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


1

Coal Transportation Rates to the Electric Power Sector  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Coal reports Coal reports Coal Transportation Rates to the Electric Power Sector With Data through 2010 | Release Date: November 16, 2012 | Next Release Date: December 2013 | Correction Previous editions Year: 2011 2004 Go Figure 1. Deliveries from major coal basins to electric power plants by rail, 2010 Background In this latest release of Coal Transportation Rates to the Electric Power Sector, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) significantly expands upon prior versions of this report with the incorporation of new EIA survey data. Figure 1. Percent of total U.S. rail shipments represented in data figure data Previously, EIA relied solely on data from the U.S. Surface Transportation Board (STB), specifically their confidential Carload Waybill Sample. While valuable, due to the statistical nature of the Waybill data,

2

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

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

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

3

Coal ban could heat up electricity prices  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Coal ban could heat up electricity prices ... The U.S. EPA’s new report on the economic impact of the bill suggests it would cost households $100?140 per year by 2030. ...

Janet Pelley

2009-05-13T23:59:59.000Z

4

Tracking new coal-fired power plants: coal's resurgence in electric power generation  

SciTech Connect

This information package is intended to provide an overview of 'Coal's resurgence in electric power generation' by examining proposed new coal-fired power plants that are under consideration in the USA. The results contained in this package are derived from information that is available from various tracking organizations and news groups. Although comprehensive, this information is not intended to represent every possible plant under consideration but is intended to illustrate the large potential that exists for new coal-fired power plants. It should be noted that many of the proposed plants are likely not to be built. For example, out of a total portfolio (gas, coal, etc.) of 500 GW of newly planned power plant capacity announced in 2001, 91 GW have been already been scrapped or delayed. 25 refs.

NONE

2007-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

5

ENERGY UTILIZATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES IN THE COAL-ELECTRIC CYCLE  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Electric Generation Technology Conventional Coal-Fired PowerPlants Advanced Coal-Electric Plants OperatingCharacteristics for Conventional Coal- Fired Power

Ferrell, G.C.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

6

Coal based electric generation comparative technologies report  

SciTech Connect

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.

Not Available

1989-10-26T23:59:59.000Z

7

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

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

,,,"Net","Residual","and Diesel",,,"Coal Coke",,"RSE" "SIC",,"Total","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Fuel(c)","Natural Gas(d)","LPG","and Breeze)","Other(e)","Row"...

8

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

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

1",,,,,,,"Coal" 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 short","Other","Row" "End-Use Categories","(trillion Btu)","kWh)","(1000 bbls)","(1000 bbls)","cu ft)","(1000 bbls)","tons)","(trillion Btu)","Factors"

9

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

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

,,,,,,,,"Coal" ,,,,,,,,"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 Short","Other","Row" "Code(a)","End-Use Categories","(trillion Btu)","(million kWh)","(1000 bbls)","(1000 bbls)","cu ft)","(1000 bbls)","tons)","(trillion Btu)","Factors",

10

NREL: Energy Analysis - Coal-Fired Electricity Generation Results...  

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

assessments have shown wide-ranging results. To better understand the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from utility-scale, coal-fired electricity generation systems (based on...

11

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

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...

12

Electricity production levelized costs for nuclear, gas and coal  

Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

Levelized costs for nuclear, gas and coal for Electricity, under the Mexican scenario. Javier C. Palacios, Gustavo Alonso, Ramn Ramrez, Armando Gmez, Javier Ortiz, Luis C....

13

"Characteristic(a)","Total(b)","Electricity(c)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(d)","Natural Gas(e)","NGL(f)","Coal","Breeze","Other(g)","Produced Onsite(h)"  

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

1.3 Relative Standard Errors for Table 1.3;" 1.3 Relative Standard Errors for Table 1.3;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," " " "," ",," "," ",," "," ",," ","Shipments" "Economic",,"Net","Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and",,"Coke and"," ","of Energy Sources" "Characteristic(a)","Total(b)","Electricity(c)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(d)","Natural Gas(e)","NGL(f)","Coal","Breeze","Other(g)","Produced Onsite(h)"

14

High-Sulfur Coal for Generating Electricity  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

...amounts of coal, because...Director-Mineral Re-sources...of Gas from Coal through a...on coals of high ash-fusion temperature...per ton of high-sulfur coal burned. Absorp-tion...particulate matter as well as...capable of remov-ing up to...

James T. Dunham; Carl Rampacek; T. A. Henrie

1974-04-19T23:59:59.000Z

15

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

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

1" 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 Btu)","(million kWh)","(1000 bbls)","(1000 bbls)","(billion cu ft)","(1000 bbls)","(1000 short tons)","(trillion Btu)","Factors" ,,,,,,,,,,, ,"Total United States"

16

Electricity from coal and utilization of coal combustion by-products  

SciTech Connect

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.

Demirbas, A. [Sila Science, Trabzon (Turkey)

2008-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

17

Clean coal technologies in electric power generation: a brief overview  

SciTech Connect

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.

Janos Beer; Karen Obenshain [Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), MA (United States)

2006-07-15T23:59:59.000Z

18

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

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

Total Coal Consumption, Projected vs. Actual 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 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 AEO 1997 948 970 987 1003 1017 1020 1025 1034 1041 1054 1075 1086 1092 1092 1099 1104 AEO 1998 1009 1051 1044 1058 1087 1084 1090 1097 1112 1130 1142 1148 1160 1162 1180 AEO 1999 1040 1075 1092 1109 1113 1118 1120 1120 1133 1139 1150 1155 1156 1173 AEO 2000 1053 1086 1103 1124 1142 1164 1175 1184 1189 1194 1199 1195 1200 AEO 2001 1078 1112 1135 1153 1165 1183 1191 1220 1228 1228 1235 1240

19

Rail Coal Transportation Rates to the Electric Power Sector  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Analysis & Projections Analysis & Projections ‹ See all Coal Reports Rail Coal Transportation Rates to the Electric Power Sector Release Date: June 16, 2011 | Next Release Date: July 2012 | full report Introduction The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) is releasing a series of estimated data based on the confidential, carload waybill sample obtained from the U.S. Surface Transportation Board (Carload Waybill Sample). These estimated data represent a continuation of EIA's data and analysis products related to coal rail transportation. These estimated data also address a need expressed by EIA's customers for more detailed coal transportation rate data. Having accurate coal rail transportation rate data is important to understanding the price of electricity for two main reasons. First,

20

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

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

2" 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 Gas(c)","LPG","Breeze)","Other(d)","Factors" "Total United States" "RSE Column Factors:","NF",0.4,1.6,1.5,0.7,1,1.6,"NF" "TOTAL INPUTS",15027,2370,414,139,5506,105,1184,5309,3 "Boiler Fuel","--","W",296,40,2098,18,859,"--",3.6

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


21

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

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

2" 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 Gas(c)","LPG","Breeze)","Other(d)","Factors" ,"Total United States" "RSE Column Factors:"," NF",0.5,1.3,1.4,0.8,1.2,1.2," NF" "TOTAL INPUTS",16515,2656,441,152,6141,99,1198,5828,2.7 "Indirect Uses-Boiler Fuel"," --",28,313,42,2396,15,875," --",4

22

Combined-Cycle Power Generation — A Promising Alternative for the Generation of Electric Power from Coal  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

The classic concept of generating electric power from a fossil energy source (coal, oil, gas) comprises the following essential process steps (Fig. 1): Combustion of coal and g...

Eberhard Nitschke

1987-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

23

Safe electrical design practices for coal-handling facilities  

SciTech Connect

Today's electrical designer must be aware of the latest changes in both codes and regulatory requirements. These regulations now make classification for coal-handling facilities as hazardous areas, a mandatory requirement for both utility and industrial plants. Safe electrical systems can be provided with proper selection, application and installation of material and equipment.

Baggs, G.; Tyles, G.

1982-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

24

PressurePressure Indiana Coal Characteristics  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

TimeTime PressurePressure · Indiana Coal Characteristics · Indiana Coals for Coke · Coal Indiana Total Consumption Electricity 59,664 Coke 4,716 Industrial 3,493 Major Coal- red power plantsTransportation in Indiana · Coal Slurry Ponds Evaluation · Site Selection for Coal Gasification · Coal-To-Liquids Study, CTL

Fernández-Juricic, Esteban

25

Table A4. Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generation  

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

2" 2" " (Estimates in Trillion Btu)" " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," " " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," ","RSE" "SIC"," "," ","Net","Residual","Distillate"," "," "," ","Coke"," ","Row" "Code(a)","Industry Groups and Industry","Total","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(c)","Natural Gas(d)","LPG","Coal","and Breeze","Other(e)","Factors"

26

High-Sulfur Coal for Generating Electricity  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

High-Sulfur...FLUIDIZED-BED COMBUSTORS, COMBUSTION...MAY FLUE GAS DES S E...1971 ). High-sulfur...was brief. Natural gas became...overdependent on natural gas and oil to...elevated pressure with a downward...coals of high ash-fusion...

James T. Dunham; Carl Rampacek; T. A. Henrie

1974-04-19T23:59:59.000Z

27

High-Sulfur Coal for Generating Electricity  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

...made historically by heating bitumi-nous coal in...heart of the anthracite district only about 5 years ago...energy, wind, and geothermal steam and brines, will...15.7 Nuclear 3.1 Geothermal Negligible 1973, use...home and commercial heating, transporta-tion...

James T. Dunham; Carl Rampacek; T. A. Henrie

1974-04-19T23:59:59.000Z

28

AEO2011: World Total Coal Flows By Importing Regions and Exporting  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Total Coal Flows By Importing Regions and Exporting Total Coal Flows By Importing Regions and Exporting Countries Dataset Summary Description This dataset comes from the Energy Information Administration (EIA), and is part of the 2011 Annual Energy Outlook Report (AEO2011). This dataset is table 144, and contains only the reference case. The dataset uses million short tons. The data is broken down into total coal exports to Europe, Asia and America. Source EIA Date Released April 26th, 2011 (3 years ago) Date Updated Unknown Keywords 2011 AEO coal EIA Data application/vnd.ms-excel icon AEO2011: World Total Coal Flows By Importing Regions and Exporting Countries - Reference Case (xls, 104 KiB) Quality Metrics Level of Review Peer Reviewed Comment Temporal and Spatial Coverage Frequency Annually Time Period 2008-2035

29

Mercury Control Technologies for Electric Utilities Burning Lignite Coal  

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

Mercury control technologies for Mercury control technologies for electric utilities Burning lignite coal Background In partnership with a number of key stakeholders, the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Fossil Energy (DOE/FE), through its National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), has been carrying out a comprehensive research program since the mid-1990s focused on the development of advanced, cost-effective mercury (Hg) control technologies for coal-fired power plants. Mercury is a poisonous metal found in coal, which can be harmful and even toxic when absorbed from the environment and concentrated in animal tissues. Mercury is present as an unwanted by-product of combustion in power plant flue gases, and is found in varying percentages in three basic chemical forms(known as speciation): particulate-bound mercury, oxidized

30

California Natural Gas % of Total Electric Utility Deliveries...  

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

Electric Utility Deliveries (Percent) California 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...

31

Table A4. Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generation  

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

1 " 1 " " (Estimates in Btu or Physical Units)" " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," ","Coke"," "," " " "," "," ","Net","Residual","Distillate","Natural Gas(d)"," ","Coal","and Breeze"," ","RSE" "SIC"," ","Total","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(c)","(billion","LPG","(1000","(1000","Other(e)","Row" "Code(a)","Industry Groups and Industry","(trillion Btu)","(million kWh)","(1000 bbls)","(1000 bbls)","cu ft)","(1000 bbls)","short tons)","short tons)","(trillion Btu)","Factors"

32

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" 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 Characteristics(a)","Supplier(b)","Supplier(c)","Supplier(b)","Supplier(c)","Factors" ,"Total United States" "RSE Column Factors:",0.3,2,1.6,1.2

33

Table 12. Total Coal Consumption, Projected vs. Actual  

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

Coal Consumption, Projected vs. Actual" 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 "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 "AEO 1997",,,,948,970,987,1003,1017,1020,1025,1034,1041,1054,1075,1086,1092,1092,1099,1104 "AEO 1998",,,,,1009,1051,1043.875977,1058.292725,1086.598145,1084.446655,1089.787109,1096.931763,1111.523926,1129.833862,1142.338257,1148.019409,1159.695312,1162.210815,1180.029785

34

International Coal Prices for Electricity Generation - EIA  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Electricity Generation for Selected Countries1 Electricity Generation for Selected Countries1 U.S. Dollars per Metric Ton2 Country 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Australia NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Austria 45.70 52.67 64.47 81.28 87.52 92.75 96.24 122.10 120.10 Belgium 37.72 34.48 35.94 72.46 80.35 63.24 75.54 130.54 NA Canada 18.52 19.17 21.03 20.32 24.50 26.29 NA NA NA China NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Chinese Taipei (Taiwan) 31.29 31.43 31.18 47.75 57.70 54.68 70.17 118.49 NA Czech Republic3 8.05 8.52 C C C C C C C Denmark NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Finland 46.66 44.02 48.28 67.00 72.06 74.27 83.72 142.90 NA France 45.28 42.89 42.45 63.55 74.90 72.90 83.90 136.10 NA Germany 51.86 45.70 50.02 70.00 79.74 77.95 90.26 152.60 NA

35

"1. Labadie","Coal","Union Electric Co",2407 "2. Iatan","Coal","Kansas City Power & Light Co",1555  

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

Missouri" Missouri" "1. Labadie","Coal","Union Electric Co",2407 "2. Iatan","Coal","Kansas City Power & Light Co",1555 "3. Rush Island","Coal","Union Electric Co",1204 "4. Callaway","Nuclear","Union Electric Co",1190 "5. New Madrid","Coal","Associated Electric Coop, Inc",1160 "6. Thomas Hill","Coal","Associated Electric Coop, Inc",1125 "7. Sioux","Coal","Union Electric Co",986 "8. Hawthorn","Coal","Kansas City Power & Light Co",979 "9. Meramec","Coal","Union Electric Co",951 "10. Aries Power Project","Gas","Dogwood Energy LLC",614

36

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (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...

37

,,,,,,"Coal Components",,,"Coke",,,"Electricity Components",,,,,,,,,,,,,,"Natural Gas Components",,,"Steam Components"  

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

2 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.2;" 2 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.2;" " Unit: Percents." ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,"Selected Wood and Other Biomass Components" ,,,,,,"Coal Components",,,"Coke",,,"Electricity Components",,,,,,,,,,,,,,"Natural Gas Components",,,"Steam Components" " "," ",,,,,,,,,,,,,"Total",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,"Wood Residues",,,," " " "," "," ",,,,,"Bituminous",,,,,,"Electricity","Diesel Fuel",,,,,,"Motor",,,,,,,"Natural Gas",,,"Steam",,,," ",,,"and","Wood-Related","All"

38

,,,,,,"Coal Components",,,"Coke",,,"Electricity Components",,,,,,,,,,,,,,"Natural Gas Components",,,"Steam Components"  

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

Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.1;" Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.1;" " Unit: Percents." ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,"Selected Wood and Other Biomass Components" ,,,,,,"Coal Components",,,"Coke",,,"Electricity Components",,,,,,,,,,,,,,"Natural Gas Components",,,"Steam Components" " "," ",,,,,,,,,,,,,"Total",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,"Wood Residues",,,," " " "," "," ",,,,,"Bituminous",,,,,,"Electricity","Diesel Fuel",,,,,,"Motor",,,,,,,"Natural Gas",,,"Steam",,,," ",,,"and","Wood-Related","All"

39

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

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

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

40

2012,"Total Electric Power Industry","AK","Natural Gas",6,244.7,210.5  

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

TYPE_OF_PRODUCER","STATE_CODE","FUEL_SOURCE","GENERATORS","NAMEPLATE_CAPACITY TYPE_OF_PRODUCER","STATE_CODE","FUEL_SOURCE","GENERATORS","NAMEPLATE_CAPACITY (Megawatts)","SUMMER_CAPACITY (Megawatts)" 2012,"Total Electric Power Industry","AK","Natural Gas",6,244.7,210.5 2012,"Total Electric Power Industry","AK","Petroleum",4,4.8,4.8 2012,"Total Electric Power Industry","AK","Wind",1,24.6,24 2012,"Total Electric Power Industry","AK","All Sources",11,274.1,239.3 2012,"Total Electric Power Industry","AR","Coal",1,755,600 2012,"Total Electric Power Industry","AR","Natural Gas",1,22,20 2012,"Total Electric Power Industry","AR","All Sources",2,777,620

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


41

"1. Coal Creek","Coal","Great River Energy",1133 "2. Antelope Valley","Coal","Basin Electric Power Coop",900  

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

Dakota" Dakota" "1. Coal Creek","Coal","Great River Energy",1133 "2. Antelope Valley","Coal","Basin Electric Power Coop",900 "3. Milton R Young","Coal","Minnkota Power Coop, Inc",697 "4. Leland Olds","Coal","Basin Electric Power Coop",670 "5. Garrison","Hydroelectric","USCE-Missouri River District",508 "6. Coyote","Coal","Otter Tail Power Co",427 "7. Stanton","Coal","Great River Energy",202 "8. Tatanka Wind Power LLC","Other Renewables","Acciona Wind Energy USA LLC",180 "9. Langdon Wind LLC","Other Renewables","FPL Energy Langdon Wind LLC",159

42

Co-Production of Substitute Natural Gas/Electricity Via Catalytic Coal Gasification  

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

9 9 Co-ProduCtion of SubStitute natural GaS / eleCtriCity via CatalytiC Coal GaSifiCation Description The United States has vast reserves of low-cost coal, estimated to be sufficient for the next 250 years. Gasification-based technology, such as Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC), is the only environmentally friendly technology that provides the flexibility to co-produce hydrogen, substitute natural gas (SNG), premium hydrocarbon liquids including transportation fuels, and electric power in desired combinations from coal and other carbonaceous feedstocks. Rising costs and limited domestic supply of crude oil and natural gas provide a strong incentive for the development of coal gasification-based co-production processes. This project addresses the co-production of SNG and electricity from coal via gasification

43

Electricity Monthly Update  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Electric Power Sector Coal Stocks: January 2012 Electric Power Sector Coal Stocks: January 2012 Stocks Above normal temperatures in January have allowed electric utilities to significantly replinish stockpiles of coal. The upswing in coal stockpiles corresponds to decreasing consumption of coal at electric generators seen in the resource use section across all regions of the country. Days of Burn Days of burn Coal capacity The average number of days of burn held at electric power plants is a forward looking estimate of coal supply given a power plant's current stockpile and past consumption patterns. Along with coal stockpiles at electric power plants, the supply of coal significantly increased in January of 2012. Total bituminous coal days of burn increased 10 percent from January 2011 to 87, while subbituminous supply increased nearly 10

44

Utility to Purchase Electricity from Innovative DOE-Supported Clean Coal  

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

Utility to Purchase Electricity from Innovative DOE-Supported Clean 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 agreement - the first U.S. purchase by a utility of low-carbon power from a commercial-scale, coal-based power plant with carbon capture - CPS Energy of San Antonio will purchase approximately 200 megawatts (MW) of power from the Texas Clean Energy Project (TCEP), located just west of Midland-Odessa.

45

By Coal Origin State  

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

2 2 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 1st Quarter 2012 Alabama ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table OS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by origin State, 1st Quarter 2012 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 1,407 184 231 - 1,822 Alabama Railroad 801 9 49 - 859 Alabama River 519 - - - 519 Alabama Truck 87 175 182 - 444 Georgia Total s - s - s Georgia Truck s - s - s Indiana Total - 98 - - 98 Indiana Railroad - 98 - - 98 Kentucky Total - - 12 - 12 Kentucky Truck - - 12 - 12 Ohio Total - 30 - - 30 Ohio

46

By Coal Origin State  

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

1 1 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 2nd Quarter 2011 Alabama ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table OS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by origin State, 2nd Quarter 2011 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 1,896 182 327 - 2,405 Alabama Railroad 1,192 2 74 - 1,268 Alabama River 655 - - - 655 Alabama Truck 50 180 253 - 482 Georgia Total s - - - s Georgia Truck s - - - s Indiana Total - 72 - - 72 Indiana Railroad - 72 - - 72 Tennessee Total - - 7 - 7 Tennessee Truck - - 7 - 7 Origin State Total 1,896

47

A compact XRF unit for determining total sulphur content in coals  

SciTech Connect

A microcomputer based x-ray fluorescence (XRF) unit was developed for off-line determination of total sulphur content in coal samples. The unit consisted of the x-ray exciting/measuring set and the microcomputer with a plug-in interface card, An Fe-55 radioisotope was used as the exciting source while a krypton-filled proportional counter was used to measure x-rays from the samples. The x-ray spectrum was simultaneously displayed on the microcomputer screen. For quantitative determination of sulphur, the intensities of sulphur K x-rays as well as calcium K x-rays and scattered x-rays were taken into account. The unit was tested with finely-ground, dried and compressed lignite, subbituminous and bituminous samples. It was found that for low-calcium coals the results were in good agreement with those obtained from the standard chemical analysis method within {+-}0.2 %S and within {+-}0.5 %S for high-calcium coals.

Sumitra, T.; Chankow, N.; Punnachaiya, S.; Srisatit, S. [Chulalongkorn Univ., Bangkok (Thailand)

1994-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

48

Rail Coal Transportation Rates to the Electric Power Sector  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

well as other details about the shipment. A waybill can include one or more cars and a train can include one or more waybills. Unlike most other reports with coal transportation...

49

Coal Transportation Rates to the Electric Power Sector  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Survey data. Each plant receiving CAPP or PRB coal in 2007 and 2010 were mapped and their data used to estimate costs for other cells by interpolating values based on inverse...

