. This report also presents the results of a study completed by SCS to determine the cost and technical feasibility of retrofitting SCR technology to selected coal-fired generating units within the Southern electric system.

  5. ZERO EMISSION COAL POWER, A NEW CONCEPT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    H. -J. ZIOCK; K. S. LACKNER; D. P. HARRISON

    2001-04-01

    The Zero Emission Coal Alliance (ZECA) is developing an integrated zero emission process that generates clean energy carriers (electricity or hydrogen) from coal. The process exothermically gasifies coal using hydrogen to produce a methane rich intermediate state. The methane is subsequently reformed using water and a CaO based sorbent. The sorbent supplies the energy needed to drive the reforming reaction and simultaneously removes the generated CO{sub 2} by producing CaCO{sub 3}. The resulting hydrogen product stream is split, approximately 1/2 going to gasify the next unit of coal, and the other half being the product. This product stream could then be split a second time, part being cleaned up with a high temperature hydrogen separation membrane to produce pure hydrogen, and the remainder used to generate electricity via a solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC). The inevitable high temperature waste heat produced by the SOFC would in turn be used to regenerate the CaO by calcining the CaCO{sub 3} product of the reforming stage thereby generating a pure stream of CO{sub 2}. The CO{sub 2} will be dealt with a mineral sequestration process discussed in other papers presented at this conference. The SOFC has the added advantage of doubling as an oxygen separation membrane, thereby keeping its exhaust stream, which is predominantly steam, free of any air. This exhaust stream is largely recycled back to the reforming stage to generate more hydrogen, with a slipstream being extracted and condensed. The slipstream carries with it the other initial contaminants present in the starting coal. Overall the process is effectively closed loop with zero gaseous emissions to the atmosphere. The process also achieves very high conversion efficiency from coal energy to electrical energy ({approximately} 70%) and naturally generates a pure stream of CO{sub 2} ready for disposal via the mineral sequestration process.

  6. Process for hydrogenating coal and coal solvents

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Tarrer, Arthur R.; Shridharani, Ketan G.

    1983-01-01

    A novel process is described for the hydrogenation of coal by the hydrogenation of a solvent for the coal in which the hydrogenation of the coal solvent is conducted in the presence of a solvent hydrogenation catalyst of increased activity, wherein the hydrogenation catalyst is produced by reacting ferric oxide with hydrogen sulfide at a temperature range of 260.degree. C. to 315.degree. C. in an inert atmosphere to produce an iron sulfide hydrogenation catalyst for the solvent. Optimally, the reaction temperature is 275.degree. C. Alternately, the reaction can be conducted in a hydrogen atmosphere at 350.degree. C.

  7. WABASH RIVER COAL GASIFICATION REPOWERING PROJECT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Unknown

    2000-09-01

    The close of 1999 marked the completion of the Demonstration Period of the Wabash River Coal Gasification Repowering Project. This Final Report summarizes the engineering and construction phases and details the learning experiences from the first four years of commercial operation that made up the Demonstration Period under Department of Energy (DOE) Cooperative Agreement DE-FC21-92MC29310. This 262 MWe project is a joint venture of Global Energy Inc. (Global acquired Destec Energy's gasification assets from Dynegy in 1999) and PSI Energy, a part of Cinergy Corp. The Joint Venture was formed to participate in the Department of Energy's Clean Coal Technology (CCT) program and to demonstrate coal gasification repowering of an existing generating unit impacted by the Clean Air Act Amendments. The participants jointly developed, separately designed, constructed, own, and are now operating an integrated coal gasification combined-cycle power plant, using Global Energy's E-Gas{trademark} technology (E-Gas{trademark} is the name given to the former Destec technology developed by Dow, Destec, and Dynegy). The E-Gas{trademark} process is integrated with a new General Electric 7FA combustion turbine generator and a heat recovery steam generator in the repowering of a 1950's-vintage Westinghouse steam turbine generator using some pre-existing coal handling facilities, interconnections, and other auxiliaries. The gasification facility utilizes local high sulfur coals (up to 5.9% sulfur) and produces synthetic gas (syngas), sulfur and slag by-products. The Project has the distinction of being the largest single train coal gasification combined-cycle plant in the Western Hemisphere and is the cleanest coal-fired plant of any type in the world. The Project was the first of the CCT integrated gasification combined-cycle (IGCC) projects to achieve commercial operation.