50

Production of Hydrogen and Electricity from Coal with CO2 Capture  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

fuels · H2 (and CO2) distribution · H2 utilization (e.g. fuel cells, combustion) · Princeton energy carriers are needed: electricity and hydrogen. · If CO2 sequestration is viable, fossil fuel1 Production of Hydrogen and Electricity from Coal with CO2 Capture Princeton University: Tom

51

By Coal Destination State  

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

1 1 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 2nd Quarter 2011 Alabama _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table DS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by destination State, 2nd Quarter 2011 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 1,896 182 327 - 2,405 Alabama Railroad 1,192 2 74 - 1,268 Alabama River 655 - - - 655 Alabama Truck 50 180 253 - 482 Colorado Total 468 - - - 468 Colorado Railroad 468 - - - 468 Illinois Total 90 - 26 - 116 Illinois River 90 - 26 - 116 Indiana Total 181 - - - 181 Indiana River 181 -

52

By Coal Destination State  

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

2 2 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 1st Quarter 2012 Alabama _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table DS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by destination State, 1st Quarter 2012 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 1,407 184 231 - 1,822 Alabama Railroad 801 9 49 - 859 Alabama River 519 - - - 519 Alabama Truck 87 175 182 - 444 Colorado Total 82 - - - 82 Colorado Railroad 82 - - - 82 Illinois Total 149 - 14 - 163 Illinois Railroad 44 - - - 44 Illinois River 105 - 14 - 119 Indiana Total 99 - - - 99

53

By Coal Destination State  

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

1 1 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 4th Quarter 2011 Alabama _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table DS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by destination State, 4th Quarter 2011 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 1,486 155 328 - 1,970 Alabama Railroad 1,020 - 75 - 1,095 Alabama River 417 - - - 417 Alabama Truck 49 155 253 - 458 Colorado Total 195 - - - 195 Colorado Railroad 195 - - - 195 Illinois Total 127 - 18 - 145 Illinois Railroad 20 - - - 20 Illinois River 107 - 18 - 125 Indiana Total

54

By Coal Destination State  

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

1 1 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 3rd Quarter 2011 Alabama _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table DS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by destination State, 3rd Quarter 2011 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 1,942 160 335 - 2,437 Alabama Railroad 1,149 - 57 - 1,206 Alabama River 741 - - - 741 Alabama Truck 52 160 278 - 490 Colorado Total 621 2 - - 623 Colorado Railroad 621 2 - - 623 Illinois Total 113 - 11 - 123 Illinois River 113 - 11 - 123 Indiana Total 265 - - - 265 Indiana Railroad

55

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

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

Construction Begins on First-of-its-Kind Advanced Clean Coal 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 gasification combined cycle (IGCC) facility near Orlando, Fla. The new generating station will be among the cleanest, most efficient coal-fueled power plants in the world. Southern Company will operate the facility through its Southern Power subsidiary, which builds, owns, and manages the company's competitive generation assets. It will be located at OUC's Stanton Energy Center in

56

Polygeneration of Liquid Fuels and Electricity by the Atmospheric Pressure Hybrid Solar Gasification of Coal  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

(16, 17, 29, 30) The technical viability of the atmospheric pressure, windowed solar vortex reactor to gasify petroleum coke (petcoke) has been demonstrated on a small scale,(16, 29, 31) and a 300 kW pilot scale reactor has also been tested successfully. ... Inputs to the reactor were the model coal (as discussed above), nitrogen used for the carrier gas for the coal feed, steam used as a gasifying agent, and oxygen that is needed when ? gas turbine for electricity generation. ...

Ashok A. Kaniyal; Philip J. van Eyk; Graham J. Nathan; Peter J. Ashman; Jonathan J. Pincus

2013-05-20T23:59:59.000Z

57

Water effects of the use of western coal for electrical production  

SciTech Connect

Water may be a constraint on the expanded development of coal resources in the semi-arid western United States. Water allocation in the West has been determined by the appropriative rights doctrine which allows perpetual use of water sources by those who first claim it for beneficial purposes. This has had the effect of placing a dominative interest in water allocation in one economic sector: agriculture. New water sources are available to coal producers but political and economic problems must be overcome. Water is required by every phase of coal development. Mines use water for dust control and land reclamation. Coal slurry pipelines would use water as a transport medium. Steam electric power plants use water for cooling, cleaning, and in the boiler. Coal gasification plants would use water for cooling, cleaning, and as a material input. In addition to these direct uses of water by coal development, the people who build and operate the development demand water for domestic and recreational purposes. The quantity of water required for a given element of a coal development is site specific and dependent on many factors. The available literature cites a range of estimates of the amount of water required for each type of development. The width of this range seems related to the stage of development of the particular technology. Estimates of water requirements for various schemes to provide an average electrical load of 9 GWe to a load center 1000 miles from western mines are shown in Table 5.

Rogers, E.A.

1980-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

58

Table ET1. Primary Energy, Electricity, and Total Energy Price and Expenditure Estimates, Selected Years, 1970-2011, United States  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

ET1. Primary Energy, Electricity, and Total Energy Price and Expenditure Estimates, Selected Years, 1970-2011, United States ET1. Primary Energy, Electricity, and Total Energy Price and Expenditure Estimates, Selected Years, 1970-2011, United States Year Primary Energy Electric Power Sector h,j Retail Electricity Total Energy g,h,i Coal Coal Coke Natural Gas a Petroleum Nuclear Fuel Biomass Total g,h,i,j Coking Coal Steam Coal Total Exports Imports Distillate Fuel Oil Jet Fuel b LPG c Motor Gasoline d Residual Fuel Oil Other e Total Wood and Waste f,g Prices in Dollars per Million Btu 1970 0.45 0.36 0.38 1.27 0.93 0.59 1.16 0.73 1.43 2.85 0.42 1.38 1.71 0.18 1.29 1.08 0.32 4.98 1.65 1975 1.65 0.90 1.03 2.37 3.47 1.18 2.60 2.05 2.96 4.65 1.93 2.94 3.35 0.24 1.50 2.19 0.97 8.61 3.33 1980 2.10 1.38 1.46 2.54 3.19 2.86 6.70 6.36 5.64 9.84 3.88 7.04 7.40 0.43 2.26 4.57 1.77 13.95 6.89 1985 2.03 1.67 1.69 2.76 2.99 4.61 7.22 5.91 6.63 9.01 4.30 R 7.62 R 7.64 0.71 2.47 4.93 1.91 19.05

59

What explains the increased utilization of Powder River Basin coal in electric power generation?  

SciTech Connect

This article examines possible explanations for increased utilization of Powder River Basin (PRB) coal in electric power generation that occurred over the last two decades. Did more stringent environmental policy motivate electric power plants to switch to less polluting fuels? Or, did greater use of PRB coal occur because relative price changes altered input markets in favor of this fuel. A key finding is that factors other than environmental policy such as the decline in railroad freight rates together with elastic demand by power plants were major contributors to the increased utilization of this fuel.

Gerking, S.; Hamilton, S.F. [University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL (United States)

2008-11-15T23:59:59.000Z

60

By Coal Origin State  

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

0 0 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 2nd Quarter 2010 Alabama ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table OS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by origin State, 2nd Quarter 2010 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Railroad 914 12 66 - 992 Alabama River 949 - - - 949 Alabama Truck 78 189 237 - 504 Alabama Total 1,941 201 303 - 2,445 Georgia Railroad 23 - - - 23 Georgia Truck s - - - s Georgia Total 23 - - - 23 Indiana Railroad - 115 - - 115 Indiana Truck - 71 - - 71 Indiana Total - 186 - - 186 Tennessee Railroad - - 1 - 1 Tennessee Truck

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


61

Coal News and Markets - Energy Information Administration  

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

Coal News and Markets Coal News and Markets Release Date: December 16, 2013 | Next Release Date: December 24, 2013 "Coal News and Markets Report" summarizes spot coal prices by coal commodity regions (i.e., Central Appalachia (CAPP), Northern Appalachia (NAPP), Illinois Basin (ILB), Powder River Basin (PRB), and Uinta Basin (UIB)) in the United States. The report includes data on average weekly coal commodity spot prices, total monthly coal production, eastern monthly coal production, electric power sector coal stocks, and average cost of metallurgical coal at coke plants and export docks. The historical data for coal commodity spot market prices are proprietary and not available for public release. Average weekly coal commodity spot prices (dollars per short ton)

62

By Coal Destination State  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Annual Coal Distribution Report 2010 Annual Coal Distribution Report 2010 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Distribution Report 2010 Alabama _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table DS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by destination State, 2010 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 7,906 821 1,242 - 9,969 Alabama Railroad 3,604 49 285 - 3,938 Alabama River 3,979 - - - 3,979 Alabama Truck 322 773 957 - 2,051 Colorado Total 2,113 - - - 2,113 Colorado Railroad 2,113 - - - 2,113 Illinois Total 336 - - - 336 Illinois River 336 - - - 336 Indiana Total 1,076

63

Historical Costs of Coal-Fired Electricity and Implications for the Future  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

We study the costs of coal-fired electricity in the United States between 1882 and 2006 by decomposing it in terms of the price of coal, transportation costs, energy density, thermal efficiency, plant construction cost, interest rate, and capacity factor. The dominant determinants of costs at present are the price of coal and plant construction cost. The price of coal appears to fluctuate more or less randomly while the construction cost follows long-term trends, decreasing from 1902 - 1970, increasing from 1970 - 1990, and leveling off or decreasing a little since then. This leads us to forecast that even without carbon capture and storage, and even under an optimistic scenario in which construction costs resume their previously decreasing trending behavior, the cost of coal-based electricity will drop for a while but eventually be determined by the price of coal, which varies stochastically but shows no long term decreasing trends. Our analysis emphasizes the importance of using long time series and compari...

McNerney, James; Farmer, J Doyne

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

64

Carbon Dioxide Capture Technology for the Coal-Powered Electricity Industry: A Systematic Prioritization of Research Needs  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Carbon Dioxide Capture Technology for the Coal-Powered Electricity Industry: A Systematic and Policy Program #12;- 2 - #12;Carbon Dioxide Capture Technology for the Coal-Powered Electricity Industry must be developed for capturing CO2 from power plants. Current CO2 capture technology is expensive

65

Electricity Monthly Update  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Electric Power Sector Coal Stocks: October 2013 Electric Power Sector Coal Stocks: October 2013 Stocks In October 2013, total coal stocks increased 0.8 percent from the previous month. This follows the normal seasonal pattern for this time of year as the country begins to build up coal stocks to be consumed during the winter months. Compared to last October, coal stocks decreased 17.7 percent. This occurred because coal stocks in October 2012 were at an extremely high level. Days of Burn Days of burn Coal capacity The average number of days of burn held at electric power plants is a forward looking estimate of coal supply given a power plant's current stockpile and past consumption patterns. The total bituminous supply decreased from 85 days the previous month to 78 days in October 2013, while the total subbituminous supply decreased from 63 days in September 2013 to

66

PRODUCTION OF HYDROGEN AND ELECTRICITY FROM COAL WITH CO2 CAPTURE  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

gasification, quench cooled and shifted to (pri- marily) H2 and CO2 via sulfur-tolerant water-gas shift (WGS with sulfur-bearing waste gases, H2S and SO2. I. INTRODUCTION Carbon-free energy carriers, H2 and electricity relative abundance, high carbon intensity, and low cost. Coal-to-H2 plants based on gasification have been

67

By Coal Origin State  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Annual Coal Distribution Report 2010 Annual Coal Distribution Report 2010 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Distribution Report 2010 Alabama ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table OS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by origin State, 2010 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 7,906 821 1,242 - 9,969 Alabama Railroad 3,604 49 285 - 3,938 Alabama River 3,979 - - - 3,979 Alabama Truck 322 773 957 - 2,051 Florida Total - - 15 - 15 Florida Railroad - - 11 - 11 Florida Truck - - 3 - 3 Georgia Total 196 - 15 - 211 Georgia Railroad 189 - 1 - 190 Georgia Truck

68

By Coal Destination State  

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

0 0 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 4th Quarter 2010 Alabama _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table DS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by destination State, 4th Quarter 2010 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Railroad 944 16 77 - 1,037 Alabama River 781 - - - 781 Alabama Truck 77 224 220 - 521 Alabama Total 1,802 240 298 - 2,340 Colorado Railroad 385 - - - 385 Illinois River 15 - - - 15 Indiana Railroad 1 - - - 1 Indiana River 350 - - - 350 Indiana Total 351 - - - 351 Kentucky Railroad 682 - 2 - 685 Kentucky (East)

69

Coal Study Guide for Elementary School  

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

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

70

Potential Energy Total electric potential energy, U, of a system of  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Potential Energy Total electric potential energy, U, of a system of charges is obtained from of work done by the field, W*= -W. Bring q1 from , W *= 0 since no electric F yet #12;Potential Energy Total electric potential energy, U, of a system of charges is obtained from the work done by an external

Bertulani, Carlos A. - Department of Physics and Astronomy, Texas A&M University

71

ENERGY UTILIZATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES IN THE COAL-ELECTRIC CYCLE  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

lb for anthracite. The reserves of lignite on a weight basisand reserves. Typical energy contents of coal range from about 7,000 for ligniteReserves of the United States, 1974 (Billion Tons). Underground Surface Total Energy Value (Quads) Subbituminous Lignite

Ferrell, G.C.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

72

Managing Total Corporate Electricity/Energy Market Risks  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

This paper starts with a short history of the use of value-at-risk techniques in financial risk management. The specific and often unique risk management challenges faced by electricity companies are then desc...

Alex Henney; Greg Keers

2000-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

73

"Table A38. Total Expenditures for Purchased Electricity, Steam, and Natural Gas"  

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

8. Total Expenditures for Purchased Electricity, Steam, and Natural Gas" 8. Total Expenditures for Purchased Electricity, Steam, and Natural Gas" " by Type of Supplier, Census Region, Census Division, Industry Group," " and Selected Industries, 1994" " (Estimates in Million Dollars)" ,," Electricity",," Steam" ,,,,,,"RSE" "SIC",,"Utility","Nonutility","Utility","Nonutility","Row" "Code(a)","Industry Group and Industry","Supplier(b)","Supplier(c)","Supplier(b)","Supplier(c)","Factors" ,,"Total United States"

74

"Table A16. Components of Total Electricity Demand by Census Region, Industry"  

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

6. Components of Total Electricity Demand by Census Region, Industry" 6. Components of Total Electricity Demand by Census Region, Industry" " Group, and Selected Industries, 1991" " (Estimates in Million Kilowatthours)" " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," " " "," "," "," "," ","Sales and/or"," ","RSE" "SIC"," "," ","Transfers","Total Onsite","Transfers","Net Demand for","Row" "Code(a)","Industry Groups and Industry","Purchases","In(b)","Generation(c)","Offsite","Electricity(d)","Factors"

75

Carbon dioxide capture technology for the coal-powered electricity industry : a systematic prioritization of research needs  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Coal is widely relied upon as a fuel for electric power generation, and pressure is increasing to limit emissions of the CO2 produced during its combustion because of concerns over climate change. In order to continue the ...

Esber, George Salem, III

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

76

By Coal Destination State  

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

0 0 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 2nd Quarter 2010 Alabama _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table DS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by destination State, 2nd Quarter 2010 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Railroad 914 12 66 - 992 Alabama River 949 - - - 949 Alabama Truck 78 189 237 - 504 Alabama Total 1,941 201 303 - 2,445 Colorado Railroad 575 - - - 575 Illinois River 99 - - - 99 Indiana River 241 - - - 241 Kentucky Railroad 827 - 12 - 839 Kentucky (East) Railroad 76 - - - 76 Kentucky (West) Railroad

77

By Coal Destination State  

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

0 0 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 3rd Quarter 2010 Alabama _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table DS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by destination State, 3rd Quarter 2010 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Railroad 839 11 83 - 933 Alabama River 1,347 - - - 1,347 Alabama Truck 118 216 236 - 571 Alabama Total 2,304 227 320 - 2,850 Colorado Railroad 514 - - - 514 Illinois River 99 - - - 99 Indiana River 172 - - - 172 Kentucky Railroad 635 - 11 - 647 Kentucky (East) Railroad 45 - - - 45 Kentucky (West)

78

By Coal Destination State  

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

0 0 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 1st Quarter 2010 Alabama _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table DS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by destination State, 1st Quarter 2010 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Railroad 907 10 59 - 975 Alabama River 903 - - - 903 Alabama Truck 150 144 253 - 546 Alabama Total 1,960 153 311 - 2,424 Colorado Railroad 640 - - - 640 Illinois River 123 - - - 123 Indiana River 312 - - - 312 Kentucky Railroad 622 - 36 - 658 Kentucky (East) Railroad 96 - 36 - 132 Kentucky (West)

79

By Coal Destination State  

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

1 1 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 1st Quarter 2011 Alabama _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table DS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by destination State, 1st Quarter 2011 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Railroad 1,040 18 80 - 1,138 Alabama River 668 - - - 668 Alabama Truck 52 164 223 - 438 Alabama Total 1,760 181 303 - 2,244 Colorado Railroad 600 - - - 600 Illinois River 203 - 13 - 217 Indiana River 180 - - - 180 Kentucky Railroad 465 - 10 - 475 Kentucky (West) Railroad 465 - 10 - 475 Utah Railroad 18 - - -

80

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

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...

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


81

Electricity Monthly Update  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Electric Power Sector Coal Stocks: September 2011 Electric Power Sector Coal Stocks: September 2011 Stocks Electric power sector coal stocks continued to replenish after the summer burn in October, though stockpile levels remain well below 2010 levels. All coal stockpile levels declined from October 2010, with bituminous coal stockpile levels 12 percent lower than the same month of 2010. Days of Burn Days of burn Coal capacity The average number of days of burn held at electric power plants is a forward looking estimate of coal supply given a power plant's current stockpile and past consumption patterns. The average number of days of burn held on hand at electric power plants was generally flat in October 2011 compared to September of this year. The summer of 2011 saw significant declines in total U.S. stockpile levels, which were replenished in the

82

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

SciTech Connect

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.

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

2012-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

83

ENERGY UTILIZATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES IN THE COAL-ELECTRIC CYCLE  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

application (coal gasification, coal combustion followed byversions of advanced gasification processes show promise ofFixed-Bed Low-Btu Coal Gasification Systems for Retrofitting

Ferrell, G.C.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

84

ENERGY UTILIZATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES IN THE COAL-ELECTRIC CYCLE  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

May, 1975. "Economic Analysis of Coal Supply: An Assessmentthe economic and technical feasibility of coal-pyritereview of other economic studies of coal supply (20,21). The

Ferrell, G.C.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

85

Coal Transportation Issues (released in AEO2007)  

Reports and Publications (EIA)

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%).

2007-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

86

ENERGY UTILIZATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES IN THE COAL-ELECTRIC CYCLE  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

also be affected by higher coal prices. II "Current Factors$/year Change in Clean Coal Price, $/ton (FOB Plant) Cost ofcoal production capacities and coal prices. Coal Production

Ferrell, G.C.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

87

"Table A46. Total Expenditures for Purchased Electricity, Steam, and Natural"  

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

6. Total Expenditures for Purchased Electricity, Steam, and Natural" 6. Total Expenditures for Purchased Electricity, Steam, and Natural" " Gas by Type of Supplier, Census Region, Industry Group, and Selected Industries," 1991 " (Estimates in Million Dollars)" ,," Electricity",," Steam",," Natural Gas" ,,"-","-----------","-","-----------","-","------------","-","RSE" "SIC",,"Utility","Nonutility","Utility","Nonutility","Utility","Transmission","Other","Row" "Code(a)","Industry Groups and Industry","Supplier(b)","Supplier(c)","Supplier(b)","Supplier(c)","Supplier(b)","Pipelines","Supplier(d)","Factors"

88

"Table A48. Total Expenditures for Purchased Electricity, Steam, and Natural"  

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

8. Total Expenditures for Purchased Electricity, Steam, and Natural" 8. Total Expenditures for Purchased Electricity, Steam, and Natural" " Gas by Type of Supplier, Census Region, and Economic Characteristics of the" " Establishment, 1991" " (Estimates in Million Dollars)" ," Electricity",," Steam",," Natural Gas" ,"-","-----------","-","-----------","-","------------","-----------","RSE" " ","Utility","Nonutility","Utility","Nonutility","Utility","Transmission","Other","Row" "Economic Characteristics(a)","Supplier(b)","Supplier(c)","Supplier(b)","Supplier(c)","Supplier(b)","Pipelines","Supplier(d)","Factors"," "

89

Table 16. Total Electricity Sales, Projected vs. Actual  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Electricity Sales, Projected vs. Actual Electricity Sales, Projected vs. Actual (billion kilowatt-hours) 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 AEO 1982 2364 2454 2534 2626 2708 2811 AEO 1983 2318 2395 2476 2565 2650 2739 3153 AEO 1984 2321 2376 2461 2551 2637 2738 3182 AEO 1985 2317 2360 2427 2491 2570 2651 2730 2808 2879 2949 3026 AEO 1986 2363 2416 2479 2533 2608 2706 2798 2883 2966 3048 3116 3185 3255 3324 3397 AEO 1987 2460 2494 2555 2622 2683 2748 2823 2902 2977 3363 AEO 1989* 2556 2619 2689 2760 2835 2917 2994 3072 3156 3236 3313 3394 3473 AEO 1990 2612 2689 3083 3488.0 3870.0 AEO 1991 2700 2762 2806 2855 2904 2959 3022 3088 3151 3214 3282 3355 3427 3496 3563 3632 3704 3776 3846 3916 AEO 1992 2746 2845 2858 2913 2975 3030 3087 3146 3209 3276 3345 3415 3483 3552 3625 3699 3774 3847 3921 AEO 1993 2803 2840 2893 2946 2998 3052 3104 3157 3214 3271 3327

90

Aspects of the electrical system design of the colmi 660 mw coal-fired power plant  

SciTech Connect

The conceptual design of the electrical systems for Mexico's Commission Federal de Electricidad (CFE) COLMI 660-MW coal-fired power plant builds on Bechtel's experience with nuclear, gas and coal-fired generating plants. The COLMI conceptual design incorporates a combination of new equipment applications and design considerations that make it more economical when compared to traditional alternatives. Also it provides a reliable state-of-the-art distribution system that is flexible enough for any unit in the 400-900 MW range. Alternative approaches were studied for the system design and equipment arrangement. This paper reviews the approach taken to arrive at the conceptual design and describes the equipment selected and the advantages they provide. Exact sizing and determination of characteristics of the equipment are not given because these were not determined during the conceptual design. These will be determined during the detailed design phase of the project.

Aguilar, J. (Bechtel Corp., Norwalk, CA (US)); Fernandez, J.H. (Comision Federal de Electricidad, Mexico, D.F. (MX))

1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

91

Electricity Monthly Update  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Electric Power Sector Coal Stocks: March 2012 Electric Power Sector Coal Stocks: March 2012 Stocks The seasonal winter drawdown of coal stocks was totally negated during the winter months this year due to low natural gas prices and unseasonably warm temperatures throughout the continental United States. In fact, March 2012 was the seventh straight month that coal stockpiles at power plants increased from the previous month. The largest driver of increasing stockpiles has been declining consumption of coal due to unseasonably warm weather and declining natural gas prices. Because much of the coal supplied to electric generators is purchased through long-term contracts, increasing coal stockpiles have proven difficult for electric power plant operators to handle. Some operators have inventories so high that they are refusing

92

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

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

Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generation" Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generation" " by Enclosed Floorspace, Percent Conditioned Floorspace, and Presence of Computer" " Controls for Building Environment, 1991" " (Estimates in Trillion Btu)" ,,"Presence of Computer Controls" ,," for Buildings Environment",,"RSE" "Enclosed Floorspace and"," ","--------------","--------------","Row" "Percent Conditioned Floorspace","Total","Present","Not Present","Factors" " "," " "RSE Column Factors:",0.8,1.3,0.9 "ALL SQUARE FEET CATEGORIES" "Approximate Conditioned Floorspace"

93

Table A31. Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generation  

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

Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generation" Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generation" " by Value of Shipment Categories, Industry Group, and Selected Industries, 1991" " (Continued)" " (Estimates in Trillion Btu)",,,,"Value of Shipments and Receipts(b)" ,,,," (million dollars)" ,,,"-","-","-","-","-","-","RSE" "SIC"," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",500,"Row" "Code(a)","Industry Groups and Industry","Total","Under 20","20-49","50-99","100-249","250-499","and Over","Factors"

94

Table A19. Components of Total Electricity Demand by Census Region and  

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

Components of Total Electricity Demand by Census Region and" Components of Total Electricity Demand by Census Region and" " Economic Characteristics of the Establishment, 1991" " (Estimates in Million Kilowatthours)" " "," "," "," ","Sales/"," ","RSE" " "," ","Transfers","Onsite","Transfers"," ","Row" "Economic Characteristics(a)","Purchases","In(b)","Generation(c)","Offsite","Net Demand(d)","Factors" ,"Total United States" "RSE Column Factors:",0.5,1.4,1.3,1.9,0.5 "Value of Shipments and Receipts" "(million dollars)"

95

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" 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 Characteristics(a)","Purchases","In(b)","Generation(c)","Offsite","Net Demand(d)","Factors" ,"Total United States" "RSE Column Factors:",0.5,2.1,1.2,2,0.4 "Value of Shipments and Receipts"

96

"2012 Total Electric Industry- Customers"  

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

Customers" Customers" "(Data from forms EIA-861- schedules 4A, 4B, 4D, EIA-861S and EIA-861U)" "State","Residential","Commercial","Industrial","Transportation","Total" "New England",6203726,842773,34164,5,7080668 "Connecticut",1454651,150435,4647,2,1609735 "Maine",703770,89048,2780,0,795598 "Massachusetts",2699141,389272,21145,2,3109560 "New Hampshire",601697,104978,3444,0,710119 "Rhode Island",435448,57824,1927,1,495200 "Vermont",309019,51216,221,0,360456 "Middle Atlantic",15727423,2215961,45836,26,17989246 "New Jersey",3455302,489943,12729,6,3957980 "New York",7010740,1038268,8144,6,8057158

97

EIA - Annual Energy Outlook 2008 - Coal Production  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Coal Production Coal Production Annual Energy Outlook 2008 with Projections to 2030 Coal Production Figure 93. Coal production by region, 1970-2030 (quadrillion Btu). Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. figure data Figure 94. U.S. coal production, 2006, 2015, and 2030 (quadrillion Btu). Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. figure data Western Coal Production Continues To Increase Through 2030 In the AEO2008 reference case, increasing coal use for electricity generation at existing plants and construction of a few new coal-fired plants lead to annual production increases that average 0.3 percent per year from 2006 to 2015, when total production is 24.5 quadrillion Btu. In the absence of restrictions on CO2 emissions, the growth in coal production

98

EIA - Annual Energy Outlook 2009 - Coal Production  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Coal Production Coal Production Annual Energy Outlook 2009 with Projections to 2030 Coal Production Figure 78. Coal production by region, 1970-2030 (quadrillion Btu). Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. figure data Figure 79. U.S. coal production in four cases, 2007, 2015, and 2030 (quadrillion Btu). Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. figure data Figure 80. Average minemouth coal prices by regionCoal production by region, 1970-2030 (quadrillion Btu). Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. figure data Total Coal Production Increases at a Slower Rate Than in the Past In the AEO2009 reference case, increasing coal use for electricity generation at both new and existing plants and the startup of several CTL

99

"2012 Total Electric Industry- Revenue (Thousands Dollars)"  

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

Revenue (Thousands Dollars)" Revenue (Thousands Dollars)" "(Data from forms EIA-861- schedules 4A-D, EIA-861S and EIA-861U)" "State","Residential","Commercial","Industrial","Transportation","Total" "New England",7418025.1,6137400,3292222.3,37797.4,16885444.6 "Connecticut",2212594.3,1901294.3,451909.7,18679.5,4584477.8 "Maine",656822,467228,241624.4,0,1365674.3 "Massachusetts",3029291.6,2453106,2127180,17162,7626739.5 "New Hampshire",713388.2,598371.1,231041,0,1542800.3 "Rhode Island",449603.6,431951.9,98597.2,1955.9,982108.6 "Vermont",356325.4,285448.7,141870,0,783644.1 "Middle Atlantic",20195109.9,20394744.7,5206283.9,488944,46285082.4

100

"2012 Total Electric Industry- Sales (Thousand Megawatthours)"  

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

Sales (Thousand Megawatthours)" Sales (Thousand Megawatthours)" "(Data from forms EIA-861- schedules 4A, 4B, 4D, EIA-861S and EIA-861U)" "State","Residential","Commercial","Industrial","Transportation","Total" "New England",47207.696,44864.227,27817.984,566.173,120456.08 "Connecticut",12757.633,12976.05,3565.944,192.711,29492.338 "Maine",4480.736,4053.188,3027.135,0,11561.059 "Massachusetts",20313.469,17722.811,16927.205,349.839,55313.324 "New Hampshire",4439.208,4478.42,1952.633,0,10870.261 "Rhode Island",3121.367,3639.866,923.478,23.623,7708.334 "Vermont",2095.283,1993.892,1421.589,0,5510.764 "Middle Atlantic",132230.522,157278.208,69506.519,3910.06,362925.309

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


101

EIA - Distribution of U.S. Coal by Destination  

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

Destination Destination Glossary Home > Coal> Distribution of U.S. Coal by Destination Distribution of U.S. Coal by Destination Release Date: January 2006 Next Release Date: 2006 Distribution of U.S Coal by Destination Domestic Distribution of U.S. Coal by Destination State, Consumer, Destination and Method of Transportation, 2004 (Thousand Short Tons) DESTINATION: ALASKA State of Origin by Method of Transportation Electricity Generation Coke Plants Industrial Plants (Except Coke) Residential and Commercial Total Alaska 460 - - 497 957 Railroad 256 - - 497 753 Truck 204 - - * 204 State Total 460 - - 497 957 Railroad 256 - - 497 753 Truck 204 - - * 204 EIA - Distribution of U.S. Coal by Destination

102

U.S. Coal Supply and Demand: 2001 Review  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

U.S. Coal Supply and Demand: 2001 Review U.S. Coal Supply and Demand: 2001 Review 1 U.S. Coal Supply and Demand: 2001 Review (Revised 5/6/2002) 1 by Fred Freme U.S. Energy Information Administration 1 This article has been revised, deleting 17.6 millions short tons of coal consumed by the manufacturers of synthetic coal from the consumption of coal by "other industrial plants." This change was made because the synthetic coal those plants produced was primarily consumed in the electric sector and reported as coal, resulting in an overstating of total coal consumption. Overview With the dawning of a new century came the beginning of a new era in the coal industry. Instead of the traditional prac- tice of only buying and selling produced coal in the United

103

Understanding China’s electricity market reform from the perspective of the coal-fired power disparity  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Abstract In China, electricity consumption has grown quickly, supply is highly dependent on coal-fired power, and the prices of electricity are determined by the government, which increases the need for reform to enhance efficiency. In response to disputes about China’s electricity market reform, this paper analyses the efficiency of China’s coal-fired power plants using the Data Envelopment Analysis—Slack Based Measure (DEA-SBM) method on three levels: groups, provinces, and plants. The results indicate that there are both coal-electricity efficiency disparities and generation-hour arrangement unfairness across groups; the disparity across provinces is obvious and long-lasting, as indicated by capacity surpluses and coal-electricity efficiencies; and the disparities are displayed in detail by the estimation at the plant level. The disparities are primarily caused by the generator combination and generation hour arrangement. Competition may be able to solve the disparities, but a further comparison indicates that competition at the national level will enhance the efficiency to a greater degree than competition at the regional level. These results demonstrate that both competition and a united electricity market are necessary for further electricity market reform.

Dunguo Mou

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

104

Noise emissions from new electric options: Coal conversion and on?site generation  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Two alternatives being considered for reducing the use of imported petroleum are the reconversion of oil?fired electric power plants to burn coal or the construction of small on?site generators which would make use of the waste heat from diesel generators to improve fuel efficiency. In urban areas there may be insufficient distance between the noise sources and residents to act as an acoustical buffer zone to attenuate noise to the local permissible limit. Calculations made during the preparation of environmental impact statements will determine noise abatement requirements either for achieving compliance with local noise limits or for minimizing community annoyance. Several studies were undertaken to provide a noise emission data base for the sound sources associated with both alternatives and to develop procedures for evaluating the effects of environmental noise changes. Noise emissions from two types of coal delivery and handling systems are reviewed since these are expected to be the main sources of noise resulting from coal reconversion of a central power station. Noise emissions from on?site cogenerators which will most likely be diesel engine?generators will be discussed briefly since it was the subject of a prior paper [A. M. Teplitzky and L. N. Miller J. Acoust. Soc. Am. Suppl. 1 67 S87(1980)]. The studies have shown that noise emissions from either alternative are compatible with the urban environment when adequate noise abatement devices are installed.

Allan M. Teplitzky

1981-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

105

By Coal Origin State  

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

1 1 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 3rd Quarter 2011 Alabama ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table OS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by origin State, 3rd Quarter 2011 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 1,942 160 335 - 2,437 Alabama Railroad 1,149 - 57 - 1,206 Alabama River 741 - - - 741 Alabama Truck 52 160 278 - 490 Georgia Total s - 3 - 3 Georgia Truck s - 3 - 3 Ohio Total - 3 - - 3 Ohio River - 3 - - 3 Origin State Total 1,942 163 338 - 2,443 Railroad 1,149 - 57 - 1,206 River 741 3 - - 745 Truck 52 160

106

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

SciTech Connect

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.

Paulina Jaramillo; W. Michael Griffin; H. Scott Matthews [Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA (United States). Civil and Environmental Engineering Department

2007-09-15T23:59:59.000Z

107

Proximate analysis of coal  

SciTech Connect

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.

Donahue, C.J.; Rais, E.A. [University of Michigan, Dearborn, MI (USA)

2009-02-15T23:59:59.000Z

108

An evaluation of total body electrical conductivity to estimate body composition of largemouth bass  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Information about body composition of fish is important for the assessment and management of fish stocks. Measurement of total body electrical conductivity (TOBEC) recently has been used to estimate the body composition of several fish species in a...

Barziza, Daniel Eugene

2012-06-07T23:59:59.000Z

109

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

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

"Net","Residual","and Diesel",,,"and",,"Row" "Code(a)","End-Use Categories","Total","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Fuel(c)","Natural Gas(d)","LPG","Breeze)","Other(e)","Factors" ,...

110

ENERGY UTILIZATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES IN THE COAL-ELECTRIC CYCLE  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

sulfur plus 10 to 40% of the coal ash. It also increases theto extract most of the coal ash. Heavy metals are alsotons of scrubber and coal ash sludge per year. By 1980, a

Ferrell, G.C.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

111

ENERGY UTILIZATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES IN THE COAL-ELECTRIC CYCLE  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

IISolvent Refining for Clean Coal Combustion,1I Walk, R. ,of Equipment (Percent of Clean Coal Produced) Year Type Jigs$1.50-$2.00 per ton of clean coal. In comparison, the cost

Ferrell, G.C.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

112

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 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 Dollar Year 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 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 1.50 AEO 1996 1994 1.32 1.29 1.28 1.27 1.26 1.26 1.25 1.27 1.27 1.27 1.28 1.27 1.28 1.27 1.28 1.26 1.28

113

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" 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 "AEO 1994",1.502753725,1.549729719,1.64272351,1.727259934,1.784039735,1.822135762,1.923203642,2.00781457,2.134768212,2.217425497,2.303725166,2.407715232,2.46134106,2.637086093,2.775389073,2.902293046,3.120364238,3.298013245 "AEO 1995",,1.4212343,1.462640338,1.488780998,1.545300242,1.585877053,1.619428341,1.668671498,1.7584219,1.803937198,1.890547504,1.968695652,2.048913043,2.134750403,2.205281804,2.281690821,2.375434783,2.504830918 "AEO 1996",,,1.346101641,1.350594221,1.369020126,1.391737646,1.421340737,1.458772082,1.496497523,1.561369914,1.619940033,1.674758358,1.749420803,1.800709877,1.871110564,1.924495246,2.006850327,2.048938234,2.156821499

114

By Coal Origin State  

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

0 0 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 1st Quarter 2010 Alabama ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table OS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by origin State, 1st Quarter 2010 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Railroad 907 10 59 - 975 Alabama River 903 - - - 903 Alabama Truck 150 144 253 - 546 Alabama Total 1,960 153 311 - 2,424 Florida Truck - - 3 - 3 Georgia Railroad 105 - 1 - 106 Georgia Truck s - 4 - 4 Georgia Total 105 - 5 - 110 Indiana Railroad - 106 - - 106 Tennessee Railroad - - 1 - 1 Origin State Total 2,065 259 321 - 2,644

115

By Coal Origin State  

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

0 0 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 3rd Quarter 2010 Alabama ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table OS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by origin State, 3rd Quarter 2010 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Railroad 839 11 83 - 933 Alabama River 1,347 - - - 1,347 Alabama Truck 118 216 236 - 571 Alabama Total 2,304 227 320 - 2,850 Georgia Railroad 9 - - - 9 Georgia Truck 7 - 5 - 12 Georgia Total 16 - 5 - 21 Indiana Railroad - 126 - - 126 Tennessee Truck - - 1 - 1 Origin State Total 2,320 353 325 - 2,998 Railroad 848 137 83 - 1,068

116

By Coal Origin State  

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

0 0 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 4th Quarter 2010 Alabama ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table OS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by origin State, 4th Quarter 2010 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Railroad 944 16 77 - 1,037 Alabama River 781 - - - 781 Alabama Truck 77 224 220 - 521 Alabama Total 1,802 240 298 - 2,340 Florida Railroad - - 11 - 11 Georgia Railroad 52 - - - 52 Georgia Truck s - 5 - 5 Georgia Total 52 - 5 - 57 Indiana Railroad - 65 - - 65 Origin State Total 1,855 304 313 - 2,472 Railroad 996 81 89 - 1,165

117

By Coal Origin State  

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

1 1 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 1st Quarter 2011 Alabama ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table OS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by origin State, 1st Quarter 2011 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Railroad 1,040 18 80 - 1,138 Alabama River 668 - - - 668 Alabama Truck 52 164 223 - 438 Alabama Total 1,760 181 303 - 2,244 Georgia Truck s - 2 - 2 Indiana Railroad - 148 - - 148 Ohio Railroad - 25 - - 25 Ohio River - 18 - - 18 Ohio Total - 43 - - 43 Origin State Total 1,760 373 305 - 2,438 Railroad 1,040 191 80 - 1,311 River

118

,,"Electricity Receipts(b)",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(c)...  

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

7 Relative Standard Errors for Table 10.7;" " Unit: Percents." ,,"Electricity Receipts(b)",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(c)" ,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total","...

119

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" 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 Industry","Total","Northeast","Midwest","South","West","Factors" ,"RSE Column Factors:",0.7,1.2,1.1,0.9,1.2 "20-39","ALL INDUSTRY GROUPS" ,"Participation in One or More of the Following Types of Programs",12605,1209,3303,6386,1706,2.9

120

Table A15. Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generation  

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

Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generation" Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generation" " by Value of Shipment Categories, Industry Group, and Selected Industries, 1994" " (Estimates in Trillion Btu)" ,,,," Value of Shipments and Receipts(b)" ,,,," "," (million dollars)" ,,,,,,,,,"RSE" "SIC"," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",500,"Row" "Code(a)","Industry Group and Industry","Total","Under 20","20-49","50-99","100-249","250-499","and Over","Factors" ,"RSE Column Factors:",0.6,1.3,1,1,0.9,1.2,1.2

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


121

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" 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 Industry","Total","Northeast","Midwest","South","West","Factors" ,"RSE Column Factors:",0.7,1.3,1,0.9,1.2 "20-39","ALL INDUSTRY GROUPS" ,"Participation in One or More of the Following Types of Programs",10743,1150,2819,5309,1464,2.6,,,"/WIR{D}~"

122

Hydrogen and electricity from coal with carbon dioxide separation using chemical looping reactors  

SciTech Connect

Concern about global climate change has led to research on low CO{sub 2} emission in the process of the energy conversion of fossil fuel. One of the solutions is the conversion of fossil fuel into carbon-free energy carriers, hydrogen, and electricity with CO{sub 2} capture and storage. In this paper, the main purpose is to investigate the thermodynamics performance of converting coal to a hydrogen and electricity system with chemical-looping reactors and to explore the influences of operating parameters on the system performance. Using FeO/Fe{sub 3}O{sub 4} as an oxygen carrier, we propose a carbon-free coproduction system of hydrogen and electricity with chemical-looping reactors. The performance of the new system is simulated using ASPEN PLUS software tool. The influences of the chemical-looping reactor's temperature, steam conversion rate, and O{sub 2}/coal quality ratio on the system performance, and the exergy performance are discussed. The results show that a high-purity of H{sub 2} (99.9%) is reached and that CO{sub 2} can be separated. The system efficiency is 57.85% assuming steam reactor at 815 C and the steam conversion rate 37%. The system efficiency is affected by the steam conversion rate, rising from 53.17 to 58.33% with the increase of the steam conversion rate from 28 to 41%. The exergy efficiency is 54.25% and the losses are mainly in the process of gasification and HRSG. 14 refs., 12 figs., 3 tabs.

Xiang Wenguo; Chen Yingying [Southeast University, Nanjing (China). Key Laboratory of Clean Coal Power Generation and Combustion Technology of Ministry of Education

2007-08-15T23:59:59.000Z

123

Distribution of hazardous air pollutant trace elements, total sulfur, and ash in coals from five Tertiary basins in the Rocky Mountain Region  

SciTech Connect

Arithmetic mean values of the contents of hazardous air pollutant (HAP) trace elements named in the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel, selenium, and uranium), ash, and total sulfur were statistically compared on a whole-coal basis for Paleocene coals from five Tertiary basins in the Rocky Mountain Region. The study of proximate and elemental analyses indicate a relationship between trace element contents and paleogeography.

Ellis, M.S.; Stricker, G.D.; Flores, R.M. [Geological Survey, Denver, CO (United States)

1994-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

124

Rail Coal Transportation Rates  

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

reports reports Coal Transportation Rates to the Electric Power Sector With Data through 2010 | Release Date: November 16, 2012 | Next Release Date: December 2013 | Correction Previous editions Year: 2011 2004 Go Figure 1. Deliveries from major coal basins to electric power plants by rail, 2010 Background In this latest release of Coal Transportation Rates to the Electric Power Sector, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) significantly expands upon prior versions of this report with the incorporation of new EIA survey data. Figure 1. Percent of total U.S. rail shipments represented in data figure data Previously, EIA relied solely on data from the U.S. Surface Transportation Board (STB), specifically their confidential Carload Waybill Sample. While valuable, due to the statistical nature of the Waybill data,

125

Experiment Investigation on Concentration and Mass Flow Measurement of Pulverized Coal Using Electrical Capacitance Tomography  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Accurate measurement of the concentration of pulverized coal in various pipes plays a key role in assuring safe and economic operation in a pulverized coal?fired boiler in the process of combustion. In this paper experimental studies are implemented on the measurement of a lean mass flow in a pneumatic conveying pipeline using electrical capacitance tomography (ECT). In this system a cyclone separator is employed where the sensors are placed in order to compensate the inhomogeneity of the sensor sensitivity. The mass flow rate is determined from the solids velocity and the volumetric concentration. The former is measured by cross?correlating the capacitance fluctuations caused by the conveyed solids and the latter by an image reconstruction method and then this two parameters are combined to give the solids mass flow rate. The distribution of void fraction in radial direction the average void fraction and the wavy characteristics are analyzed. The feasibility and reliability of the method are verified by the experimental results.

J. Liu; M. Sun; X. Y. Wang; S. Liu

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

126

Greenhouse gases, climate change and the transition from coal to low-carbon electricity  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

A transition from the global system of coal-based electricity generation to low-greenhouse-gas-emission energy technologies is required to mitigate climate change in the long term. The use of current infrastructure to build this new low-emission system necessitates additional emissions of greenhouse gases, and the coal-based infrastructure will continue to emit substantial amounts of greenhouse gases as it is phased out. Furthermore, ocean thermal inertia delays the climate benefits of emissions reductions. By constructing a quantitative model of energy system transitions that includes life-cycle emissions and the central physics of greenhouse warming, we estimate the global warming expected to occur as a result of build-outs of new energy technologies ranging from 100 GWe to 10 TWe in size and 1–100 yr in duration. We show that rapid deployment of low-emission energy systems can do little to diminish the climate impacts in the first half of this century. Conservation, wind, solar, nuclear power, and possibly carbon capture and storage appear to be able to achieve substantial climate benefits in the second half of this century; however, natural gas cannot.

N P Myhrvold; K Caldeira

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

127

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

SciTech Connect

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.