  8. Roles of electricity: Electric steelmaking

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Burwell, C.C.

    1986-07-01

    Electric steel production from scrap metal continues to grow both in total quantity and in market share. The economics of electric-steel production in general, and of electric minimills in particular, seem clearly established. The trend towards electric steelmaking provides significant economic and competitive advantages for producers and important overall economic, environmental, and energy advantages for the United States at large. Conversion to electric steelmaking offers up to a 4-to-1 advantage in terms of the overall energy used to produce a ton of steel, and s similar savings in energy cost for the producer. The amount of old scrap used to produce a ton of steel has doubled since 1967 because of the use of electric furnaces.

  9. Combined compressed air storage-low BTU coal gasification power plant

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Kartsounes, George T.; Sather, Norman F.

    1979-01-01

    An electrical generating power plant includes a Compressed Air Energy Storage System (CAES) fueled with low BTU coal gas generated in a continuously operating high pressure coal gasifier system. This system is used in coordination with a continuously operating main power generating plant to store excess power generated during off-peak hours from the power generating plant, and to return the stored energy as peak power to the power generating plant when needed. The excess coal gas which is produced by the coal gasifier during off-peak hours is stored in a coal gas reservoir. During peak hours the stored coal gas is combined with the output of the coal gasifier to fuel the gas turbines and ultimately supply electrical power to the base power plant.

  10. Microbial solubilization of coals

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Campbell, J.A.; Fredrickson, J.K.; Stewart, D.L.; Thomas, B.L.; McCulloch, M.; Wilson, B.W.; Bean, R.M.

    1988-11-01

    Microbial solubilization of coal may serve as a first step in a process to convert low-rank coals or coal-derived products to other fuels or products. For solubilization of coal to be an economically viable technology, a mechanistic understanding of the process is essential. Leonardite, a highly oxidized, low-rank coal, has been solubilized by the intact microorganism, cell-free filtrate, and cell-free enzyme of /ital Coriolus versicolor/. A spectrophotometric conversion assay was developed to quantify the amount of biosolubilized coal. In addition, a bituminous coal, Illinois No. 6, was solubilized by a species of /ital Penicillium/, but only after the coal had been preoxidized in air. Model compounds containing coal-related functionalities have been incubated with the leonardite-degrading fungus, its cell-free filtrate, and purified enzyme. The amount of degradation was determined by gas chromatography and the degradation products were identified by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. We have also separated the cell-free filtrate of /ital C. versicolor/ into a <10,000 MW and >10,000 MW fraction by ultrafiltration techniques. Most of the coal biosolubilization activity is contained in the <10,000 MW fraction while the model compound degradation occurs in the >10,000 MW fraction. The >10,000 MW fraction appears to contain an enzyme with laccase-like activity. 10 refs., 8 figs., 5 tabs.

  11. Illinois SB 1987: the Clean Coal Portfolio Standard Law

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2009-01-15

    On January 12, 2009, Governor Rod Blagojevich signed SB 1987, the Clean Coal Portfolio Standard Law. The legislation establishes emission standards for new coal-fueled power plants power plants that use coal as their primary feedstock. From 2009-2015, new coal-fueled power plants must capture and store 50 percent of the carbon emissions that the facility would otherwise emit; from 2016-2017, 70 percent must be captured and stored; and after 2017, 90 percent must be captured and stored. SB 1987 also establishes a goal of having 25 percent of electricity used in the state to come from cost-effective coal-fueled power plants that capture and store carbon emissions by 2025. Illinois is the first state to establish a goal for producing electricity from coal-fueled power plants with carbon capture and storage (CCS). To support the commercial development of CCS technology, the legislation guarantees purchase agreements for the first Illinois coal facility with CCS technology, the Taylorville Energy Center (TEC); Illinois utilities are required to purchase at least 5 percent of their electricity supply from the TEC, provided that customer rates experience only modest increases. The TEC is expected to be completed in 2014 with the ability to capture and store at least 50 percent of its carbon emissions.