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

1981-12-08T23:59:59.000Z

128

Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Total Total .............. 16,164,874 5,967,376 22,132,249 2,972,552 280,370 167,519 18,711,808 1993 Total .............. 16,691,139 6,034,504 22,725,642 3,103,014 413,971 226,743 18,981,915 1994 Total .............. 17,351,060 6,229,645 23,580,706 3,230,667 412,178 228,336 19,709,525 1995 Total .............. 17,282,032 6,461,596 23,743,628 3,565,023 388,392 283,739 19,506,474 1996 Total .............. 17,680,777 6,370,888 24,051,665 3,510,330 518,425 272,117 19,750,793 Alabama Total......... 570,907 11,394 582,301 22,601 27,006 1,853 530,841 Onshore ................ 209,839 11,394 221,233 22,601 16,762 1,593 180,277 State Offshore....... 209,013 0 209,013 0 10,244 260 198,509 Federal Offshore... 152,055 0 152,055 0 0 0 152,055 Alaska Total ............ 183,747 3,189,837 3,373,584 2,885,686 0 7,070 480,828 Onshore ................ 64,751 3,182,782

129

Electricity Monthly Update  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Coal Stocks: August 2011 Coal Stocks: August 2011 Stocks Coal stocks continued the usual summer decline as utilities burned into their summer stockpile in August. Sigificant declines from August 2010 were seen in total coal stockpiles, driven by a 14 percent drop in bituminous coal stockpiles as well as a 10 percent drop in subbituminous coal stockpiles. Lignite stockpiles declined by 6 percent over the same time period. Days of burn The average number of days of burn held at electric power plants is a forward looking estimate of coal supply given a power plant's current stockpile and past consumption patterns. The average number of days of burn held on hand at electric power plants increased slightly in August 2011 compared to previous months. This was largely driven by increases in

130

" Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"  

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

6 Capability to Switch Electricity to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; " 6 Capability to Switch Electricity to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; " " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;" " Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Million Kilowatthours." ,,"Electricity Receipts",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total"," ","Not","Natural","Distillate","Residual",,,"and" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Receipts(c)","Switchable","Switchable","Gas","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil","Coal","LPG","Breeze","Other(d)"," "

131

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

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

b. Relative Standard Errors for Total Electricity Consumption per b. Relative Standard Errors for Total Electricity Consumption per Effective Occupied Square Foot, 1992 Building Characteristics All Buildings Using Electricity (thousand) Total Electricity Consumption (trillion Btu) Electricity Intensities (thousand Btu) Per Square Foot Per Effective Occupied Square Foot All Buildings 4 5 4 4 Building Floorspace (Square Feet) 1,001 to 5,000 5 6 6 6 5,001 to 10,000 4 9 9 9 10,001 to 25,000 5 7 5 5 25,001 to 50,000 7 10 10 10 50,001 to 100,000 7 12 8 8 100,001 to 200,000 9 13 10 10 200,001 to 500,000 10 13 11 11 Over 500,000 26 18 18 21 Principal Building Activity Education 8 9 6 6 Food Sales and Service 8 9 8 7 Health Care 14 12 12 9 Lodging 11 22 16 16 Mercantile and Service 5 7 7 7 Office 6 10 7 6 Public Assembly 7 12 28 30 Public Order and Safety 18 29 18 18 Religious Worship 10 10 11 11 Warehouse and Storage

132

ENERGY UTILIZATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES IN THE COAL-ELECTRIC CYCLE  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Plant - without coking (lb/hr) Feed Coal* Hydrogen YieldsCoking Summary Cost Estimates for Solvent Refining of Five U.S. CoalsCoal Handling and Preparation Preheaters and Dissolvers Mineral Separation (Filters) Solvent Recovery Gas Recovery Mineral Residue Processing and Storage Coking

Ferrell, G.C.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

133

Total............................................................  

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

Total................................................................... 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 1,441 906 595 539 339 2,000 to 2,499................................................. 12.2 2,052 1,733 1,072 765 646 400 2,500 to 2,999................................................. 10.3 2,523 2,010 1,346 939 748 501 3,000 to 3,499................................................. 6.7 3,020 2,185 1,401 1,177 851 546

134

Annual Energy Outlook 2006 with Projections to 2030 - Coal  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Coal Coal Annual Energy Outlook 2006 with Projections to 2030 Market Share of Western Coal Continues To Increase U.S. coal production has remained near 1,100 million tons annually since 1996. In the AEO2006 reference case, increasing coal use for electricity generation at existing plants and construction of a few new coal-fired plants lead to annual production increases that average 1.1 percent per year from 2004 to 2015, when total production is 1,272 million tons. The growth in coal production is even stronger thereafter, averaging 2.0 percent per year from 2015 to 2030, as substantial amounts of new coal-fired generating capacity are added, and several CTL plants are brought on line. Figure 97. Coal production by region, 1970-2030 (million short tons). Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800 for help.

135

Total...................  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4,690,065 52,331,397 2,802,751 4,409,699 7,526,898 209,616 1993 Total................... 4,956,445 52,535,411 2,861,569 4,464,906 7,981,433 209,666 1994 Total................... 4,847,702 53,392,557 2,895,013 4,533,905 8,167,033 202,940 1995 Total................... 4,850,318 54,322,179 3,031,077 4,636,500 8,579,585 209,398 1996 Total................... 5,241,414 55,263,673 3,158,244 4,720,227 8,870,422 206,049 Alabama ...................... 56,522 766,322 29,000 62,064 201,414 2,512 Alaska.......................... 16,179 81,348 27,315 12,732 75,616 202 Arizona ........................ 27,709 689,597 28,987 49,693 26,979 534 Arkansas ..................... 46,289 539,952 31,006 67,293 141,300 1,488 California ..................... 473,310 8,969,308 235,068 408,294 693,539 36,613 Colorado...................... 110,924 1,147,743

136

Table A52. Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generatio  

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

2. Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generation by Employment Size" 2. Total Inputs of Energy for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generation by Employment Size" " Categories and Presence of General Technologies and Cogeneration Technologies, 1994" " (Estimates in Trillion Btu)" ,,,,"Employment Size(a)" ,,,,,,,,"RSE" ,,,,,,,"1000 and","Row" "General/Cogeneration Technologies","Total","Under 50","50-99","100-249","250-499","500-999","Over","Factors" "RSE Column Factors:",0.5,2,2.1,1,0.7,0.7,0.9 "One or More General Technologies Present",14601,387,781,2054,2728,3189,5462,3.1 " Computer Control of Building Environment (b)",5079,64,116,510,802,1227,2361,5

137

Comparing solar PV (photovoltaic) with coal-fired electricity production in the centralized network of South Africa  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Abstract South Africa has a highly centralized network, in which almost all electricity is produced in Mpumalanga and transmitted throughout South Africa. In the case of the Western Cape, electricity has to be transmitted over 800–1370 km. This generates losses and entails high transmission costs. Investments in additional production and transmission capacity are needed to cope with the growing demand. Although there is a large potential for solar energy in South Africa, investments are lacking while large investments in new coal-fired power plants are being executed. These coal power plants do not only increase the need for heavier transmission infrastructure, but also have a higher CO2 emission level and a higher pressure on water reserves. This paper performs a more comprehensive cost-analysis between solar energy production and coal production facilities, to make a more elaborate picture of which technologies are more plausible to foresee in the growing demand of electricity. The current centralized electricity infrastructure makes the investment in large production facilities more likely. However, it should be questioned if the investment in large centralized solar parks will be more beneficial than the investments by consumers in smaller solar PV facilities on site.

R.A.F. de Groot; V.G. van der Veen; A.B. Sebitosi

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

138

Table 12. Coal Prices to Electric Generating Plants, Projected vs. Actual  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Coal Prices to Electric Generating Plants, Projected vs. Actual Coal Prices to Electric Generating Plants, Projected vs. Actual (nominal dollars per million Btu) 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 AEO 1982 2.03 2.17 2.33 2.52 2.73 2.99 AEO 1983 1.99 2.10 2.24 2.39 2.57 2.76 4.29 AEO 1984 1.90 2.01 2.13 2.28 2.44 2.61 3.79 AEO 1985 1.68 1.76 1.86 1.95 2.05 2.19 2.32 2.49 2.66 2.83 3.03 AEO 1986 1.61 1.68 1.75 1.83 1.93 2.05 2.19 2.35 2.54 2.73 2.92 3.10 3.31 3.49 3.68 AEO 1987 1.52 1.55 1.65 1.75 1.84 1.96 2.11 2.27 2.44 3.55 AEO 1989* 1.50 1.51 1.68 1.77 1.88 2.00 2.13 2.26 2.40 2.55 2.70 2.86 3.00 AEO 1990 1.46 1.53 2.07 2.76 3.7 AEO 1991 1.51 1.58 1.66 1.77 1.88 1.96 2.06 2.16 2.28 2.41 2.57 2.70 2.85 3.04 3.26 3.46 3.65 3.87 4.08 4.33 AEO 1992 1.54 1.61 1.66 1.75 1.85 1.97 2.03 2.14 2.26 2.44 2.55 2.69 2.83 3.00 3.20 3.40 3.58 3.78 4.01 AEO 1993 1.92 1.54 1.61 1.70

139

Coal: evolving supply and demand in world seaborne steam coal trade. [1975 to 1985; forecasting to 1995  

SciTech Connect

This paper describes the evolution of world seaborne steam coal trade since 1975. It highlights current trends and the historic and present sources of supply and demand and discusses selected factors that may affect future world trade patterns. It concludes with a general discussion on the prospects for United States participation in the growing world markets for steam coal. Worldwide seaborne steam coal trade is linked very closely to the generation of electricity and industrial use of process heat in cement and other manufacturing plants. The main factors that influence this trade are: economic growth, electricity demand, indigenous coal production (and degree of protection from lower cost coal imports), and the delivered costs of coal relative to other substitutable fuels. It may be of interest to know how these factors have changed seaborne steam coal trade in the past twelve years. In 1970, the total world use of steam coal was about two billion short tons. International trade in steam coal was only 80 million tons or about 4% of the total. Seaborne trade accounted for about 30% of international trade, or about 25 million tons. In 1982, the latest year for which good statistics are available, total world use of steam coal was about 3.6 billion tons. Seaborne steam coal trade was 110 million tons which is about 3% of the total and 37% of the international trade. 11 figs., 2 tabs.

Yancik, J.

1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

140

"State","Fossil Fuels",,,,,,"Nuclear Electric Power",,"Renewable Energy",,,,,,"Total Energy Production"  

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

P2. Energy Production Estimates in Trillion Btu, 2011 " P2. Energy Production Estimates in Trillion Btu, 2011 " "State","Fossil Fuels",,,,,,"Nuclear Electric Power",,"Renewable Energy",,,,,,"Total Energy Production" ,"Coal a",,"Natural Gas b",,"Crude Oil c",,,,"Biofuels d",,"Other e",,"Total" ,"Trillion Btu" "Alabama",468.671,,226.821,,48.569,,411.822,,0,,245.307,,245.307,,1401.191 "Alaska",33.524,,404.72,,1188.008,,0,,0,,15.68,,15.68,,1641.933 "Arizona",174.841,,0.171,,0.215,,327.292,,7.784,,107.433,,115.217,,617.734 "Arkansas",2.985,,1090.87,,34.087,,148.531,,0,,113.532,,113.532,,1390.004 "California",0,,279.71,,1123.408,,383.644,,25.004,,812.786,,837.791,,2624.553

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


141

"Table A25. Components of Total Electricity Demand by Census Region, Census Division, Industry"  

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

Components of Total Electricity Demand by Census Region, Census Division, Industry" Components of Total Electricity Demand by Census Region, Census Division, Industry" " Group, and Selected Industries, 1994" " (Estimates in Million Kilowatthours)" " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," " " "," "," "," "," ","Sales and/or"," ","RSE" "SIC"," "," ","Transfers","Total Onsite","Transfers","Net Demand for","Row" "Code(a)","Industry Group and Industry","Purchases","In(b)","Generation(c)","Offsite","Electricity(d)","Factors"

142

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

SciTech Connect

The U.S. Department of Energy and ADA Environmental Solutions are engaged in 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 fly ash. There is a need to provide cost-effective and safer alternatives to traditional flue gas conditioning with SO{sub 3} and ammonia. During this reporting quarter, installation of a liquid flue gas conditioning system was completed at the American Electric Power Conesville Plant, Unit 3. This plant fires a bituminous coal and has opacity and particulate emissions performance issues related to fly ash re-entrainment. Two cohesivity-specific additive formulations, ADA-44C and ADA-51, will be evaluated. In addition, ammonia conditioning will also be compared.

Kenneth E. Baldrey

2003-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

143

Total...................................................................  

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

15.2 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 Unit.............................. 3.3 2.9 Q Q Q N For Two Housing Units............................. 1.4 Q Q 0.5 0.8 N Central Warm-Air Furnace........................... 2.8 2.4 Q Q Q 0.2 Other Equipment......................................... 0.3 0.2 Q N Q N Wood..............................................................

144

Total..........................................................................  

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

7.1 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 2.8 2.4 2,500 to 2,999..................................................... 10.3 3.7 1.8 2.8 2.1 3,000 to 3,499..................................................... 6.7 2.0 1.4 1.7 1.6 3,500 to 3,999..................................................... 5.2 1.6 0.8 1.5 1.4 4,000 or More.....................................................

145

Total..........................................................................  

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

0.7 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 1.3 2,500 to 2,999..................................................... 10.3 3.0 1.8 0.5 0.7 3,000 to 3,499..................................................... 6.7 2.1 1.2 0.5 0.4 3,500 to 3,999..................................................... 5.2 1.5 0.8 0.3 0.4 4,000 or More.....................................................

146

Total..........................................................................  

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

25.6 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 2.6 2,500 to 2,999..................................................... 10.3 2.2 2.7 3.0 2.4 3,000 to 3,499..................................................... 6.7 1.6 2.1 2.1 0.9 3,500 to 3,999..................................................... 5.2 1.1 1.7 1.5 0.9 4,000 or More.....................................................

147

Total..........................................................................  

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

4.2 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 2,999..................................................... 10.3 2.4 0.9 1.4 3,000 to 3,499..................................................... 6.7 0.9 0.3 0.6 3,500 to 3,999..................................................... 5.2 0.9 0.4 0.5 4,000 or More.....................................................

148

Total.........................................................................  

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

Floorspace (Square Feet) 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 2,500 to 2,999.................................................... 10.3 1.5 2.3 2.7 2.1 1.7 3,000 to 3,499.................................................... 6.7 1.0 2.0 1.7 1.0 1.0 3,500 to 3,999.................................................... 5.2 0.8 1.5 1.5 0.7 0.7 4,000 or More.....................................................

149

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 2,999..................................................... 10.3 2.2 1.7 0.6 3,000 to 3,499..................................................... 6.7 1.6 1.0 0.6 3,500 to 3,999..................................................... 5.2 1.1 0.9 0.3 4,000 or More.....................................................

150

Total..........................................................................  

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

7.1 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 2,500 to 2,999..................................................... 10.3 0.5 0.5 0.4 1.1 3,000 to 3,499..................................................... 6.7 0.3 Q 0.4 0.3 3,500 to 3,999..................................................... 5.2 Q Q Q Q 4,000 or More.....................................................

151

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 0.4 2,139 1,598 Q Q Q Q 2,500 to 2,999........................................ 10.1 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 3,000 or More......................................... 29.6 0.3 Q Q Q Q Q Q Heated Floorspace (Square Feet) None...................................................... 3.6 1.8 1,048 0 Q 827 0 407 Fewer than 500......................................

152

Total...................................................................  

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

2,033 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 1,441 906 595 539 339 2,000 to 2,499................................................. 12.2 2,052 1,733 1,072 765 646 400 2,500 to 2,999................................................. 10.3 2,523 2,010 1,346 939 748 501 3,000 to 3,499................................................. 6.7 3,020 2,185 1,401 1,177 851 546 3,500 to 3,999................................................. 5.2 3,549 2,509 1,508

153

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 1st Quarter 2013  

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

Destination Destination State ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 1st Quarter 2013 Alabama _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table DS-1. Domestic Coal Distribution, by Destination State, 1st Quarter 2013 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 807 158 282 - 1,247 Alabama Railroad 449 71 14 - 534 Alabama River 358 - - - 358 Alabama Truck - 87 267 - 354 Colorado Total 204 - - - 204 Colorado Railroad

154

Total...........................................................  

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

26.7 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 2,500 to 2,999..................................... 10.3 1.2 2.2 2.3 1.7 2.9 0.6 2.0 3,000 to 3,499..................................... 6.7 0.9 1.4 1.5 1.0 1.9 0.4 1.4 3,500 to 3,999..................................... 5.2 0.8 1.2 1.0 0.8 1.5 0.4 1.3 4,000 or More...................................... 13.3 0.9 1.9 2.2 2.0 6.4 0.6 1.9 Heated Floorspace

155

Total...........................................................  

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

14.7 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 999........................................... 23.8 2.7 1.4 2.2 2.8 5.5 5.1 3.0 1.1 1,000 to 1,499..................................... 20.8 2.3 1.4 2.4 2.5 3.5 3.5 3.6 1.6 1,500 to 1,999..................................... 15.4 1.8 1.4 2.2 2.0 2.4 2.4 2.1 1.2 2,000 to 2,499..................................... 12.2 1.4 0.9 1.8 1.4 2.2 2.1 1.6 0.8 2,500 to 2,999..................................... 10.3 1.6 0.9 1.1 1.1 1.5 1.5 1.7 0.8 3,000 to 3,499..................................... 6.7 1.0 0.5 0.8 0.8 1.2 0.8 0.9 0.8 3,500 to 3,999..................................... 5.2 1.1 0.3 0.7 0.7 0.4 0.5 1.0 0.5 4,000 or More...................................... 13.3

156

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 2,499.............................. 12.2 11.9 2,039 1,731 1,055 2,143 1,813 1,152 Q Q Q 2,500 to 2,999.............................. 10.3 10.1 2,519 2,004 1,357 2,492 2,103 1,096 Q Q Q 3,000 or 3,499.............................. 6.7 6.6 3,014 2,175 1,438 3,047 2,079 1,108 N N N 3,500 to 3,999.............................. 5.2 5.1 3,549 2,505 1,518 Q Q Q N N N 4,000 or More...............................

157

Electricity generation from coal with CO2 capture by means of a novel power cycle  

SciTech Connect

Climate modelers have estimated that anthropogenic emissions of CO2 must be reduced substantially from the present rate to stabilize atmospheric concentration. To achieve this, electricity generation from fossil fuels with CO2 capture and direct sequestration may play an important role. If so, it will be worthwhile to consider power cycles that are designed to minimize atmospheric CO2 emissions and deliver CO2 ready for pipeline transport in addition to providing other desirable attributes of environmental performance and efficiency. One such novel approach, named the Matiant cycle, employs self generated CO2 as the working fluid with both Bryton and Rankine cycle turbines. Process modeling studies are being conducted at the NETL to investigate the promise of this cycle. In the work to be reported, synthesis gas is provided to the Matiant cycle by oxygen-blown dry coal entrained gasification. Oxygen for both the gasifier and the Matiant cycle is provided by use of an Ion Transport Membrane (ITM). ITM is a revolutionary approach for producing high purity oxygen from a high temperature pressurized air stream. ASPEC Plus is used as the simulation tool to compute energy balances and system performance. Two flowsheets are analyzed, the difference being the treatment of the low oxygen content raffinate stream from the ITM. Computed thermal efficiencies of the ITM/Matiant cycle are comparable to those of conventional IGCC without carbon capture. Specific carbon emissions per net MWh are many times lower for the new cycle than for other approaches being developed for power generation with CO2 capture, however. As much as 99.5% of the carbon in synthesis gas fed to the Matiant cycle could be recovered and removed in a pipeline as a high pressure liquid. Such high capture efficiencies at large central generating stations could allow use of fossil fuels without capture at smaller installations or by mobile sources, yielding a modest overall rate of CO2 emissions.

Ruether, J.; Le, P.; White, C.

2000-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

158

Co-combustion of refuse derived fuel and coal in a cyclone furnace at the Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, C. P. Crane Station  

SciTech Connect

A co-combustion demonstration burn of coal and fluff refuse-derived fuel (RDF) was conducted by Teledyne National and Baltimore Gas and Electric Company. This utility has two B and W cyclone furnaces capable of generating 400 MW. The facility is under a prohibition order to convert from No. 6 oil to coal; as a result, it was desirable to demonstrate that RDF, which has a low sulfur content, can be burned in combination with coals containing up to 2% sulfur, thus reducing overall sulfur emissions without deleterious effects. Each furnace consists of four cyclones capable of generating 1,360,000 pounds per hour steam. The tertiary air inlet of one of the cyclones was modified with an adapter to permit fluff RDF to be pneumatically blown into the cyclone. At the same time, coal was fed into the cyclone furnace through the normal coal feeding duct, where it entered the burning chamber tangentially and mixed with the RDF during the burning process. Secondary shredded fluff RDF was prepared by the Baltimore County Resource Recovery Facility. The RDF was discharged into a receiving station consisting of a belt conveyor discharging into a lump breaker, which in turn, fed the RDF into a pneumatic line through an air-lock feeder. A total of 2316 tons were burned at an average rate of 5.6 tons per hour. The average heat replacement by RDF for the cyclone was 25%, based on Btu input for a period of forty days. The range of RDF burned was from 3 to 10 tons per hour, or 7 to 63% heat replacement. The average analysis of the RDF (39 samples) for moisture, ash, heat (HHV) and sulfur content were 18.9%, 13.4%, 6296 Btu/lb and 0.26% respectively. RDF used in the test was secondary shredded through 1-1/2 inch grates producing the particle size distribution of from 2 inches to .187 inches. Findings to date after inspection of the boiler and superheater indicate satisfactory results with no deleterious effects from the RDF.

Not Available

1982-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

159

Coal Distribution Database, 2006  

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

2009 Final February 2011 2 Overview of 2009 Coal Distribution Tables Introduction The Coal Distribution Report - Annual 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. This Final 2009 Coal Distribution Report - Annual, supersedes the data contained in the four Quarterly Coal Distribution Reports previously issued for 2009. This report relies on the most current data available from EIA's various monthly, quarterly and annual surveys of the coal industry and electric power generation industry. In addition, the report

160

Illinois Coal Revival Program (Illinois)  

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

The Illinois Coal Revival Program is a grants program providing partial funding to assist with the development of new, coal-fueled electric generation capacity and coal gasification or IGCC units...