  12. Beluga coal gasification feasibility study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Robert Chaney; Lawrence Van Bibber

    2006-07-15

    The objective of the study was to determine the economic feasibility of developing and siting a coal-based integrated gasification combined-cycle (IGCC) plant in the Cook Inlet region of Alaska for the co-production of electric power and marketable by-products. The by-products, which may include synthesis gas, Fischer-Tropsch (F-T) liquids, fertilizers such as ammonia and urea, alcohols, hydrogen, nitrogen and carbon dioxide, would be manufactured for local use or for sale in domestic and foreign markets. This report for Phase 1 summarizes the investigation of an IGCC system for a specific industrial setting on the Cook Inlet, the Agrium U.S. Inc. ('Agrium') fertilizer plant in Nikiski, Alaska. Faced with an increase in natural gas price and a decrease in supply, the Agrium is investigating alternatives to gas as feed stock for their plant. This study considered all aspects of the installation and infrastructure, including: coal supply and cost, coal transport costs, delivery routes, feedstock production for fertilizer manufacture, plant steam and power, carbon dioxide (CO{sub 2}) uses, markets for possible additional products, and environmental permit requirements. The Cook Inlet-specific Phase 1 results, reported here, provided insight and information that led to the conclusion that the second study should be for an F-T plant sited at the Usibelli Coal Mine near Healy, Alaska. This Phase 1 case study is for a very specific IGCC system tailored to fit the chemical and energy needs of the fertilizer manufacturing plant. It demonstrates the flexibility of IGCC for a variety of fuel feedstocks depending on plant location and fuel availability, as well as the available variety of gas separation, gas cleanup, and power and steam generation technologies to fit specific site needs. 18 figs., 37 tabs., 6 apps.

  13. Advanced Coal Wind Hybrid: Economic Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Phadke, Amol; Goldman, Charles; Larson, Doug; Carr, Tom; Rath, Larry; Balash, Peter; Yih-Huei, Wan

    2008-11-28

    Growing concern over climate change is prompting new thinking about the technologies used to generate electricity. In the future, it is possible that new government policies on greenhouse gas emissions may favor electric generation technology options that release zero or low levels of carbon emissions. The Western U.S. has abundant wind and coal resources. In a world with carbon constraints, the future of coal for new electrical generation is likely to depend on the development and successful application of new clean coal technologies with near zero carbon emissions. This scoping study explores the economic and technical feasibility of combining wind farms with advanced coal generation facilities and operating them as a single generation complex in the Western US. The key questions examined are whether an advanced coal-wind hybrid (ACWH) facility provides sufficient advantages through improvements to the utilization of transmission lines and the capability to firm up variable wind generation for delivery to load centers to compete effectively with other supply-side alternatives in terms of project economics and emissions footprint. The study was conducted by an Analysis Team that consists of staff from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), and Western Interstate Energy Board (WIEB). We conducted a screening level analysis of the economic competitiveness and technical feasibility of ACWH generation options located in Wyoming that would supply electricity to load centers in California, Arizona or Nevada. Figure ES-1 is a simple stylized representation of the configuration of the ACWH options. The ACWH consists of a 3,000 MW coal gasification combined cycle power plant equipped with carbon capture and sequestration (G+CC+CCS plant), a fuel production or syngas storage facility, and a 1,500 MW wind plant. The ACWH project is connected to load centers by a 3,000 MW transmission line. In the G+CC+CCS plant, coal is gasified into syngas and CO{sub 2} (which is captured). The syngas is burned in the combined cycle plant to produce electricity. The ACWH facility is operated in such a way that the transmission line is always utilized at its full capacity by backing down the combined cycle (CC) power generation units to accommodate wind generation. Operating the ACWH facility in this manner results in a constant power delivery of 3,000 MW to the load centers, in effect firming-up the wind generation at the project site.

  14. Electric sales and revenue 1991

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-04-01

    The Electric Sales and Revenue is prepared by the Survey Management Division, Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels; Energy Information Administration (EIA); US Department of Energy. This publication provides information about sales of electricity, its associated revenue, and the average revenue per kilowatthour sold to residential, commercial, industrial, and other consumers throughout the United States. Previous publications presented data on typical electric bills at specified consumption levels as well as sales, revenue, and average revenue. The sales of electricity, associated revenue, and average revenue per kilowatthour provided in this report are presented at the national, Census division, State, and electric utility levels.

  15. Pulverized coal fuel injector

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Rini, Michael J.; Towle, David P.

    1992-01-01

    A pulverized coal fuel injector contains an acceleration section to improve the uniformity of a coal-air mixture to be burned. An integral splitter is provided which divides the coal-air mixture into a number separate streams or jets, and a center body directs the streams at a controlled angle into the primary zone of a burner. The injector provides for flame shaping and the control of NO/NO.sub.2 formation.

  16. Integrated coal liquefaction process

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Effron, Edward

    1978-01-01

    In a process for the liquefaction of coal in which coal liquids containing phenols and other oxygenated compounds are produced during the liquefaction step and later hydrogenated, oxygenated compounds are removed from at least part of the coal liquids in the naphtha and gas oil boiling range prior to the hydrogenation step and employed as a feed stream for the manufacture of a synthesis gas or for other purposes.

  17. WCI Case for Coal

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

    Coal The role of as an energy source The role of coal as an energy source Key Messages * Energy demand has grown strongly and will continue to increase, particularly in developing countries where energy is needed for economic growth and poverty alleviation. * All energy sources will be needed to satisfy that demand by providing a diverse and balanced supply mix. * Coal is vital for global energy security. It is abundantly available, affordable, reliable and easy and safe to transport. * In an

  18. Wheeling coal: an antitrust alternative to ICC rate making

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brand, W.E.; Leckie, D.A.

    1984-08-30

    Parallels are drawn between the position of an electric utility requested to transmit electric power for the benefit of third-party buyers and sellers with whom the utility may be connected but who lack a direct connection themselves, and the position of a railroad which forms the sole land-transportation link between a producer-seller of coal and its electric-utility customer purchasing coal for use as a primary fuel in power generation. The authors suggest that the federal courts can remedy any unreasonable refusal to grant trackage rights for the transport of coal by the seller or purchaser in much the same way that they have remedied refusals to wheel electric power between a third-party seller and third-party purchaser. 56 references.

  19. Annual Coal Distribution Tables

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

    Domestic Distribution of U.S. Coal by Destination State, Consumer, Destination and Method of Transportation, 2001 (Thousand Short Tons) DESTINATION: Alabama State of Origin by...

  20. Coal Distribution Database, 2006

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

    Report - Annual provides detailed information on domestic coal distribution by origin state, destination state, consumer category, and method of transportation. Also provided is...

  1. Rail Coal Transportation Rates

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

    Recurring Reserves Stocks All reports Browse by Tag Alphabetical Frequency Tag Cloud Data For: 2001 Next Release Date: October 2003 U. S. Coal-Producing Districts...

  2. Rail Coal Transportation Rates

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

    Previous Data Years Year: 2013 2011 2010 2008 2002 Go Background and Methodology The data ... The initial report on coal transportation rates covered the years 2001 through 2008, ...

  3. Coal liquefaction quenching process

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Thorogood, Robert M.; Yeh, Chung-Liang; Donath, Ernest E.

    1983-01-01

    There is described an improved coal liquefaction quenching process which prevents the formation of coke with a minimum reduction of thermal efficiency of the coal liquefaction process. In the process, the rapid cooling of the liquid/solid products of the coal liquefaction reaction is performed without the cooling of the associated vapor stream to thereby prevent formation of coke and the occurrence of retrograde reactions. The rapid cooling is achieved by recycling a subcooled portion of the liquid/solid mixture to the lower section of a phase separator that separates the vapor from the liquid/solid products leaving the coal reactor.

  4. Coal Distribution Database, 2006

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

    TF RailroadVesselShip Fuel It is also noted that Destination State code of "X Export" indicates movements to foreign destinations. 1 68 Domestic Coal Distribution...

  5. Coal Market Module

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    The use of coals with sub- optimal characteristics carries with it penalties in operating efficiency, maintenance cost, and system reliability. Such penalties range from the...

  6. British coal privatization procedures

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-06-01

    The form in which British Coal is to be privatized has finally been announced. Offers are to be invited for the operating underground and opencast mines which will be grouped into five regionally based companies. Additionally, offers will be invited for a number of collieries which are currently under care and maintenance. The five Regional Coal Companies to be formed are Central North, which will comprise the assets in the Yorkshire and Durham coalfields, including the five collieries in the Selby Complex; Central South, which will contain the assets located in the Nottinghamshire, Leicestershire, Derbyshire, and Warwickshire coalfields; North East, which has four opencast sites, Scotland, which has nine operating open-cast sites and a single underground mine, Longannet; and South Wales with its nine operating opencast sites. Tower colliery, the last underground mine in South Wales, was finally put on care and maintenance on April 20, 1994. Details of the five Regional Coal Companies are given. A new public sector body, the Coal Authority will be set up to which all British Coal's title to unworked coal and coal mines will be transferred. All the relevant property rights and liabilities of British Coal will be transferred into the Regional Coal Companies prior to their sun.