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


161

A portfolio approach to energy governance : state management of China's coal and electric power supply industries  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

This study addresses the extent to which China's central state devolved ownership and investment levels in its energy sector to other actors during the modern reform period (1978- 2008). The project focused on China's coal ...

Cunningham, Edward A., IV (Edward Albert)

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

162

Nitrogen oxide removal processes for coal-fueled electric power generation  

SciTech Connect

There is a global trend requiring lower NO{sub x}, emissions from stationary combustion sources. When NO{sub x} is released into the atmosphere it contributes to photochemical smog and acid rain. Elevated ozone concentrations have been implicated in crop and forest damage, and adverse effects on human health. Several alternative technologies have been developed to reduce NO{sub x} emissions resulting from the combustion of coal. The alternatives, which range from combustion modifications, to addition of post-combustion systems, to use of alternate coal combustion technologies, provide different degrees of NO{sub x} reduction efficiency with different associated costs. Only by careful evaluation of site specific factors can the optimum technology for each application be chosen. This chapter will investigate the alternatives for NO{sub x} control for new, large utility steam generators using coal as a fuel.

Van Nieuwenhuizen, Wm.

1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

163

Total plastic strain and electrical resistivity in high purity aluminum cyclically strained at 4.2 K  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

TOTAL PLASTIC STRAIN AND ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY IN HIGH PURITY ALUMINUM CYCLICALLY STRAINED AT 4. 2 K A Thesis by JAMES TERENCE GEHAN Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas ARM University in partial fulfillment... of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE December 1988 Ulajor Subject: 1VIechanical Engineering TOTAL PLASTIC STRAIN AND ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY IN HIGH PURITY ALUMINUM CYCLICALLY STRAINED AT 4. 2 K A Thesis by JAMES TERENCE GEHAN Approved...

Gehan, James Terence

2012-06-07T23:59:59.000Z

164

Appalachian coal awareness conference: promoting Eastern coal  

SciTech Connect

Promoting the development and use of coal, especially coal from the Appalachian region, was the focus of introductory and keynote speeches and a discussion by representatives of the Virginia Coal Council, mining engineers, industry, and the Edison Electric Institute. Governor Dalton's keynote address noted that both producers and consumers attending the conference should work together to promote coal as a solution to the US energy future, and reported the impact that a commitment to coal has had on Virginia's economic growth. Participants in the coal consumers panel discussion raised various economic and regulatory issues.

Not Available

1984-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

165

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

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

Daniel C. Cicero Daniel C. Cicero Hydrogen & Syngas Technology Manager National Energy Technology Laboratory 3610 Collins Ferry Road P.O. Box 880 Morgantown, WV 26507 304-285-4826 daniel.cicero@netl.doe.gov Gary J. stiegel Gasification Technology Manager National Energy Technology Laboratory 626 Cochrans Mill Road P.O. Box 10940 Pittsburgh, PA 15236 412-386-4499 gary.stiegel@netl.doe.gov Elaine Everitt Project Manager National Energy Technology Laboratory 3610 Collins Ferry Road P.O. Box 880 Morgantown, WV 26507 304-285-4491 elaine.everitt@netl.doe.gov 4/2009 Hydrogen & Syngas Technologies Gasification Technologies Development of a HyDrogasification process for co-proDuction of substitute natural gas (sng) anD electric power from western coals Description In the next two decades, electric utilities serving the Western United States must install

166

Electricity Monthly Update - Energy Information Administration  

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

Administration, Form EIA-923, Power Plant Operations Report Coal stockpiles at electric power plants totaled 136 million tons at the end of October, lower than in recent years for...

167

A computer-based total productive maintenance model for electric motors  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

The paper describes the development of a computer-based total productive maintenance (TPM) model to improve electrical motors readiness and uptime while reducing capital overhead. The TPM model includes the consideration of reactive, periodic, and predictive practices. The input data is processed and the generated report details a set of periodic recommendations providing guidelines on recommended actions and their frequency. The details about test results indicating the current condition of the motor as well estimated reactive, periodic, and predictive maintenance cost details are presented. Based on the historic data stored in its database, the model can predict potential problems prior to failure as well as prescribe periodic maintenance actions to maximise motor life. The TPM model will be a useful tool to predict the degradation in motor life due to deterioration in insulation, bearing, rotor bar and stator windings of the motor.

Aruna Muniswamy; Bhaskaran Gopalakrishnan; Subodh Chaudhari; Majid Jaridi; Ed Crowe; Deepak Gupta

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

168

U.S. Coal Supply and Demand: 1997 Review  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Western Western Interior Appalachian Energy Information Administration/ U.S. Coal Supply and Demand: 1997 Review 1 Figure 1. Coal-Producing Regions Source: Energy Information Administration, Coal Industry Annual 1996, DOE/EIA-0584(96) (Washington, DC, November 1997). U.S. Coal Supply and Demand: 1997 Review by B.D. Hong Energy Information Administration U.S. Department of Energy Overview U.S. coal production totaled a record high of 1,088.6 million short tons in 1997, up by 2.3 percent over the 1996 production level, according to preliminary data from the Energy Information Administration (Table 1). The electric power industry (utilities and independent power producers)-the dominant coal consumer-used a record 922.0 million short tons, up by 2.8 percent over 1996. The increase in coal use for

169

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

8 PM)" 8 PM)" "Alaska" "Fuel, Quality",1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-",203,141,148 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-",8698,8520,8278 " Average sulfur Content (percent)","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-",0.33,0.5,0.71

170

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

SciTech Connect

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.

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

2009-03-29T23:59:59.000Z

171

Weekly Coal Production Estimation Methodology  

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

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...

172

Total Energy - Data - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Total Energy Flow, (Quadrillion Btu) Total Energy Flow, (Quadrillion Btu) Total Energy Flow diagram image Footnotes: 1 Includes lease condensate. 2 Natural gas plant liquids. 3 Conventional hydroelectric power, biomass, geothermal, solar/photovoltaic, and wind. 4 Crude oil and petroleum products. Includes imports into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. 5 Natural gas, coal, coal coke, biofuels, and electricity. 6 Adjustments, losses, and unaccounted for. 7 Natural gas only; excludes supplemental gaseous fuels. 8 Petroleum products, including natural gas plant liquids, and crude oil burned as fuel. 9 Includes 0.01 quadrillion Btu of coal coke net exports. 10 Includes 0.13 quadrillion Btu of electricity net imports. 11 Total energy consumption, which is the sum of primary energy consumption, electricity retail sales, and electrical system energy losses.

173

Making Fischer?Tropsch Fuels and Electricity from Coal and Biomass: Performance and Cost Analysis  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

We employ a unified analytical framework to systematically analyze 16 separate process designs, simulating for each detailed mass/energy balances using Aspen Plus software, and calculating their full lifecycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. ... In the plant designs with electricity as a major coproduct, designated as “once-through” (OT) configurations (Figure 1b), the syngas passes only once through the synthesis reactor, and all of the unconverted syngas plus light gases from FTL refining are compressed and supplied to the power island where a gas turbine/steam turbine combined cycle (GTCC) provides the power needed to operate the plant, as well as a substantial amount of export power (up to 37% of the total plant output of fuel (LHV) and power—see Table 3). ... (27) The gasifier is followed by a tar cracking unit, modeled as an ATR with a syngas exit temperature of 882 °C that converts into syngas the heavy hydrocarbons that form at typical biomass gasification temperatures and that would otherwise condense and cause operating difficulties downstream. ...

Guangjian Liu; Eric D. Larson; Robert H. Williams; Thomas G. Kreutz; Xiangbo Guo

2010-12-06T23:59:59.000Z

174

The ICF, Inc. coal and electric utilities model : an analysis and evaluation  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

v.1. The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) is sponsoring a series of evaluations of important energy policy and electric utility industry models by the MIT Energy Model Analysis Program (EMAP). The subject of this ...

Wood, David O.

1981-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

175

ENERGY UTILIZATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES IN THE COAL-ELECTRIC CYCLE  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Fluidized-Bed Steam-Electric Steam-Electric Combined-CycleCombined-Cycle Current (1974) Future Future a Source:steam plants. The combined-cycle versions of advanced

Ferrell, G.C.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

176

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

1 PM)" 1 PM)" "Maine" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-",241,237,262,266,327,319,367,506,619 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-",13138,13124,12854,12823,12784,13171,12979,12779,13011 " Average sulfur Content (percent)","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-",0.71,0.69,0.77,0.78,0.7,0.65,0.72,0.82,0.72

177

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

SciTech Connect

The U.S. Department of Energy and ADA Environmental Solutions are engaged in 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 fly ash. There is a need to provide cost-effective and safer alternatives to traditional flue gas conditioning with SO{sub 3} and ammonia. During this reporting quarter, performance testing of flue gas conditioning was underway at the PacifiCorp Jim Bridger Power Plant. The product tested, ADA-43, was a combination resistivity modifier with cohesivity polymers. This represents the first long-term full-scale testing of this class of products. Modifications to the flue gas conditioning system at Jim Bridger, including development of alternate injection lances, was also undertaken to improve chemical spray distribution and to avoid spray deposition to duct interior surfaces. Also in this quarter, a firm commitment was received for another long-term test of the cohesivity additives. This plant fires a bituminous coal and has opacity and particulate emissions performance issues related to fly ash re-entrainment. Ammonia conditioning is employed here on one unit, but there is interest in liquid cohesivity additives as a safer alternative.

Kenneth E. Baldrey

2002-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

178

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

SciTech Connect

The U.S. Department of Energy and ADA Environmental Solutions are engaged in 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 fly ash. There is a need to provide cost-effective and safer alternatives to traditional flue gas conditioning with SO{sub 3} and ammonia. During this reporting quarter, installation of a flue gas conditioning system was completed at PacifiCorp Jim Bridger Power Plant. Performance testing was underway. Results will be detailed in the next quarterly and subsequent technical summary reports. Also in this quarter, discussions were initiated with a prospective long-term candidate plant. This plant fires a bituminous coal and has opacity performance issues related to fly ash re-entrainment. Ammonia conditioning has been proposed here, but there is interest in liquid additives as a safer alternative.

Kenneth E. Baldrey

2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

179

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (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.

180

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

SciTech Connect

The U.S. Department of Energy and ADA Environmental Solutions are engaged in 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 fly ash. There is a need to provide cost-effective and safer alternatives to traditional flue gas conditioning with SO{sub 3} and ammonia. During this reporting quarter, performance testing of flue gas conditioning was completed at the PacifiCorp Jim Bridger Power Plant. The product tested, ADA-43, was a combination resistivity modifier with cohesivity polymers. The product was effective as a flue gas conditioner. However, ongoing problems with in-duct deposition resulting from the flue gas conditioning were not entirely resolved. Primarily these problems were the result of difficulties encountered with retrofit of an existing spray humidification system. Eventually it proved necessary to replace all of the original injection lances and to manually bypass the PLC-based air/liquid feed control. This yielded substantial improvement in spray atomization and system reliability. However, the plant opted not to install a permanent system. Also in this quarter, preparations continued for a test of the cohesivity additives at the American Electric Power Conesville Plant, Unit 3. This plant fires a bituminous coal and has opacity and particulate emissions performance issues related to fly ash re-entrainment. Ammonia conditioning is employed here on one unit, but there is interest in liquid cohesivity additives as a safer alternative.

Kenneth E. Baldrey

2002-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


181

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

1 PM)" 1 PM)" "Hawaii" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-",303,296,188,175,281,309,358,297,279 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-",11536,11422,11097,10975,10943,10871,10669,10640,10562 " Average sulfur Content (percent)","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-","-",0.32,0.44,0.49,0.55,0.51,0.47,0.66,0.65,0.62

182

The Asia-Pacific coal technology conference  

SciTech Connect

The Asia-Pacific coal technology conference was held in Honolulu, Hawaii, November 14--16, 1989. Topics discussed included the following: Expanded Horizons for US Coal Technology and Coal Trade; Future Coal-Fired Generation and Capacity Requirements of the Philippines; Taiwan Presentation; Korean Presentation; Hong Kong Future Coal Requirements; Indonesian Presentation; Electric Power System in Thailand; Coal in Malaysia -- A Position Paper; The US and Asia: Pacific Partners in Coal and Coal Technology; US Coal Production and Export; US Clean Coal Technologies; Developments in Coal Transport and Utilization; Alternative/Innovative Transport; Electricity Generation in Asia and the Pacific: Power Sector Demand for Coal, Oil and Natural Gas; Role of Clean Coal Technology in the Energy Future of the World; Global Climate Change: A Fossil Energy Perspective; Speaker: The Role of Coal in Meeting Hawaii's Power Needs; and Workshops on Critical Issues Associated with Coal Usage. Individual topics are processed separately for the data bases.

Not Available

1990-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

183

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

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Analysis & Projections 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 institutional users, having higher consumption for the year. The 2010 increase in consumption, over 2009, restored about 40 percent of the previous drop in consumption in 2009 from 2008 levels. The electric power sector (electric utilities and independent power producers), which consumes about 93 percent of all coal

184

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

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.

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

2012-03-11T23:59:59.000Z

185

Spectroscopy of infrared emission characteristics of thermal power plant boiler coal ash deposits  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Thermal radiation characteristics of ash deposits on a coal combustion boiler of an electric power plant are investigated. Normal emittance spectra in 2.5-25 µm wavelength region and total normal emittance are measured on four kinds of ash at 600-1100K ... Keywords: ash deposit, emittance, pulverized coal combustion boiler furnace, spectroscopic measurement, thermal radiation

Aleksandar Saljnikov; Darko Goricanec; Danijela Dobersek; Dorde Kozic

2007-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

186

Influence of coal as an energy source on environmental pollution  

SciTech Connect

This article considers the influence of coal energy on environmental pollution. Coal is undoubtedly part of the greenhouse problem. The main emissions from coal combustion are sulfur dioxide (SO{sub 2}), nitrogen oxides (NOx), particulates, carbon dioxide (CO{sub 2}), and mercury (Hg). Since 1980, despite a 36% increase in electricity generation and more than a 50% increase in coal use, electric utility SO{sub 2} and NOx emissions have declined significantly. Globally, the largest source of anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is CO{sub 2} from the combustion of fossil fuels - around 75% of total GHG emissions covered under the Kyoto Protocol. At the present time, coal is responsible for 30-40% of world CO{sub 2} emission from fossil fuels.

Balat, M. [University of Mahallesi, Trabzon (Turkey)

2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

187

Profitability analysis of non-coking coal preparation for power plants in India  

SciTech Connect

Currently coal-based power plants produce about 70% of the total electricity generated in India, where non-coking (steam) coals are utilized mostly without any preparation. A massive capacity addition of at least 140,000 MWe is required (over the 81,000 MWe of current installed capacity) during the next 15 years to meet growing energy demand. Such a rapid expansion of power generation capacity poses a serious challenge to the environment (at emission controls) and transportation infrastructure in India. Furthermore, the high ash content of indigenous coals and concentration of coal mines in central and northeastern India away from urban centers exacerbate the problem. Thus, coal preparation is envisioned to play a major role in shaping the energy future of India. Under the Indo-US Coal Preparation Program, the US Department of Energy`s Pittsburgh Energy Technology Center (PETC) is coordinating coal preparation activities for the US Agency for International Development. In this context, a detailed analysis of the washability characteristics of non-coking coals was performed using the PETC Coal Preparation Plant Simulator (CPPS) to identify coal preparation strategies for India. Based on these strategies, a profitability analysis of non-coking coal preparation has been conducted considering coal preparation and transportation costs, and coal quality impacts on power plant operations. This paper summarizes the results of this analysis and quantifies the significance of coal preparation for the Indian power sector.

Gollakota, S.V.; Rao, S.N. [Burns and Roe Services Corp., Pittsburgh, PA (United States). Pittsburgh Energy Technology Center; Staats, G.E. [Dept. of Energy, Pittsburgh, PA (United States). Pittsburgh Energy Technology Center

1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

188

Chapter 2 - Coal as Multiple Sources of Energy  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Abstract Coal as multiple sources of energy is mined for its solid and gas-, oil-, and condensate-derived hydrocarbons as well as liquefied for synfuels. More than 50 countries mine coal as feedstock for power plants to generate electricity but only six of these countries monopolize 73% of the total recoverable coalbed gas resources of the world. Worldwide, about 30,000 coal mine explosions are caused by methane and carbon dioxide, and to prevent outbursts and emissions, underground, surface, and abandoned coalmine gases are exploited for industrial and commercial uses. Still, a large volume of unrecovered fugitive coalmine gases is released as global greenhouse gas emissions. An alternative source for foreign oil dependent countries is synfuels from coal liquefaction technology. Also, coal-derived hydrocarbons are a part of the conventional resources that is, gas, oil, and condensate sourced from coal but expelled into adjoining reservoirs, are attractive alternative energy sources.

Romeo M. Flores

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

189

U.S. Coal Supply and Demand: 2003 Review  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

3 Review 3 Review 1 U.S. Coal Supply and Demand: 2003 Review by Fred Freme U.S. Energy Information Administration Overview U.S. coal production fell for the second year in a row in 2003, declining by 24.8 million short tons to end the year at 1,069.5 million short tons according to preliminary data from the Energy Information Administration (Table 1), down 2.3 percent from the 2002 level of 1,094.3 million short tons. (Note: All percentage change calculations are done at the short ton level.) Total U.S. coal consumption rose in 2003, with all coal-consuming sectors increasing or remaining stable for the year. Coal consumption in the electric power sector increased by 2.4 percent. However, there were only slight gains in consumption by the other sectors. U.S. coal exports rose in 2003 for the first time in

190

Table A57. Capability to Switch from Coal to Alternative Energy Sources by  

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

7. Capability to Switch from Coal to Alternative Energy Sources by" 7. Capability to Switch from Coal to Alternative Energy Sources by" " Industry Group, Selected Industries, and Selected Characteristics, 1991 " " (Estimates in Thousand Short Tons)" " "," "," ", " "," "," Coal",,," Alternative Types of Energy(b)" " "," ","-","-","-------------","-","-","-","-","-","-","RSE" ,,"Total"," ","Not","Electricity","Natural","Distillate","Residual",,,"Row" ,,"Consumed(c)","Switchable","Switchable","Receipts(d)","Gas","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil","LPG","Other","Factors"

191

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

6 PM)" 6 PM)" "South Dakota" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",115,113,113,110,108,103,94,92,93,94,99,103,130,134,139,142,151,156,174,176,195 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",6096,6025,6034,6057,6049,6972,9034,8687,8728,8630,8464,8540,8550,8560,8523,8711,8534,8530,8391,8386,8327 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",0.9,0.87,0.92,0.9,0.91,0.87,0.52,0.63,0.72,0.6,0.31,0.33,0.37,0.33,0.34,0.31,0.32,0.3,0.31,0.31,0.33 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",565,488,"-",467,"-","-",598,"-","-","-","-","-","-",804,822,1245,1546,"-",1985,1248,1808

192

Techno-Economic Analysis of Coal-Based Hydrogen and Electricity Cogeneration Processes with CO2 Capture  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

The baseline coal gasification process and the novel membrane and syngas chemical-looping processes are evaluated. ... burner ...

Fanxing Li; Liang Zeng; Liang-Shih Fan

2010-07-29T23:59:59.000Z

193

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

SciTech Connect

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.

El-Bassioni, A.A.

1980-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

194

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

SciTech Connect

The U.S. Department of Energy and ADA Environmental Solutions are engaged in 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 fly ash. There is a need to provide cost-effective and safer alternatives to traditional flue gas conditioning with SO{sub 3} and ammonia. During this reporting quarter, two cohesivity-specific additive formulations, ADA-44C and ADA-51, were evaluated in a full-scale trial at the American Electric Power Conesville plant. Ammonia conditioning was also evaluated for comparison. ADA-51 and ammonia conditioning significantly reduced rapping and non-rapped particulate re-entrainment based on stack opacity monitor data. Based on the successful tests to date, ADA-51 will be evaluated in a long-term test.

Kenneth E. Baldrey

2003-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

195

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

SciTech Connect

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.

Sun, Xiaolei; Rink, Nancy

2011-04-30T23:59:59.000Z

196

"Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Source(b)","Electricity(c)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(d)","Natural Gas(e)","NGL(f)","Coal","and Breeze","Other(g)"  

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

3.4 Relative Standard Errors for Table 3.4;" 3.4 Relative Standard Errors for Table 3.4;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," ",," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",," " " "," ","Any" "NAICS"," ","Energy","Net","Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and",,"Coke"," " "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Source(b)","Electricity(c)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(d)","Natural Gas(e)","NGL(f)","Coal","and Breeze","Other(g)" ,,"Total United States"

197

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 4th Quarter 2012  

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

Origin Origin State ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 4th Quarter 2012 Alabama ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table OS-1. Domestic Coal Distribution, by Origin State, 4th Quarter 2012 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 1,226 162 274 - 1,662 Alabama Railroad 803 17 22 - 842 Alabama River 384 - - - 384 Alabama Truck 39 144 252 - 436 Georgia Total s - - - s Georgia Truck s - - - s Indiana Total

198

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 3rd Quarter 2013  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Origin Origin State ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 3rd Quarter 2013 Alabama ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table OS-1. Domestic Coal Distribution, by Origin State, 3rd Quarter 2013 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 1,198 151 353 - 1,702 Alabama Railroad 796 26 20 - 842 Alabama River 307 - 3 - 310 Alabama Truck 96 125 330 - 551 Georgia Total - - 3 - 3 Georgia Truck - - 3 - 3 Indiana Total

199

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Distribution Report 2011  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Origin Origin State ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Distribution Report 2011 Alabama ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table OS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by origin State, 2011 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 6,982 679 1,278 - 8,939 Alabama Railroad 4,400 20 286 - 4,706 Alabama River 1,885 - - - 1,885 Alabama Truck 696 659 992 - 2,347 Georgia Total s - 5 - 5 Georgia Truck s - 5 - 5 Indiana Total - 221 -

200

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 2nd Quarter 2013  

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

Origin Origin State ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 2nd Quarter 2013 Alabama ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table OS-1. Domestic Coal Distribution, by Origin State, 2nd Quarter 2013 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 1,066 210 301 - 1,577 Alabama Railroad 495 116 26 - 638 Alabama River 512 - 2 - 513 Alabama Truck 59 94 273 - 426 Georgia Total - - 2 - 2 Georgia Truck - - 2 - 2 Indiana Total

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


201

International Energy Outlook - Coal  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Coal Coal International Energy Outlook 2004 Coal Although coal use is expected to be displaced by natural gas in some parts of the world, only a slight drop in its share of total energy consumption is projected by 2025. Coal continues to dominate fuel markets in developing Asia. Figure 52. World Coal Consumption, 1970-2025. Need help, call the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Figure Data Figure 53. Coal Share of World Energy Consumption by Sector, 2001 and 2025. Need help, call the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Figure Data Figure 54. Coal Share of Regional Energy Consumption, 1970-2025. Need help, call the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Figure Data World coal consumption has been in a period of generally slow growth since

202

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

6 PM)" 6 PM)" "Alabama" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",184,181,173,176,167,156,154,154,157,148,141,141,142,147,152,179,211,206,271,268,282 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",12094,12107,12061,12092,12088,11861,11794,11584,11519,10963,10951,10990,10828,10977,10878,10950,10879,10644,10659,10507,10633 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",1.51,1.4,1.43,1.33,1.3,1.2,1.24,1.13,1.13,1.02,0.91,0.92,0.94,0.95,0.84,0.97,0.94,0.88,0.89,0.92,0.99 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",507,512,460,425,402,376,446,405,288,326,652,552,509,560,754,1148,1327,1107,1672,1249,1589 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",130098,137126,137164,137671,137864,138276,139383,139645,139510,139140,137395,144286,140588,141395,142757,141012,140469,143452,140050,137243,137733

203

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

1 PM)" 1 PM)" "Nebraska" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",75,75,75,75,77,75,72,59,59,55,56,57,58,60,66,71,80,88,90,133,142 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",8561,8542,8553,8561,8571,8594,8599,8595,8584,8498,8632,8585,8654,8673,8574,8570,8514,8511,8496,8544,8547 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",0.35,0.35,0.37,0.35,0.35,0.33,0.34,0.32,0.27,0.3,0.3,0.31,0.3,0.29,0.32,0.31,0.3,0.31,0.31,0.31,0.28 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",703,457,465,248,402,224,511,450,333,432,649,656,555,457,712,1343,1534,1669,1772,1056,1711 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",138043,137600,137586,107945,137640,103081,137621,137567,132550,137671,137750,138571,138043,138040,136976,138119,138124,138007,139452,140500,137895

204

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

8 PM)" 8 PM)" "Louisiana" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",170,165,153,158,154,155,151,148,143,140,132,131,127,134,138,151,166,185,210,204,216 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",8194,8223,8122,8092,8136,8110,8171,8102,8097,8149,7933,8030,8095,8023,8146,8136,8205,8246,8183,8201,8114 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",0.49,0.49,0.5,0.52,0.51,0.58,0.57,0.64,0.56,0.58,0.63,0.74,0.52,0.5,0.51,0.54,0.49,0.39,0.41,0.39,0.39 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",371,413,388,223,269,348,327,302,222,204,459,519,63,247,286,427,300,196,425,195,296 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",144962,143214,141950,152148,147869,141543,147221,153519,153400,154469,149843,145238,140393,145807,147379,147057,142607,139310,140002,136969,136986

205

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

7 PM)" 7 PM)" "North Carolina" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",178,178,173,170,168,163,148,143,144,144,143,159,176,178,200,240,269,274,326,359,352 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",12544,12506,12456,12465,12416,12461,12422,12368,12398,12450,12448,12380,12422,12423,12345,12309,12268,12374,12243,12333,12270 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",0.96,0.94,0.92,0.96,0.95,0.86,0.89,0.9,0.89,0.85,0.82,0.86,0.85,0.87,0.86,0.88,0.91,1.01,1.01,1.04,1.01 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",512,473,441,405,384,382,468,428,311,398,616,584,467,623,715,997,1356,1042,1513,1014,1433 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",138229,138317,138450,138610,138238,138148,138298,138264,138167,138169,138360,145952,144098,140848,141338,142869,139114,146617,146483,146243,144814

206

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

9 PM)" 9 PM)" "Wisconsin" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",136,136,133,121,121,114,106,109,107,102,102,105,112,112,118,129,150,170,198,206,218 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",9642,9643,9725,9490,9565,9351,9222,9375,9299,9115,9165,9500,9089,9006,9030,9088,8975,8967,9025,8920,8964 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",0.81,0.81,0.71,0.49,0.51,0.46,0.46,0.5,0.46,0.39,0.35,0.37,0.41,0.38,0.39,0.38,0.36,0.36,0.37,0.38,0.4 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",526,312,310,153,221,177,193,180,83,81,88,146,111,108,109,150,203,204,356,222,240 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",139200,113495,110433,92736,103860,95883,91924,90760,75079,73869,74440,139048,133712,134343,135093,135238,134333,134845,136126,134033,131245

207

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

8 PM)" 8 PM)" "Indiana" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",136,134,131,127,127,125,119,116,112,111,108,114,117,120,121,140,152,161,193,202,214 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",10562,10569,10628,10539,10535,10338,10357,10461,10517,10620,10604,10540,10593,10550,10601,10756,10638,10588,10486,10470,10498 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",2.06,1.98,1.88,1.78,1.76,1.57,1.59,1.61,1.63,1.58,1.51,1.43,1.48,1.5,1.53,1.72,1.61,1.74,1.71,1.73,1.76 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",191,297,218,365,390,298,198,150,184,170,245,220,208,311,330,803,1394,1337,2002,1002,1571 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",89740,105529,96317,126976,137426,115914,90057,81174,100264,90095,90071,149762,142836,138660,135267,139405,139621,140607,139538,139436,139390

208

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

1 PM)" 1 PM)" "Texas" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",145,150,149,144,135,134,129,126,124,120,123,133,126,125,131,129,139,149,162,168,184 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",7291,7225,7234,7284,7346,7346,7440,7423,7509,7506,7548,7635,7677,7605,7641,7611,7665,7681,7759,7787,7705 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",0.74,0.75,0.76,0.75,0.73,0.77,0.71,0.75,0.71,0.65,0.65,0.67,0.68,0.78,0.77,0.74,0.67,0.6,0.56,0.61,0.61 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",517,471,399,179,211,283,473,342,113,96,617,556,200,423,171,248,267,240,312,213,423 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",141838,139760,140129,112764,120681,117555,138383,114810,99067,80493,135419,141905,140340,139979,137700,137955,137876,136814,136638,136569,135686

209

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

6 PM)" 6 PM)" "Missouri" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",135,134,134,124,110,98,95,93,92,93,92,96,90,92,93,101,111,133,151,153,159 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",10400,10298,10321,9860,9718,9216,9063,8994,8938,8948,8913,8940,8875,8865,8838,8854,8808,8825,8837,8802,8801 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",2.01,1.84,1.8,1.02,1.03,0.57,0.58,0.47,0.37,0.34,0.3,0.36,0.36,0.37,0.38,0.37,0.36,0.38,0.38,0.38,0.36 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",280,230,210,113,101,110,183,292,118,88,263,134,118,348,279,1236,1457,1713,1829,1022,1607 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",107890,131371,136233,83795,79640,79069,95638,123143,89640,76829,94214,136667,136381,137769,139288,137693,137188,137476,137340,137948,137655

210

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

0 PM)" 0 PM)" "Iowa" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",112,110,110,101,99,99,94,94,88,82,82,81,89,89,93,98,105,108,127,134,142 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",8892,8890,8867,8660,8783,8678,8658,8662,8636,8581,8626,9000,8648,8705,8665,8668,8612,8619,8605,8657,8585 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",0.7,0.67,0.67,0.52,0.57,0.49,0.45,0.45,0.44,0.4,0.35,0.37,0.39,0.43,0.44,0.42,0.44,0.41,0.41,0.42,0.37 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",518,355,158,127,144,96,117,141,141,399,643,617,579,635,459,1077,474,603,1023,1038,878 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",137943,123305,84117,83079,86795,77324,78400,83517,88176,139340,138731,139524,139667,139171,137162,139200,134952,135219,133214,136726,133860

211

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

50 PM)" 50 PM)" "Georgia" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",179,180,180,178,169,167,158,159,155,155,154,166,168,172,180,218,240,261,307,362,390 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",11893,11936,12039,12148,11774,11576,11581,11755,11750,11740,11559,11730,11686,11668,11024,11058,10994,10983,10947,10933,10891 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",1.63,1.63,1.68,1.37,1.05,0.81,0.83,0.84,0.85,0.8,0.76,0.81,0.79,0.82,0.78,0.81,0.82,0.78,0.78,0.76,0.78 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",486,474,434,347,396,378,431,421,328,390,691,668,549,268,289,433,356,537,838,552,667 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",139812,138000,140514,142390,138483,139631,140676,140471,138495,138495,138498,145714,138348,134648,136533,141855,135864,141493,138081,138371,137129

212

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

0 PM)" 0 PM)" "Arizona" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",143,141,137,135,137,139,144,142,133,133,124,125,126,127,130,141,144,159,174,181,180 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",10482,10356,10303,10271,10281,10274,10232,10159,10186,10257,10229,10145,10232,10081,10211,10088,10011,9946,9828,9712,9685 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",0.49,0.51,0.51,0.49,0.51,0.53,0.55,0.54,0.55,0.55,0.56,0.58,0.6,0.64,0.57,0.57,0.57,0.57,0.59,0.65,0.66 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",446,499,467,511,428,510,539,532,429,480,860,706,654,767,859,1403,1625,1671,2102,1300,1807 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",142831,139662,140379,140533,142148,139933,142293,140336,138850,138690,138607,143333,139567,139550,133595,140912,139114,140914,138424,135340,135993

213

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

0 PM)" 0 PM)" "Pennsylvania" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",152,155,148,144,143,136,138,136,135,130,115,121,125,122,137,159,172,175,210,230,241 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",12241,12302,12399,12443,12368,12315,12321,12279,12323,12552,12670,11240,12111,11733,11615,11741,11459,11400,11079,10940,11063 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",2.16,2.14,2.12,2.07,2.11,2.12,2.09,2.13,2.19,2.15,2.26,2.12,1.95,1.95,2,1.94,2.09,2.08,2.09,2.21,2.39 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",322,247,236,236,249,224,289,225,184,186,292,373,464,467,451,746,762,916,1181,762,1484 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",140462,137574,132824,141621,141245,128574,132045,126590,121550,112919,125114,146429,145976,144660,144343,146174,139310,139290,138850,138731,139112

214

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

47 PM)" 47 PM)" "Florida" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",185,186,182,177,178,179,174,173,165,159,157,172,176,176,192,231,256,256,297,339,347 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",12364,12351,12370,12332,12293,12296,12193,12122,12144,12299,12330,12105,12263,12281,12249,12227,12142,12116,11929,11957,12024 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",1.73,1.73,1.68,1.57,1.6,1.47,1.55,1.59,1.55,1.53,1.59,1.54,1.55,1.44,1.44,1.38,1.37,1.35,1.38,1.45,1.67 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",302,225,242,220,226,247,278,254,193,236,409,339,324,389,392,581,568,712,1003,727,856 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",151010,151217,151471,151660,151248,150633,148417,143486,143812,147529,147162,150000,149657,148431,148183,147510,146124,147276,146433,144745,143138

215

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

1 PM)" 1 PM)" "Virginia" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",155,152,147,147,145,145,142,139,138,134,133,159,169,167,195,233,245,249,277,308,328 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",12714,12768,12830,12817,12778,12743,12597,12554,12603,12702,12814,12730,12845,12826,12713,12650,12592,12531,12492,12501,12476 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",0.96,1,1.03,1,0.99,1.03,0.99,1.01,0.97,1.3,0.98,1.02,1.16,0.97,0.94,1,1.04,0.94,0.92,1,1.02 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",384,223,247,213,216,251,290,282,204,230,424,357,380,499,497,761,875,922,1380,978,1315 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",146360,146626,148881,150319,149743,146179,146988,148219,150157,150660,151002,148810,149779,149367,150757,149019,150090,148238,147390,145531,145626

216

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

1 PM)" 1 PM)" "Minnesota" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",125,126,119,113,114,114,107,109,107,110,111,102,106,108,107,113,122,150,169,164,174 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",8788,8802,8838,8844,8821,8828,8914,8895,8883,8883,8929,8930,8860,8895,8914,8909,8911,8853,8902,8878,8812 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",0.51,0.48,0.45,0.44,0.46,0.47,0.45,0.45,0.44,0.44,0.43,0.47,0.45,0.46,0.44,0.44,0.44,0.45,0.46,0.46,0.43 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",93,88,83,80,85,85,90,78,74,76,54,65,60,85,110,157,152,444,941,1210,1568 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",73719,72052,72467,71631,73031,73310,74050,72267,72781,71055,72531,132857,131267,133093,134967,133848,134976,132929,136357,139955,140595

217

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

4 PM)" 4 PM)" "Washington" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",158,155,137,136,136,144,157,163,149,156,169,146,140,143,133,154,173,217,216,227 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",8135,8014,8189,8125,8400,8267,7936,8043,8215,8224,8310,8014,8052,8151,8131,8532,9211,8366,8403,8391 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",0.7,0.66,0.66,0.71,0.65,0.69,0.71,0.62,0.59,0.75,0.73,1.01,1,0.93,0.75,0.69,0.34,0.32,0.33,0.34 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",511,573,466,469,472,485,509,499,405,479,664,241,325,412,562,1629,663,1229,965,1383 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",140948,140176,139924,139936,139933,139952,139931,139943,139907,140000,140000,137098,145438,139331,137340,142807,138598,139040,139905,130674

218

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

7 PM)" 7 PM)" "West Virginia" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",147,152,147,142,139,127,125,124,122,118,120,125,121,125,135,153,167,173,222,254,239 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",12452,12505,12524,12489,12468,12418,12378,12398,12305,12361,12281,12085,12103,12166,12061,11976,11967,12046,11897,11959,12034 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",1.89,1.92,2.05,1.94,1.87,1.98,1.93,1.95,1.86,1.84,1.42,1.19,1.71,1.69,1.75,1.78,1.79,2.04,2,2.13,2.4 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",572,537,484,462,442,439,529,464,371,463,721,666,543,725,785,959,901,1063,2146,1434,1738 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",139293,139090,139486,139229,139324,138988,138655,138883,139186,139100,139324,137143,122840,140526,140943,141667,143471,143817,135557,137855,138536

219

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

32 PM)" 32 PM)" "Wyoming" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",84,83,76,80,80,82,82,81,79,76,78,77,79,82,87,95,100,105,117,120,132 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",8811,8756,8840,8779,8766,8738,8716,8787,8794,8784,8803,8880,8759,8826,8826,8814,8708,8684,8769,8791,8806 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",0.54,0.51,0.52,0.51,0.52,0.5,0.52,0.54,0.53,0.51,0.5,0.48,0.49,0.49,0.48,0.49,0.51,0.49,0.51,0.51,0.53 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",527,494,479,473,444,445,546,517,406,476,724,707,553,714,950,1317,1628,1772,2146,1369,1736 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",138848,139167,139150,139060,138986,139281,139171,138821,139138,139102,139219,146905,139448,139593,139338,139638,139333,139448,139926,139824,139238

220

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

3 PM)" 3 PM)" "Delaware" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",181,178,173,169,162,162,159,157,156,159,152,217,178,190,220,281,308,286,352,334,355 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",13035,13053,13064,13027,12954,13085,13020,13062,12962,12935,12995,11495,12858,12803,12530,12222,12401,12524,12452,12567,12550 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",0.97,0.96,1.03,0.94,0.92,1,1.01,0.99,0.98,0.97,1.01,0.67,0.91,0.9,0.83,0.67,0.74,0.73,0.74,0.8,0.77 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",278,238,242,230,259,261,321,278,215,244,446,380,406,576,611,863,1351,1304,1811,1120,1624 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",151269,151483,150760,151286,149733,152012,151900,151464,150957,150998,150486,148095,148964,147895,146312,147248,139117,144114,143781,137938,136498

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


221

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

9 PM)" 9 PM)" "New Jersey" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",180,178,173,177,182,178,175,176,159,145,139,227,187,180,205,218,273,289,333,401,416 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",13429,13402,13465,13397,13341,13282,12993,13084,13113,13150,13153,13000,13137,13056,12868,12644,12770,11890,12073,11491,11758 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",1.16,1.27,1.29,1.29,1.29,1.21,1.36,1.24,1.13,1.14,1.13,1.57,1.23,1.11,1.58,1.14,1.17,0.88,1.03,0.9,1.05 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",360,302,303,268,290,286,359,299,242,288,484,454,468,604,602,985,970,1147,1547,1011,1495 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",148298,148469,148864,149283,148376,149310,147321,148488,148655,149295,149557,141667,143162,139250,135095,134802,141505,136271,138217,136595,139952

222

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

4 PM)" 4 PM)" "New York" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",161,159,149,150,145,141,143,142,143,145,149,142,155,159,176,213,240,241,257,273,305 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",12846,12923,12978,12914,12959,13051,13013,13105,13052,13034,13117,13025,13019,12545,12063,11832,11584,11382,11248,11187,10982 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",1.84,1.77,1.65,1.55,1.71,1.79,1.8,1.8,1.75,1.67,1.12,1.97,1.78,1.8,1.66,1.4,1.36,1.37,1.43,1.29,1.31 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",360,272,264,257,251,263,319,284,203,237,431,350,366,493,486,731,800,799,1390,811,1144 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",150036,150812,150898,151012,149567,148624,149671,150326,150740,150569,151162,149286,149371,149998,149024,148914,150136,151036,148410,146824,144319

223

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

2 PM)" 2 PM)" "New Mexico" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",132,138,132,137,141,142,143,134,131,133,138,147,153,143,148,151,156,179,199,190,206 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",9117,9092,9013,8991,9043,9033,9116,9069,9082,9132,9206,9250,9444,9164,9225,9173,9282,9198,9173,9226,8963 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",0.79,0.8,0.81,0.81,0.82,0.8,0.8,0.81,0.8,0.8,0.8,0.72,0.73,0.73,0.72,0.79,0.76,0.77,0.75,0.77,0.75 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",525,535,516,506,465,490,587,575,439,502,758,631,614,754,956,1293,1695,1879,2353,1526,1942 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",138098,136000,135676,136000,136000,136000,136000,136000,136000,136000,136000,139524,136000,136048,136007,136252,136024,136026,134186,134086,134219

224

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

6 PM)" 6 PM)" "Kentucky" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",119,118,116,117,116,111,106,105,106,106,102,110,119,123,137,152,170,175,214,217,226 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",11558,11552,11620,11697,11683,11625,11536,11571,11579,11582,11604,11425,11464,11498,11550,11620,11568,11661,11534,11472,11460 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",2.59,2.53,2.44,2.39,2.34,2.42,2.47,2.5,2.37,2.27,2.29,2.15,2.16,2.12,2.09,2.21,2.23,2.22,2.33,2.54,2.58 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",575,505,479,204,153,318,310,361,278,275,559,567,465,227,127,117,127,127,203,168,217 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",138943,138998,138993,90574,87876,118024,105736,116976,115748,110888,125371,139286,137640,132664,131967,132710,132305,134155,134110,134810,135140

225

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

4 PM)" 4 PM)" "United States" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",145,145,141,139,136,132,129,127,125,122,120,123,125,128,136,154,169,177,207,221,227 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",10465,10378,10395,10315,10338,10248,10263,10275,10241,10163,10115,10200,10168,10137,10074,10107,10063,10028,9947,9902,9843 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",1.35,1.3,1.29,1.18,1.17,1.08,1.1,1.11,1.06,1.01,0.93,0.89,0.94,0.97,0.97,0.98,0.97,0.96,0.97,1.01,1.04 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",335,253,251,237,242,257,303,273,202,236,418,369,334,433,429,644,623,717,1087,702,954 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",149536,150093,150293,149983,149324,149371,149367,149838,149736,149407,149857,147857,147902,147086,147286,146481,143883,144545,142205,141321,140598

226

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

3 PM)" 3 PM)" "Kansas" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",124,123,118,102,102,102,99,102,98,95,98,105,98,101,103,112,119,123,141,143,151 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",8948,8998,8900,8654,8708,8730,8827,8766,8696,8628,8672,8700,8571,8619,8626,8569,8607,8582,8545,8526,8569 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",0.58,0.59,0.49,0.43,0.49,0.43,0.49,0.48,0.45,0.43,0.42,0.43,0.44,0.48,0.44,0.44,0.45,0.41,0.39,0.4,0.38 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",540,432,438,402,397,212,412,282,266,319,400,336,273,362,407,556,485,340,711,428,569 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",138176,138367,139117,138633,138890,104067,141940,154117,144688,147607,154871,154286,157186,156948,156855,155174,144821,137017,136552,137645,137600

227

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

5 PM)" 5 PM)" "Illinois" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",175,171,174,170,161,163,163,155,156,144,115,119,119,116,115,119,126,134,158,165,170 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",10789,10721,10666,10362,10181,9970,9878,9781,9700,9560,9690,9555,9253,9176,9120,9015,8937,8962,8892,8876,8896 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",2.07,2,1.91,1.63,1.46,1.14,1.16,1.17,1.1,1.03,1.11,1.1,0.7,0.66,0.65,0.62,0.53,0.52,0.5,0.48,0.5 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",395,309,304,297,280,232,298,309,234,291,324,579,524,540,464,1286,1465,1744,2432,1505,1765 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",148831,149029,149843,148693,148945,124129,128245,126779,130829,130367,96874,153333,140345,147876,143595,137405,141102,137319,137310,137181,137507

228

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

4 PM)" 4 PM)" "Mississippi" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",165,167,160,164,157,153,151,155,154,155,152,163,159,154,169,210,231,271,301,301,289 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",12543,12555,12507,12338,11312,11221,11023,10486,10569,11062,11549,11670,9723,9235,9087,8993,8961,9290,9276,8541,8519 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",1.64,1.56,1.69,1.41,1.02,1.04,0.93,0.68,0.75,0.74,0.85,0.7,0.63,0.59,0.57,0.57,0.6,0.59,0.55,0.53,0.69 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",243,216,200,176,164,374,224,269,199,154,333,377,428,412,465,651,830,763,1042,1193,1076 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",151229,151257,152595,153436,152705,139507,154381,156867,157169,157967,155569,154524,145986,155336,155638,155064,155619,154738,149826,142902,151357