  7. Balancing coal pipes

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Earley, D.; Kirkenir, B.

    2009-11-15

    Balancing coal flow to the burners to optimise combustion by using real-time measurement systems (such as microwave mass measurement) is discussed. 3 figs.

  8. Florida CFB demo plant yields low emissions on variety of coals

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2005-07-01

    The US Department of Energy (DOE) has reported results of tests conducted at Jacksonville Electric Authority (JEA)'s Northside power plant using mid-to-low-sulfur coal, which indicate the facility is one of the cleanest burning coal-fired power plants in the world. A part of DOE's Clean Coal Technology Demonstration Program, the JEA project is a repowering demonstration of the operating and environmental performance of Foster Wheeler's utility-scale circulating fluidized bed combustion (CFB) technology on a range of high-sulfur coals and blends of coal and high-sulfur petroleum coke. The 300 MW demonstration unit has a non-demonstration 300 MW twin unit.

  9. U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report...

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

    5. Average Price of U.S. Coal Exports and Imports, 2009 - 2015 (dollars per short ton) January - March April - June July - September October - December Total Year Exports Imports ...

  10. U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Report 2014

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

    2. Underground Coal Mining Productivity by State and Mining Method, 2014 (short tons ... Continuous 2 Conventional and Other 3 Longwall 4 Total Alabama 0.92 - 1.92 1.84 ...

  11. Less electricity use this summer slightly offset by higher power...

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

    8% in their summer electricity bills. EIA forecasts that more electricity will be generated this year by natural gas, solar energy, and wind and less from coal-fired power plants.

  12. " Electricity Sales/Transfers Out",96,4

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

    "RSE Column Factor:",1 "Coal ",2105,4 "Natural Gas",6835,3 "Net Electricity",2656,2 " Purchased Electricity",2689,1 " Transfers In",53,4 " Generation from Noncombustible",," " ...

  13. "Code(a)","End Use","for Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Diesel Fuel...

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

    "," ",,,"Fuel Oil",,,"Coal" "NAICS"," ","Net Demand","Residual","and",,"LPG and","(excluding Coal" "Code(a)","End Use","for Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Diesel Fuel(c)","Natural ...

  14. "End Use","for Electricity(a)","Fuel Oil","Diesel Fuel(b)","Natural...

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

    ,,,"Distillate" ,,,"Fuel Oil",,,"Coal" ,"Net Demand","Residual","and",,"LPG and","(excluding Coal" "End Use","for Electricity(a)","Fuel Oil","Diesel Fuel(b)","Natural ...

  15. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    from Electric Power to Industrial for years 2002 through ... Totals may not add due to independent rounding. Prices are ... Annual Consumption per Consumer (thousand cubic feet) ...

  16. Development of a Coal Quality Expert

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-06-20

    ABB Power Plant Laboratories Combustion Engineering, Inc., (ABB CE) and CQ Inc. completed a broad, comprehensive program to demonstrate the economic and environmental benefits of using higher quality U.S. coals for electrical power generation and developed state-of-the-art user-friendly software--Coal Quality Expert (CQE)-to reliably predict/estimate these benefits in a consistent manner. The program was an essential extension and integration of R and D projects performed in the past under U.S. DOE and EPRI sponsorship and it expanded the available database of coal quality and power plant performance information. This software will permit utilities to purchase the lowest cost clean coals tailored to their specific requirements. Based on common interest and mutual benefit, the subject program was cosponsored by the U.S. DOE, EPRI, and eight U.S. coal-burning utilities. In addition to cosponsoring this program, EPN contributed its background research, data, and computer models, and managed some other supporting contracts under the terms of a project agreement established between CQ Inc. and EPRI. The essential work of the proposed project was performed under separate contracts to CQ Inc. by Electric Power Technologies (El?'T), Black and Veatch (B and V), ABB Combustion Engineering, Babcock and Wilcox (B and W), and Decision Focus, Inc. Although a significant quantity of the coals tied in the United States are now cleaned to some degree before firing, for many of these coals the residual sulfur content requires users to install expensive sulfur removal systems and the residual ash causes boilers to operate inefficiently and to require frequent maintenance. Disposal of the large quantities of slag and ash at utility plant sites can also be problematic and expensive. Improved and advanced coal cleaning processes can reduce the sulfur content of many coals to levels conforming to environmental standards without requiring post-combustion desulfurization systems. Also, some coals may be beneficiated or blended to a quality level where significantly less costly desulfurization systems are needed. Coal cleaning processes may also be used to remove the precursors of other troublesome emissions that can be identified now or in the future. An added benefit of coal cleaning and blending is the reduction in concentrations of mineral impurities in the fuel leading to improved performance and operation of the'' boiler in which it is fired. The ash removed during the pre-combustion cleaning process can be more easily and safely disposed of at the mine than at the utility plant after combustion. EPRI's Coal Quality Impact Model (CQIM) has shown that improved fuel quality can result in savings in unit capital and operating costs. This project produced new and improved software to select coal types and specifications resulting in the best quality and lowest cost fuel to meet specific environmental requirements.