229

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

6 PM)" 6 PM)" "New Hampshire" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",178,174,169,161,152,159,161,163,161,152,148,167,180,170,202,244,256,290,353,366,380 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",13303,13247,13260,13179,13032,13111,13146,13054,13133,13133,13114,13050,13245,13262,13199,13087,13196,13109,12886,12849,12922 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",1.81,1.43,1.61,1.62,1.52,1.38,1.56,1.42,1.4,1.35,1.34,1.34,1.17,1.09,1.16,1.32,1.29,1.51,1.2,1.44,1.44 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",227,180,186,184,200,233,254,264,187,214,345,337,371,374,406,595,782,914,1069,717,1345 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",154329,156712,156757,154129,153464,154402,154517,152621,151850,153221,153740,151190,152400,152724,152883,154024,155071,152450,152379,151240,146800

230

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

9 PM)" 9 PM)" "Montana" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",67,67,71,69,69,67,71,68,67,73,92,95,61,62,64,71,85,93,102,107,111 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",8564,8522,8576,8496,8500,8520,8439,8426,8433,8435,6618,8380,8482,8515,8504,8447,8428,8426,8347,8409,8375 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",0.63,0.65,0.66,0.65,0.66,0.68,0.68,0.72,0.72,0.73,0.52,0.53,0.64,0.62,0.63,0.66,0.66,0.61,0.69,0.67,0.69 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",543,472,509,526,463,491,565,529,466,491,"-","-",219,746,948,1274,173,90,135,83,73 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",141000,141000,141000,141000,141000,141000,141000,141000,141000,140100,"-","-",137148,136574,137064,126095,130833,137343,136819,139021,138571

231

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

4 PM)" 4 PM)" "Nevada" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",149,141,146,147,143,131,137,139,130,129,126,126,134,142,136,154,173,188,220,222,244 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",11122,11121,11051,11012,11291,11075,11140,11169,11199,11257,11211,11210,11284,11120,11118,11176,11495,11151,10664,10505,10626 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",0.53,0.5,0.49,0.49,0.49,0.48,0.49,0.5,0.47,0.46,0.47,0.51,0.53,0.5,0.54,0.53,0.54,0.46,0.44,0.42,0.47 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",314,393,331,358,329,337,552,508,380,453,722,585,600,601,473,990,1270,"-",2360,1382,1751 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",148233,147538,147779,148545,148195,146667,136898,138760,138845,139110,139110,151667,139110,138548,149914,141760,140610,"-",138938,138386,138452

232

Table 6. Electric Power Delivered Fuel Prices and Quality for Coal, Petroleum, N  

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

2 PM)" 2 PM)" "Ohio" "Fuel, Quality",1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 "Coal (cents per million Btu)",152,148,144,141,144,142,134,132,136,136,146,131,123,121,133,154,170,171,205,239,224 " Average heat value (Btu per pound)",11882,11945,11983,12049,12052,12122,12056,11891,11913,11918,11823,11550,12143,12160,12098,12097,11525,11495,11444,11768,11563 " Average sulfur Content (percent)",2.44,2.63,2.57,2.39,2.34,1.89,2.08,2.01,2.01,1.98,1.92,2.07,1.98,2.14,2.25,2.16,1.68,1.7,1.96,2.2,2.28 "Petroleum (cents per million Btu)1",459,381,233,187,197,349,347,426,202,348,635,601,532,731,777,1291,1224,1619,591,488,760 " Average heat value (Btu per gallon)",142917,131114,93026,81274,82224,128733,105121,135936,105736,128624,133586,142143,125426,137810,137986,138193,138150,138026,134567,136305,136052

233

Improvements in Test Protocols for Electric Vehicles to Determine Range and Total Energy Consumption  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

As electric vehicles have entered the market fairly recently, ... tested the same way as the ICE-driven cars with the exception that determining range is ... However, the current procedures address mainly primary...

Juhani Laurikko; Jukka Nuottimäki…

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

234

MS_Coal_Studyguide.indd  

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

COAL-OUR MOST ABUNDANT FUEL COAL-OUR MOST ABUNDANT FUEL America has more coal than any other fossil fuel resource. Th e United States also has more coal reserves than any other single country in the world. In fact, 1/4 of all the known coal in the world is in the United States. Th e United States has more energy in coal that can be mined than the rest of the world has in oil that can be pumped from the ground. Currently, coal is mined in 25 of the 50 states. Coal is used primarily in the United States to generate electricity. In fact, it is burned in power plants to produce nearly half of the electricity we use. A stove uses about half a ton of coal a year. A water heater uses about two tons of coal a year. And a refrigerator, that's another half-ton a year. Even though you

235

Electricity Monthly Update  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Highlights: August 2011 Highlights: August 2011 Extreme heat in Texas, New Mexico, Colorado and Arizona drove significant increases in the retail sales of electricity in the Southwest. Wind generation increased in much of the United States, except the middle of the country where total generation declined. Bituminous coal stocks dropped 14% from August 2010. Key indicators Same Month 2010 Year to date Total Net Generation -1% 11% Residential Retail Price -6% 11% Cooling Degree-Days -3% 2% Natural Gas Price, Henry Hub -6% -9% Bituminous Coal Stocks -14% -14% Subbituminous Coal Stocks -10% -17% Heat wave drives record demand and wholesale prices in Texas A prolonged August heat wave in Texas stressed available generating capacity and produced very high wholesale prices in the Electric

236

Discharge produces hydrocarbons from coal  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Discharge produces hydrocarbons from coal ... Studies of the reactions of coal in electric discharges by two chemists at the U.S. Bureau of Mines' Pittsburgh Coal Research Center may lead to improved ways of producing acetylene and other useful chemicals from coal. ... Other workers have produced high yields of acetylene from coal by extremely rapid pyrolysis using energy sources such as plasma jets, laser beams, arc-image reactors, and flash heaters. ...

1968-01-22T23:59:59.000Z

237

China's Coal: Demand, Constraints, and Externalities  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

s 2006 total primary energy consumption, compared to 24Coal Dependence of Primary Energy Consumption, 2007coal/primary energy consumption Source: BP Statistical

Aden, Nathaniel

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

238

Electricity Monthly Update  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Highlights: October 2011 Highlights: October 2011 Mixed temperatures led to flat retail sales of electricity during October 2011. Coal-fired generation decreased or was flat across the United States except for the Central region when compared to October 2010. October's electric system load remained in the mid-to-low section of the annual range in many electric systems across the United States. Key Indicators Oct. 2011 % Change from Oct. 2010 Total Net Generation (Thousand MWh) 309,400 0.5% Residential Retail Price (cents/kWh) 12.12 2.2% Retail Sales (Thousand MWh) 285,156 -0.9% Heating Degree-Days 259 8.8% Natural Gas Price, Henry Hub ($/MMBtu) 3.68 4.0% Coal Stocks (Thousand Tons) 156,880 -10.7% Coal Consumption (Thousand Tons) 69,627 -1.8% Natural Gas Consumption (Mcf) 603,724 1.6%

239

STEO November 2012 - coal supplies  

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

Despite drop in domestic coal production, U.S. coal exports to reach Despite drop in domestic coal production, U.S. coal exports to reach record high in 2012. While U.S. coal production is down 7 percent this year due in part to utilities switching to low-priced natural gas to generate electricity, American coal is still finding plenty of buyers in overseas markets. U.S. coal exports are expected to hit a record 125 million tons in 2012, the U.S. Energy Information Administration says in its new monthly short-term energy outlook. 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. However, U.S. coal exports next year are still expected to top 100 million tons for the third year in a row

240

Weekly Coal Production by State  

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

Weekly Coal Production Weekly Coal Production Data for week ended: December 14, 2013 | Release date: December 19, 2013 | Next release date: December 30, 2013 For the week ended December 14, 2013: U.S. coal production totaled approximately 18.9 million short tons (mmst) This production estimate is 3.1% higher than last week's estimate and 2.9% lower than the production estimate in the comparable week in 2012 Coal production east of the Mississippi River totaled 8.2 mmst Coal production west of the Mississippi River totaled 10.8 mmst U.S. year-to-date coal production totaled 957.1 mmst, 1.9% lower than the comparable year-to-date coal production in 2012 EIA revises its weekly estimates of state-level coal production using Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) quarterly coal production data.

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


241

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

SciTech Connect

The U.S. Department of Energy and ADA Environmental Solutions are engaged in 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 fly ash. There is a need to provide cost-effective and safer alternatives to traditional flue gas conditioning with SO{sub 3} and ammonia. During this reporting quarter, further laboratory-screening tests of additive formulations were completed. For these tests, the electrostatic tensiometer method was used for determination of fly ash cohesivity. Resistivity was measured for each screening test with a multi-cell laboratory fly ash resistivity furnace constructed for this project. Also during this quarter chemical formulation testing was undertaken to identify stable and compatible resistivity/cohesivity liquid products.

Kenneth E. Baldrey

2001-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

242

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

SciTech Connect

The U.S. Department of Energy and ADA Environmental Solutions are engaged in 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 fly ash. There is a need to provide cost-effective and safer alternatives to traditional flue gas conditioning with SO{sub 3} and ammonia. This quarterly report summarizes project activity for the period April-June, 2003. In this period there was limited activity and no active field trials. Results of ash analysis from the AEP Conesville demonstration were received. In addition, a site visit was made to We Energies Presque Isle Power Plant and a proposal extended for a flue gas conditioning trial with the ADA-51 cohesivity additive. It is expected that this will be the final full-scale evaluation on the project.

Kenneth E. Baldrey

2003-07-30T23:59:59.000Z

243

Review of China's Low-Carbon City Initiative and Developments in the Coal Industry  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

prices but rising coal prices). The Chinese government hasenergy price reform, the coal price of major state-ownedwith rising market coal prices but fixed electricity and

Fridley, David

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

244

U.S. Coal Supply and Demand: 2010 Year in Review - Energy Information  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

U.S. Coal Supply and Demand: 2010 Year in Review U.S. Coal Supply and Demand: 2010 Year in Review Release Date: June 1, 2011 | Next Release Date: Periodically | full report Introduction Coal production in the United States in 2010 increased to a level of 1,085.3 million short tons according to preliminary data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), an increase of 1.0 percent, or 10.4 million short tons above the 2009 level of 1,074.9 million short tons (Table 1). In 2010 U.S. coal consumption increased in all sectors except commercial and institutional while total coal stocks fell slightly for the year. Coal consumption in the electric power sector in 2010 was higher by 4.5 percent, while coking coal consumption increased by 37.9 percent and the other industrial sector increased by 7.1 percent. The commercial and

245

Coal Production 1992  

SciTech Connect

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.

Not Available

1993-10-29T23:59:59.000Z

246

U.S. Coal Supply and Demand  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

U.S. Coal Supply and Demand > U.S. Coal Supply and Demand U.S. Coal Supply and Demand > U.S. Coal Supply and Demand U.S. Coal Supply and Demand 2010 Review (entire report also available in printer-friendly format ) Previous Editions 2009 Review 2008 Review 2007 Review 2006 Review 2005 Review 2004 Review 2003 Review 2002 Review 2001 Review 2000 Review 1999 Review Data for: 2010 Released: May 2011 Next Release Date: April 2012 Table 3. Electric Power Sector Net Generation, 2009-2010 (Million Kilowatthours) New England Coal 14,378 14,244 -0.9 Hydroelectric 7,759 6,861 -11.6 Natural Gas 48,007 54,680 13.9 Nuclear 36,231 38,361 5.9 Other (1) 9,186 9,063 -1.3 Total 115,559 123,210 6.6 Middle Atlantic Coal 121,873 129,935 6.6 Hydroelectric 28,793 26,463 -8.1 Natural Gas 89,808 104,341 16.2 Nuclear 155,140 152,469 -1.7

247

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Distribution Report 2011  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Destination Destination State ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Distribution Report 2011 Alabama _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table DS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by destination State, 2011 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 6,982 679 1,278 - 8,939 Alabama Railroad 4,400 20 286 - 4,706 Alabama River 1,885 - - - 1,885 Alabama Truck 696 659 992 - 2,347 Colorado Total 1,884 2 - - 1,885 Colorado Railroad

248

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 2nd Quarter 2012  

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

Destination Destination State ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 2nd Quarter 2012 Alabama _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table DS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by destination State, 2nd Quarter 2012 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 1,714 158 238 - 2,110 Alabama Railroad 1,056 12 45 - 1,113 Alabama River 464 - - - 464 Alabama Truck 194 146 193 - 532 Colorado Total 275 - - - 275

249

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 2nd Quarter 2013  

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

Destination Destination State ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 2nd Quarter 2013 Alabama _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table DS-1. Domestic Coal Distribution, by Destination State, 2nd Quarter 2013 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 1,066 210 301 - 1,577 Alabama Railroad 495 116 26 - 638 Alabama River 512 - 2 - 513 Alabama Truck 59 94 273 - 426 Colorado Total 97 - - - 97 Colorado

250

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 2nd Quarter 2012  

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

Origin Origin State ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 2nd Quarter 2012 Alabama ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table OS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by origin State, 2nd Quarter 2012 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 1,714 158 238 - 2,110 Alabama Railroad 1,056 12 45 - 1,113 Alabama River 464 - - - 464 Alabama Truck 194 146 193 - 532 Georgia Total s - - - s Georgia Truck s - - - s

251

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 3rd Quarter 2012  

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

Destination Destination State ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 3rd Quarter 2012 Alabama _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table DS-1. Domestic coal distribution, by destination State, 3rd Quarter 2012 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 1,837 167 196 - 2,200 Alabama Railroad 1,051 25 10 - 1,087 Alabama River 730 - - - 730 Alabama Truck 56 141 186 - 384 Colorado Total 456 - 16 - 472

252

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 4th Quarter 2012  

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

Destination Destination State ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 4th Quarter 2012 Alabama _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table DS-1. Domestic Coal Distribution, by Destination State, 4th Quarter 2012 Destination: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Origin State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 1,226 162 274 - 1,662 Alabama Railroad 803 17 22 - 842 Alabama River 384 - - - 384 Alabama Truck 39 144 252 - 436 Colorado Total 301 - 25 - 326 Colorado

253

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 1st Quarter 2013  

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

Origin Origin State ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Distribution Report 1st Quarter 2013 Alabama ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table OS-1. Domestic Coal Distribution, by Origin State, 1st Quarter 2013 Origin: Alabama (thousand short tons) Coal Destination State Transportation Mode Electric Power Sector Coke Plants Industrial Plants (excluding Coke) Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Total 807 158 282 - 1,247 Alabama Railroad 449 71 14 - 534 Alabama River 358 - - - 358 Alabama Truck - 87 267 - 354 Indiana Total - 164 - - 164 Indiana Railroad - 164 - - 164

254

"Table A28. Total Expenditures for Purchased Energy Sources by Census Region"  

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

Total Expenditures for Purchased Energy Sources by Census Region" Total Expenditures for Purchased Energy Sources by Census Region" " and Economic Characteristics of the Establishment, 1991" " (Estimates in Million Dollars)" " "," "," "," ",," "," "," "," "," ","RSE" " "," "," ","Residual","Distillate","Natural"," "," ","Coke"," ","Row" "Economic Characteristics(a)","Total","Electricity","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(b)","Gas(c)","LPG","Coal","and Breeze","Other(d)","Factors"

255

Blackout: coal, climate and the last energy crisis  

SciTech Connect

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.

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

2009-07-15T23:59:59.000Z

256

Coal Distribution Database, 2008  

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

4Q 2009 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 Distribution Report is a preliminary report, based on the most current data available from EIA's various monthly, quarterly and annual surveys of the coal industry and electric power generation industry. The final report will rely on the receipt of annual data to replace the imputed monthly data for smaller electric generation plants that are excluded from the monthly filing requirement, and final data for all other respondents. The Coal Distribution Report traces coal from the origin State to the destination State by transportation mode. The data sources beginning with the 2008 Coal Distribution Report

257

Annual Coal Distribution Tables  

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

Domestic Distribution of U.S. Coal by Destination State, 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 Method of Transportation Electricity Generation Coke Plants Industrial Plants (Except Coke) Residential and Commercial Total Alabama 7,212 375 6,032 3 13,622 Railroad 2,613 170 4,607 - 7,390 River 3,867 - - - 3,867 Truck 732 205 1,424 3 2,365 Illinois 1,458 - - * 1,458 Railroad 167 - - - 167 River 1,291 - - - 1,291 Truck - - - * * Kentucky Total 2,277 - 262 - 2,539 Railroad 1,928 - 165 - 2,093 River 349 - 83 - 432 Truck - - 14 - 14 Eastern 843 - 262 - 1,105 Railroad 843 - 165 - 1,008 River - - 83 - 83 Truck - - 14 - 14 Western 1,435 - - - 1,435 Railroad 1,086 - - - 1,086 River 349 - - - 349 Pennsylvania Total 242 - 62 - 304 Great Lakes - - 60 - 60 Railroad - - * - * River 242 - -

258

Rail Coal Transportation Rates  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Trends, 2001 - 2010 Trends, 2001 - 2010 Transportation infrastructure overview In 2010, railroads transported over 70 percent of coal delivered to electric power plants which are generally concentrated east of the Mississippi River and in Texas. The U.S. railroad market is dominated by four major rail companies that account for 99 percent of U.S. coal rail shipments by volume. Deliveries from major coal basins to power plants by mode Rail Barge Truck Figure 2. Deliveries from major coal basins to power plants by rail, 2010 figure data Figure 3. Deliveries from major coal basins to power plants by barge, 2010 figure data Figure 4. Deliveries from major coal basins to power plants by truck, 2010 figure data The Powder River Basin of Wyoming and Montana, where coal is extracted in

259

Coal | Department of Energy  

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

Coal 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 Secretary Moniz Visits Clean Coal Facility in Mississippi On Friday, Nov. 8, 2013, Secretary Moniz and international energy officials toured Kemper, the nation's largest carbon capture and storage facility, in Liberty, Mississippi. A small Mississippi town is making history with the largest carbon capture

260

How To Address Data Gaps in Life Cycle Inventories: A Case Study on Estimating CO2 Emissions from Coal-Fired Electricity Plants on a Global Scale  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Our framework hypothesizes that emissions from coal power plants can be explained by plant-specific factors (predictors) that include steam pressure, total capacity, plant age, fuel type, and gross domestic product (GDP) per capita of the resident nations of those plants. ... For example, Wernet et al.(5) used neural networks to estimate the cumulative energy demand (CED) of chemicals based on their molecular properties. ...

Zoran J. N. Steinmann; Aranya Venkatesh; Mara Hauck; Aafke M. Schipper; Ramkumar Karuppiah; Ian J. Laurenzi; Mark A. J. Huijbregts

2014-04-21T23:59:59.000Z

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


261

Electricity Monthly Update  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Highlights: January 2012 Highlights: January 2012 Warm temperatures across much of the U.S. led to lower retail sales of electricity during January 2012. Coal-fired generation decreased in every region of the United States when compared to January 2011. Coal stocks recovered due to decreased consumption this January compared to the same month of 2011. Key Indicators Jan 2012 % Change from Jan. 2011 Total Net Generation (Thousand MWh) 340,743 -6.4% Residential Retail Price (cents/kWh) 11.43 4.4% Retail Sales (Thousand MWh) 310,859 -6.5% Heating Degree-Days 751 -21.4% Natural Gas Price, Henry Hub ($/MMBtu) 2.75 -40.3% Coal Stocks (Thousand Tons) 181,621 10.2% Coal Consumption (Thousand Tons) 70,595 -21.7% Natural Gas Consumption (Mcf) 676,045 19.9% Nuclear Outages (MW) 9,567 2.1%

262

Electricity Monthly Update  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Highlights: March 2012 Highlights: March 2012 Average natural gas prices at the Henry Hub declined for the eighth straight month leading to a nearly 40% increase in consumption for electricity during March 2012. The warmest March on record for much of the central U.S. drove a 5% decrease in residential retail sales when compared to March 2011. U.S. coal supplies as measured by days of burn were above 80 days for the third straight month in March as declining coal consumption drove coal stockpile increases. Key Indicators Mar 2012 % Change from Mar 2011 Total Net Generation (Thousand MWh) 309,709 -2.9% Residential Retail Price (cents/kWh) 11.76 1.5% Retail Sales (Thousand MWh) 282,453 -2.6% Heating Degree-Days 377 -36.4% Natural Gas Price, Henry Hub ($/MMBtu) 2.22 -45.7% Coal Stocks

263

Coal Gasification  

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

DOE's Office of Fossil Energy supports activities to advance coal-to-hydrogen technologies, specifically via the process of coal gasification with sequestration. DOE anticipates that coal...

264

Gasification of Coal and Oil  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

... , said the Gas Council is spending £120,000 this year on research into coal gasification, and the National Coal Board and the Central Electricity Generating Board £680,000 and ... coal utilization. The Gas Council is spending about £230,000 on research into the gasification of oil under a programme intended to contribute also to the improvement of the economics ...