  17. New coal technology to flourish at Kentucky plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Blankinship, S.

    2007-08-15

    Within four years a 76 MW (net) advanced supercritical coal unit, TC2, will go into service at the Trimble County power plant on the Ohio River near Louiseville, KY, USA. The unit is designed to burn a blend of eastern bituminous and western sub-bituminous Powder River Basin coals. TC2 is one of four US power plants to receive a $125 m tax credit under the 2005 EPACT Qualifying Advanced Coal Program for high efficiency and low emission generating units. Trimble County is owned and operated by E.ON US subsidiaries Kentucky Utilities and Louiseville Gas & Electric. It was originally designed to accommodate four 500 MW coal-fired units fired by bituminous coal from the Illinois Basin. 1 photo.

  18. Cooperative research program in coal liquefaction

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Huffman, G.P.

    1991-01-01

    This Quarterly Report on coal liquefaction research includes discussion in the areas of (1) Iron Based Catalysts for Coal Liquefaction; (2) Exploratory Research on Coal Conversion; (3) Novel Coal Liquefaction Concepts; (4) Novel Catalysts for Coal Liquefaction. (VC)

  19. Clean coal technologies market potential

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Drazga, B.

    2007-01-30

    Looking at the growing popularity of these technologies and of this industry, the report presents an in-depth analysis of all the various technologies involved in cleaning coal and protecting the environment. It analyzes upcoming and present day technologies such as gasification, combustion, and others. It looks at the various technological aspects, economic aspects, and the various programs involved in promoting these emerging green technologies. Contents: Industry background; What is coal?; Historical background of coal; Composition of coal; Types of coal; Environmental effects of coal; Managing wastes from coal; Introduction to clean coal; What is clean coal?; Byproducts of clean coal; Uses of clean coal; Support and opposition; Price of clean coal; Examining clean coal technologies; Coal washing; Advanced pollution control systems; Advanced power generating systems; Pulverized coal combustion (PCC); Carbon capture and storage; Capture and separation of carbon dioxide; Storage and sequestration of carbon dioxide; Economics and research and development; Industry initiatives; Clean Coal Power Initiative; Clean Coal Technology Program; Coal21; Outlook; Case Studies.

  20. Assessment of underground coal gasification in bituminous coals. Volume I. Executive summary. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1981-01-01

    This report describes the bituminous coal resources of the United States, identifies those resources which are potentially amenable to Underground Coal Gasification (UCG), identifies products and markets in the vicinity of selected target areas, identifies UCG concepts, describes the state of the art of UCG in bituminous coal, and presents three R and D programs for development of the technology to the point of commercial viability. Of the 670 billion tons of bituminous coal remaining in-place as identified by the National Coal Data System, 32.2 billion tons or 4.8% of the total are potentially amenable to UCG technology. The identified amenable resource was located in ten states: Alabama, Colorado, Illinois, Kentucky, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia, and West Virginia. The principal criteria which eliminated 87.3% of the resource was the minimum thickness (42 inches). Three R and D programs were developed using three different concepts at two different sites. Open Borehole, Hydraulic Fracture, and Electrolinking concepts were developed. The total program costs for each concept were not significantly different. The study concludes that much of the historical information based on UCG in bituminous coals is not usable due to the poor siting of the early field tests and a lack of adequate diagnostic equipment. This information gap requires that much of the early work be redone in view of the much improved understanding of the role of geology and hydrology in the process and the recent development of analytical tools and methods.

  1. U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Report 2014

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

    1. Average Sales Price of Coal by State and Coal Rank, 2014 (dollars per short ton) Coal-Producing State Bituminous Subbituminous Lignite Anthracite Total Alabama 87.17 - - - 87.17 Alaska - w - - w Arizona w - - - w Arkansas w - - - w Colorado w w - - 38.64 Illinois 47.11 - - - 47.11 Indiana 48.41 - - - 48.41 Kansas w - - - w Kentucky Total 57.62 - - - 57.62 Kentucky (East) 66.97 - - - 66.97 Kentucky (West) 49.58 - - - 49.58 Louisiana - - w - w Maryland 50.62 - - - 50.62 Mississippi - - w - w

  2. Coal waste materials applications in Europe

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Niel, E.M.M.G.

    1997-12-31

    European countries have built up a tradition of coal burning activities. It is a well known fact that in the past twenty five years economic and technological growth was accompanied by more awareness for the protection of the environment. Therefore, increasing attention was paid to emission of hazardous gases, dust disposal and the proper reuse of coal residues. Both government and industry were searching for reasonable solutions to fight the rising environmental threats. It is noticed that the utilization situation in the different European countries varies considerably due to different historical, geographic and economic conditions. Nevertheless about 45% of the nearly 60 million tonnes of coal combustion by-products produced in European power plants are utilized, mainly in construction, civil engineering and the mining industry. In all European countries where electric energy is provided by coal fired power plants three parties are involved: (1) the power plants, as producers and owners of the coal fly ashes; (2) the consumers, which use the ashes in building products and construction; and (3) the government, mainly in watching over environmental and health aspects. This paper describes the use of fly ash in cements and concretes in European countries and the regulations on the use of fly ash.

  3. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

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

    Arkansas Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Arkansas) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 14,754 30 Electric utilities 11,526 23 IPP & CHP 3,227 29 Net generation (megawatthours) 61,592,137 24 Electric utilities 48,752,895 18 IPP & CHP 12,839,241 28 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 89,528 15 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 47,048 20 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 37,289 23 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.9 9 Nitrogen oxide

  4. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

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

    West Virginia Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (West Virginia) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 16,276 25 Electric utilities 11,981 21 IPP & CHP 4,295 21 Net generation (megawatthours) 81,059,577 19 Electric utilities 63,331,833 15 IPP & CHP 17,727,743 17 Emissions Sulfur Dioxide (short tons) 102,406 12 Nitrogen Oxide (short tons) 72,995 11 Carbon Dioxide (thousand metric tons) 73,606 9 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.5 14

  5. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

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

    Wisconsin Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Wisconsin) Item Value Rank Primary Energy Source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 17,166 23 Electric utilities 14,377 18 IPP & CHP 2,788 32 Net generation (megawatthours) 61,064,796 25 Electric utilities 47,301,782 20 IPP & CHP 13,763,014 26 Emissions Sulfur Dioxide (short tons) 81,239 17 Nitrogen Oxide (short tons) 39,597 27 Carbon Dioxide (thousand metric tons) 43,750 19 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.7 12 Nitrogen

  6. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

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

    Wyoming Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Wyoming) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 8,458 37 Electric utilities 7,233 32 IPP & CHP 1,225 43 Net generation (megawatthours) 49,696,183 32 Electric utilities 45,068,982 23 IPP & CHP 4,627,201 41 Emissions Sulfur Dioxide (short tons) 45,704 24 Nitrogen Oxide (short tons) 49,638 18 Carbon Dioxide (thousand metric tons) 47,337 17 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.8 22 Nitrogen Oxide

  7. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Arizona Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Arizona) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 28,249 13 Electric utilities 21,311 11 IPP & CHP 6,938 17 Net generation (megawatthours) 112,257,187 13 Electric utilities 94,847,135 8 IPP & CHP 17,410,053 19 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 22,597 32 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 56,726 17 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 53,684 16 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.4 41 Nitrogen oxide

  8. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Colorado Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Colorado) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 14,933 29 Electric utilities 10,204 28 IPP & CHP 4,729 18 Net generation (megawatthours) 53,847,386 30 Electric utilities 43,239,615 26 IPP & CHP 10,607,771 30 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 28,453 30 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 44,349 24 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 38,474 22 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.1 32 Nitrogen

  9. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Georgia Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Georgia) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 38,250 7 Electric utilities 28,873 3 IPP & CHP 9,377 10 Net generation (megawatthours) 125,837,224 10 Electric utilities 109,523,336 4 IPP & CHP 16,313,888 20 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 105,998 11 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 58,144 14 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 62,516 12 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.7 24 Nitrogen oxide

  10. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Indiana Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Indiana) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 27,499 14 Electric utilities 23,319 7 IPP & CHP 4,180 23 Net generation (megawatthours) 115,395,392 12 Electric utilities 100,983,285 6 IPP & CHP 14,412,107 22 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 332,396 3 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 133,412 3 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 103,391 3 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 5.8 1 Nitrogen oxide

  11. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Iowa Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Iowa) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 16,507 24 Electric utilities 12,655 20 IPP & CHP 3,852 25 Net generation (megawatthours) 56,853,282 28 Electric utilities 43,021,954 27 IPP & CHP 13,831,328 25 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 74,422 19 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 41,793 25 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 39,312 21 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.6 13 Nitrogen oxide

  12. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Kansas Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Kansas) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 14,227 31 Electric utilities 11,468 24 IPP & CHP 2,759 33 Net generation (megawatthours) 49,728,363 31 Electric utilities 39,669,629 29 IPP & CHP 10,058,734 31 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 31,550 29 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 29,014 29 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 31,794 29 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.3 29 Nitrogen oxide

  13. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Kentucky Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Kentucky) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 20,878 21 Electric utilities 19,473 15 IPP & CHP 1,405 40 Net generation (megawatthours) 90,896,435 17 Electric utilities 90,133,403 10 IPP & CHP 763,032 49 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 204,873 5 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 89,253 7 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 85,795 7 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 4.5 3 Nitrogen oxide

  14. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Maryland Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Maryland) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 12,264 33 Electric utilities 85 47 IPP & CHP 12,179 8 Net generation (megawatthours) 37,833,652 35 Electric utilities 20,260 47 IPP & CHP 37,813,392 9 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 41,370 26 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 20,626 35 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 20,414 34 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.2 18 Nitrogen oxide

  15. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Michigan Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Michigan) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 30,435 12 Electric utilities 22,260 9 IPP & CHP 8,175 14 Net generation (megawatthours) 106,816,991 14 Electric utilities 84,075,322 12 IPP & CHP 22,741,669 13 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 173,521 7 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 77,950 9 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 64,062 11 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 3.2 7 Nitrogen oxide

  16. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Minnesota Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Minnesota) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 15,621 28 Electric utilities 11,557 22 IPP & CHP 4,064 24 Net generation (megawatthours) 56,998,330 27 Electric utilities 45,963,271 22 IPP & CHP 11,035,059 29 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 39,272 27 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 38,373 28 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 32,399 28 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.4 27 Nitrogen

  17. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Missouri Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Missouri) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 21,790 19 Electric utilities 20,538 13 IPP & CHP 1,252 42 Net generation (megawatthours) 87,834,468 18 Electric utilities 85,271,253 11 IPP & CHP 2,563,215 46 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 149,842 9 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 77,749 10 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 75,735 8 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 3.4 6 Nitrogen oxide

  18. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Montana Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Montana) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 6,330 41 Electric utilities 3,209 38 IPP & CHP 3,121 30 Net generation (megawatthours) 30,257,616 41 Electric utilities 12,329,411 35 IPP & CHP 17,928,205 16 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 14,426 34 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 20,538 36 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 17,678 36 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.0 34 Nitrogen oxide

  19. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Nebraska Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Nebraska) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 8,732 36 Electric utilities 7,913 30 IPP & CHP 819 46 Net generation (megawatthours) 39,431,291 34 Electric utilities 36,560,960 30 IPP & CHP 2,870,331 45 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 63,994 22 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 27,045 30 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 26,348 31 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 3.2 8 Nitrogen oxide

  20. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Mexico Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (New Mexico) Item Value U.S. Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 8,072 39 Electric utilities 6,094 33 IPP & CHP 1,978 37 Net generation (megawatthours) 32,306,210 39 Electric utilities 26,422,867 34 IPP & CHP 5,883,343 38 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 12,064 37 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 46,192 22 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 24,712 32 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.7 37 Nitrogen