1960-02-13T23:59:59.000Z

265

Electricity Monthly Update  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Highlights: November 2011 Highlights: November 2011 Warm temperatures across the Eastern half of the continental U.S. led to flat or lower retail sales of electricity during November 2011. Coal-fired generation decreased in every region of the United States when compared to November 2010. Wholesale electricity prices set annual lows across the East coast as well as in the ERCOT portion of Texas in November 2011. Key Indicators Nov. 2011 % Change from Nov. 2010 Total Net Generation (Thousand MWh) 304,268 -0.6% Residential Retail Price (cents/kWh) 11.88 2.2% Retail Sales (Thousand MWh) 273,053 -0.7% Heating Degree-Days 469 -10.3% Natural Gas Price, Henry Hub ($/MMBtu) 3.32 -13.8% Coal Stocks (Thousand Tons) 168,354 8.9% Coal Consumption (Thousand Tons) 66,789 -8.2% Natural Gas Consumption

266

Electricity Monthly Update  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Highlights: December 2011 Highlights: December 2011 Warm temperatures across the Eastern half of the continental U.S. led to lower retail sales of electricity during December 2011. Coal-fired generation decreased in every region of the United States when compared to December 2010. Electric system load ranged in the mid-to-low section of the annual range across all wholesale regions except the Bonneville Power Administration in the Northwest in December 2011. Key Indicators Dec. 2011 % Change from Dec. 2010 Total Net Generation (Thousand MWh) 336,419 -7.1% Residential Retail Price (cents/kWh) 11.52 4.2% Retail Sales (Thousand MWh) 299,421 -6.1% Heating Degree-Days 713 -20.6% Natural Gas Price, Henry Hub ($/MMBtu) 3.24 -25.7% Coal Stocks (Thousand Tons) 175,100 -0.1% Coal Consumption

267

"2012 Total Electric Industry- Average Retail Price (cents/kWh)"  

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

Average Retail Price (cents/kWh)" 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",15.713593,13.679941,11.83487,6.6759453,14.017926 "Connecticut",17.343298,14.652335,12.672933,9.6930118,15.54464 "Maine",14.658797,11.52742,7.9819499,".",11.812709 "Massachusetts",14.912724,13.841518,12.566635,4.9056852,13.78825 "New Hampshire",16.070168,13.36121,11.83228,".",14.192854 "Rhode Island",14.404061,11.867247,10.676724,8.2796427,12.740867 "Vermont",17.006075,14.316157,9.9796777,".",14.220244

268

E-Print Network 3.0 - annual coal preparation Sample Search Results  

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

Coal pro- vided about half of all annual electricity production for the US throughout its history... Historical Costs of Coal-Fired Electricity and Implications for the Future...

269

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

Energy Savers (EERE)

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...

270

Clean Coal Technology (Indiana)  

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

A public utility may not use clean coal technology at a new or existing electric generating facility without first applying for and obtaining from the Utility Regulatory Commission a certificate...

271

WCI Case for Coal  

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

with the steam cycle of coal-fired power plants offers the potential to convert 40% of solar energy into electricity. This compares to 13% for large-scale photovoltaic systems,...

272

coking coal  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

coking coal [A caking coal suitable for the production of coke for metallurgical use] ? Kokskohle f, verkokbare Kohle

2014-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

273

Tracking Progress Current and Expected Energy from Coal for California  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Electricity supplies from existing coal and petroleum coke plants represent about 10 percent of the total energy requirements to serve loads in California load during 2010, and they account for about 29 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions attributed to the electricity sector. Available capacity and energy supplies from these power plants are tied to long-term contracts, some of which have been in place for several decades. Table 1 provides a listing of dependable capacity to California utilities in 2011 from out-of-state coal plants.

unknown authors

274

Handbook of coal analysis  

SciTech Connect

The Handbook deals with the various aspects of coal analysis and provides a detailed explanation of the necessary standard tests and procedures that are applicable to coal in order to help define usage and behavior relative to environmental issues. It provides details of the meaning of various test results and how they might be applied to predict coal behavior during use. Emphasis is on ASTM standards and test methods but ISO and BSI standards methods are included. Chapter headings are: Coal analysis; Sampling and sample preparation; Proximate analysis; Ultimate analysis; Mineral matter; Physical and electrical properties; Thermal properties; Mechanical properties; Spectroscopic properties; Solvent properties; and Glossary.

James G. Speight

2005-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

275

Electricity Monthly Update  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Highlights: September 2011 Highlights: September 2011 Cooler temperatures drove down retail sales of electricity in the Southeast compared to September 2010. Fossil steam generation decreased in much of the United States, except in the ERCOT portion of Texas where total generation increased from September, 2010. Bituminous coal stocks dropped 18% from September 2010. Key Indicators Sept. 2011 % Change from Sept. 2010 Total Net Generation (Thousand MWh) 336,264 -3% Residential Retail Price (cents/Kwh) 12.26 2% Retail Sales (Thousand MWh) 324,357 -1% Cooling Degree-Days 184 -6% Natural Gas Price, Henry Hub ($/mmBtu) 4.04 0% Coal Stocks (Thousand Tons) 144,439 -11% Coal Consumption (Thousand Tons) 76,765 -3% Natural Gas Consumption (Mcf) 702,589 -2% Nuclear Outages (MW) 9,227 70%

276

Table A67. Capability to Switch from Electricity to Alternative Energy Source  

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

7. Capability to Switch from Electricity to Alternative Energy Sources" 7. Capability to Switch from Electricity to Alternative Energy Sources" " by Industry Group, Selected Industries, and Selected Characteristics," " 1994: Part 1" " (Estimates in Million Kilowatthours)" ,,,"Electricity Receipts",,,," Alternative Types of Energy(b)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke",,"RSE" "SIC"," ","Total"," ","Not","Natural","Distillate","Residual",,,"and",,"Row" "Code(a)","Industry Group and Industry","Receipts(c)","Switchable","Switchable","Gas","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil","Coal","LPG","Breeze","Other(d)","Factors"," "

277

Estimating Total Energy Consumption and Emissions of China's Commercial and Office Buildings  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

water heating Technologies Electric heater Gas boilerCoal Boiler Small cogen Stove District heating Heat pumpElectric water heater Gas boiler Coal Boiler Small cogen Oil

Fridley, David G.

2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

278

Coal Distribution Database, 2008  

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

Origin State, Origin State, Consumer, Destination and Method of Transportation 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 Distribution Report is a preliminary report, based on the most current data available from EIA's various monthly, quarterly and annual surveys of the coal industry and electric power generation industry. The final report will rely on the receipt of annual data to replace the imputed monthly data for smaller electric generation plants that are excluded from the monthly filing requirement, and final data for all other respondents. The Coal Distribution Report traces coal from the origin State to the destination State by

279

Quarterly Coal Report  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2Q) 2Q) Distribution Category UC-950 Quarterly Coal Report April-June 1999 Energy Information Administration Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 This report was prepared by the Energy Information Administration, the independent statistical and analytical agency within the Department of Energy. The information contained herein should not be construed as advocating or reflecting any policy position of the Department of Energy or any other organization. Contacts This publication was prepared by Paulette Young under the direction of B.D. Hong, Leader, Coal Infor- mation Team, Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels. Questions addressing the Appendix A, U.S. Coal Imports section should be directed to Paulette Young at (202) 426-1150, email

280

Quarterly Coal Report  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1Q) 1Q) Distribution Category UC-950 Quarterly Coal Report January-March 1999 Energy Information Administration Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 This report was prepared by the Energy Information Administration, the independent statistical and analytical agency within the Department of Energy. The information contained herein should not be construed as advocating or reflecting any policy position of the Department of Energy or any other organization. Contacts This publication was prepared by Paulette Young under the direction of B.D. Hong, Leader, Coal Infor- mation Team, Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels. Questions addressing the Appendix A, U.S. Coal Imports section should be directed

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


281

Coal Distribution Database, 2008  

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

Destination State, Destination State, Consumer, Destination and Method of Transportation 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 Distribution Report is a preliminary report, based on the most current data available from EIA's various monthly, quarterly and annual surveys of the coal industry and electric power generation industry. The final report will rely on the receipt of annual data to replace the imputed monthly data for smaller electric generation plants that are excluded from the monthly filing requirement, and final data for all other respondents. The Coal Distribution Report traces coal from the origin State to the destination State by

282

Coal combustion products (CCPs  

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

combustion products (CCPs) 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. When properly managed, CCPs offer society environmental and economic benefits without harm to public health and safety. Research supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Fossil Energy (FE) has made an important contribution in this regard. Fossil Energy Research Benefits Coal Combustion Products Fossil Energy Research Benefits

283

Coal Storage and Transportation  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Abstract Coal preparation, storage, and transportation are essential to coal use. Preparation plants, located near to the mine, remove some inorganic minerals associated with raw coal. Coal is transported from the mines to the point of consumption, often an electric generating plant, by rail, barge and trucks. Railroads are the predominant form of coal transportation within a country. Global coal trade, movement by large ocean-going vessels, continues to increase. At the end use site, the coal is crushed, ground, and the moisture content reduced to the proper specifications for end use. Coal is stored at various points in the supply chain. Processed coal will weather and oxidize, changing its properties; it can self-ignite, unless precautions are taken. Technology in use today is similar to that used in previous decades. Performance improvements have come from improved software and instruments that deliver real-time data. These improve management of sub-processes in the coal supply chain and reduce costs along the supply chain.

J.M. Ekmann; P.H. Le

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

284

Through its Clean Coal Research Program, FE  

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

its inception as part of DOE in 1977, FE's 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 Program, FE R&D today is focusing on ways to continue using this vital source of energy while minimizing atmospheric CO 2 emissions. Through its Clean Coal Research Program, FE is in the forefront of global efforts to develop and

285

Coal Distribution Database, 2006  

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

7 7 December 2008 2007 Changes in Coal Distribution Table Format and Data Sources The changes in the coal distribution data sources made in 2006 are carried over to the 2007 tables. As in 2006, EIA used data from the EIA-3 survey to distribute synfuel to the electric generation sector on a state level, aggregated with all of the other coal (such as bituminous, subbituminous, and lignite coal) sent to electric generating plants. EIA supplemented the EIA-3 data with previously collected information to determine the mode of transportation from the synfuel plant to the electric generating consumer, which was not reported on the EIA-3A survey form. Although not contained in the EIA-6A master file, this information has been documented in an ancillary spreadsheet in the EIA

286

file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\ICR\My%20Documents\Coal\Di  

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

Data For: 2002 Data For: 2002 Next Release Date: Summer 2004 Home > Coal > Annual Coal Distribution > Coal Destination Map > Domestic Distribution by Destination: Alaska Domestic Distribution of U.S. Coal by Destination State, Consumer, Destination and Method of Transportation, 2002 (Thousand Short Tons) State of Origin by Method of Transportation Electricity Generation Coke Plants Industrial Plants (Except Coke) Residential and Commercial Total Destination: Alaska Alaska 376 - - 471 847 Railroad 376 - - 471 847 Truck - - - * * State Total 376 - - 471 847 Railroad 376 - - 471 847 Truck - - - * * See footnotes at end of table. EIA Home Page 1 of 1 Domestic Distribution of U.S. Coal by Destination State, Consumer, Destination and Method of Transpo... Data For: 2002 Next Release Date: Summer 2004

287

" Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"  

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

8 Capability to Switch Distillate Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; " 8 Capability to Switch Distillate Fuel Oil 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 Barrels." ,,"Distillate Fuel Oil",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total"," ","Not","Electricity","Natural","Residual",,,"and" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Consumed(c)","Switchable","Switchable","Receipts(d)","Gas","Fuel Oil","Coal","LPG","Breeze","Other(e)"

288

" Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"  

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

4 Capability to Switch Residual Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002;" 4 Capability to Switch Residual Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002;" " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;" " Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Thousand Barrels." ,,"Residual Fuel Oil",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke",,"RSE" "NAICS"," ","Total"," ","Not","Electricity","Natural","Distillate",,,"and",,"Row" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Consumed(c)","Switchable","Switchable","Receipts(d)","Gas","Fuel Oil","Coal","LPG","Breeze","Other(e)","Factors"

289

" Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"  

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

2 Capability to Switch LPG to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002; " 2 Capability to Switch LPG to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002; " " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;" " Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Thousand Barrels." ,,"LPG",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke",,"RSE" "NAICS"," ","Total"," ","Not","Electricity","Natural","Distillate","Residual",,"and",,"Row" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Consumed(c)","Switchable","Switchable","Receipts(d)","Gas","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil","Coal","Breeze","Other(e)","Factors"

290

" Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"  

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

8 Capability to Switch Distillate Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002; " 8 Capability to Switch Distillate Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002; " " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;" " Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Thousand Barrels." ,,"Distillate Fuel Oil",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke",,"RSE" "NAICS"," ","Total"," ","Not","Electricity","Natural","Residual",,,"and",,"Row" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Consumed(c)","Switchable","Switchable","Receipts(d)","Gas","Fuel Oil","Coal","LPG","Breeze","Other(e)","Factors"

291

" Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"  

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

2 Capability to Switch Natural Gas to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006;" 2 Capability to Switch Natural Gas to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006;" " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;" " Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Billion Cubic Feet." ,,"Natural Gas",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total"," ","Not","Electricity","Distillate","Residual",,,"and" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Consumed(c)","Switchable","Switchable","Receipts(d)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil","Coal","LPG","Breeze","Other(e)"

292

" Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"  

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

4 Capability to Switch Residual Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006;" 4 Capability to Switch Residual Fuel Oil 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 Barrels." ,,"Residual Fuel Oil",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total"," ","Not","Electricity","Natural","Distillate",,,"and" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Consumed(c)","Switchable","Switchable","Receipts(d)","Gas","Fuel Oil","Coal","LPG","Breeze","Other(e)"

293

" Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"  

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

2 Capability to Switch Natural Gas to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002;" 2 Capability to Switch Natural Gas to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002;" " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;" " Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Billion Cubic Feet." ,,"Natural Gas",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke",,"RSE" "NAICS"," ","Total"," ","Not","Electricity","Distillate","Residual",,,"and",,"Row" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Consumed(c)","Switchable","Switchable","Receipts(d)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil","Coal","LPG","Breeze","Other(e)","Factors"

294

" Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"  

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

2 Capability to Switch LPG to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; " 2 Capability to Switch LPG 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 Barrels." ,,"LPG",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total"," ","Not","Electricity","Natural","Distillate","Residual",,"and" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Consumed(c)","Switchable","Switchable","Receipts(d)","Gas","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil","Coal","Breeze","Other(e)"

295

Clean coal  

SciTech Connect

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.

Liang-Shih Fan; Fanxing Li [Ohio State University, OH (United States). Dept. of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering

2006-07-15T23:59:59.000Z

296

"Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Source(b)","Electricity(c)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(d)","Natural Gas(e)","NGL(f)","Coal","and Breeze","Other(g)"  

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

4.4 Relative Standard Errors for Table 4.4;" 4.4 Relative Standard Errors for Table 4.4;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," ",," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",," " " "," ","Any" "NAICS"," ","Energy",,"Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and",,"Coke"," " "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Source(b)","Electricity(c)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(d)","Natural Gas(e)","NGL(f)","Coal","and Breeze","Other(g)" ,,"Total United States" , 311,"Food",0.4,0.4,19.4,9,2,6.9,5.4,0,10.3

297

Role of coal in the world and Asia  

SciTech Connect

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.

Johnson, C.J.; Li, B.

1994-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

298

Tide May Be shifting versus coal  

SciTech Connect

Opinions about the future viability of coal as an energy source for generating electricity are presented. Positions of the coal lobby and environmental groups along with recent actions are included.

NONE

2008-03-15T23:59:59.000Z

299

"Table A36. Total Expenditures for Purchased Energy Sources by Census Region,"  

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

6. Total Expenditures for Purchased Energy Sources by Census Region," 6. Total Expenditures for Purchased Energy Sources by Census Region," " Census Division, Industry Group, and Selected Industries, 1994" " (Estimates in Million Dollars)" ,,,,,,,,,,,"RSE" "SIC"," "," "," ","Residual","Distillate ","Natural"," "," ","Coke"," ","Row" "Code(a)","Industry Group and Industry","Total","Electricity","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(b)","Gas(c)","LPG","Coal","and Breeze","Other(d)","Factors" ,,"Total United States"

300

NETL: Coal  

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

use of our domestic energy resources and infrastructure. Gasification Systems | Advanced Combustion | Coal & Coal-Biomass to Liquids | Solid Oxide Fuel Cells | Turbines CO2...

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


301

Distinguishing Weak and Strong Disposability among Undesireable Outputs in DEA: The Example of the Environmental Efficiency of Chinese Coal-Fired Power Plants  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

in terajoules (TJ). 4.2 Undesirable Outputs Undesirable variable refers to emissions from the electricity generation process. Coal is a combustible mineral composed primarily of carbon and hydrocarbon, along with other assorted elements including nitrogen... of the sample power plants is 211.71GW. The total annual generation is 1117.59 TWh. Data, such as installed capacity, annual fuel consumption (coal and oil), number of employees, annual electricity generation, heat rates, and quality of fuel, were collected...

Yu, Hongliang; Pollitt, Michael G.

302

Domestic Coal Distribution 2009 Q2 by Origin State: Alabama  

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

Q2 by Origin State: Alabama 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 Generation Coke Plants Industrial Plants Excluding Coke Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Railroad 875 12 33 - 920 Alabama River 855 - - - 855 Alabama Truck 155 84 230 - 469 Alabama Total 1,885 96 263 - 2,244 Florida Railroad - - 8 - 8 Georgia Railroad 118 - - - 118 Georgia Truck s - 15 - 15 Georgia Total 118 - 15 - 133 Indiana Railroad - 83 - - 83 Indiana Truck 17 34 - - 50 Indiana Total 17 116 - - 133 Kentucky Railroad 83 - - - 83 Pennsylvania Railroad 95 - - - 95 Origin State Total 2,197 212 285 - 2,695 Railroad 1,171 95 40 - 1,305 River 855 - - - 855 Truck 171 118 245 - 534 2 / 58 Domestic Coal Distribution 2009 Q2 by Origin State: Alaska

303

Quarterly Coal Report  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1Q) 1Q) Quarterly Coal Report January - March 2008 July 2008 Energy Information Administration Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric, and Alternate Fuels U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 _____________________________________________________________________________ This report is available on the Web at: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/quarterly/qcr.pdf _____________________________________________ This report was prepared by the Energy Information Administration, the independent statistical and analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. The information contained herein should be not be construed as advocating or reflecting any policy position of the U.S. Department of Energy or any other organization.

304

Quarterly Coal Report  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2Q) 2Q) Quarterly Coal Report April - June 2009 September 2009 Energy Information Administration Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric, and Alternate Fuels U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 _____________________________________________________________________________ This report is available on the Web at: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/quarterly/qcr.pdf _____________________________________________ This report was prepared by the Energy Information Administration, the independent statistical and analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. The information contained herein should be not be construed as advocating or reflecting any policy position of the U.S. Department of Energy or any other organization.

305

Quarterly Coal Report  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7/01Q) 7/01Q) Quarterly Coal Report January - March 2007 June 2007 Energy Information Administration Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric, and Alternate Fuels U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 _____________________________________________________________________________ This report is available on the Web at: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/quarterly/qcr.pdf _____________________________________________ This report was prepared by the Energy Information Administration, the independent statistical and analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. The information contained herein should be not be construed as advocating or reflecting any policy position of the U.S. Department of Energy or any other organization.

306

Quarterly Coal Report  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

3Q) 3Q) Quarterly Coal Report July - September 2008 December 2008 Energy Information Administration Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric, and Alternate Fuels U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 _____________________________________________________________________________ This report is available on the Web at: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/quarterly/qcr.pdf _____________________________________________ This report was prepared by the Energy Information Administration, the independent statistical and analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. The information contained herein should be not be construed as advocating or reflecting any policy position of the U.S. Department of Energy or any other organization.

307

Quarterly Coal Report  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2Q) 2Q) Quarterly Coal Report April - June 2008 September 2008 Energy Information Administration Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric, and Alternate Fuels U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 _____________________________________________________________________________ This report is available on the Web at: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/quarterly/qcr.pdf _____________________________________________ This report was prepared by the Energy Information Administration, the independent statistical and analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. The information contained herein should be not be construed as advocating or reflecting any policy position of the U.S. Department of Energy or any other organization.

308

Quarterly Coal Report  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8/04Q) 8/04Q) Quarterly Coal Report October - December 2008 March 2009 Energy Information Administration Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric, and Alternate Fuels U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 _____________________________________________________________________________ This report is available on the Web at: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/quarterly/qcr.pdf _____________________________________________ This report was prepared by the Energy Information Administration, the independent statistical and analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. The information contained herein should be not be construed as advocating or reflecting any policy position of the U.S. Department of Energy or any other organization.

309

Cost and Performance Comparison Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants, Volume 3 Executive Summary: Low Rank Coal and Natural Gas to Electricity  

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

Baseline Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 3 Executive Summary: Low Rank Coal and Natural Gas to Electricity September 2011 DOE/NETL-2010/1399 Disclaimer This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference therein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring

310

EIA - AEO2010 - Coal projections  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Coal Projections Coal Projections Annual Energy Outlook 2010 with Projections to 2035 Coal Projections Figure 88. Coal production by region, 1970-2035 Click to enlarge » Figure source and data excel logo Figure 89. U.S. coal production in six cases, 2008, 2020, and 2035 Click to enlarge » Figure source and data excel logo Figure 90. Average annual minemouth coal prices by region, 1990-2035 Click to enlarge » Figure source and data excel logo Figure 91. Average annual delivered coal prices in four cases, 1990-2035 Click to enlarge » Figure source and data excel logo Figure 92. Change in U.S. coal consumption by end use in two cases, 2008-2035 Click to enlarge » Figure source and data excel logo Coal production increases at a slower rate than in the past In the AEO2010 Reference case, increasing coal use for electricity generation, along with the startup of several CTL plants, leads to growth in coal production averaging 0.2 percent per year from 2008 to 2035. This is significantly less than the 0.9-percent average growth rate for U.S. coal production from 1980 to 2008.

311

" Row: End Uses;" " Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity;"  

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

6 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2006;" 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)"

312

" Row: End Uses;" " Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity;"  

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

1. End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 1998;" 1. End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 1998;" " 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)"," ","RSE" " ","Total","Electricity(a)","Fuel Oil","Diesel Fuel(b)","(billion","NGL(d)","(million","Other(e)","Row"

313

" Row: End Uses;" " Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity;"  

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

2. End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 1998;" 2. End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 1998;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: End Uses;" " Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity;" " Unit: Trillion Btu." " "," ",," ","Distillate"," "," ",," "," " " ",,,,"Fuel Oil",,,"Coal",,"RSE" " "," ","Net","Residual","and",,"LPG and","(excluding Coal"," ","Row" "End Use","Total","Electricity(a)","Fuel Oil","Diesel Fuel(b)","Natural Gas(c)","NGL(d)","Coke and Breeze)","Other(e)","Factors"

314

" Row: End Uses;" " Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity;"  

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

5 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2010;" 5 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2010;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: End Uses;" " Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity;" " Unit: Physical Units or Btu." " "," ",," ","Distillate"," "," ","Coal"," " " ",,,,"Fuel Oil",,,"(excluding Coal" " "," ","Net","Residual","and","Natural Gas(c)","LPG and","Coke and Breeze)"," " " ","Total","Electricity(a)","Fuel Oil","Diesel Fuel(b)","(billion","NGL(d)","(million","Other(e)"

315

" Row: End Uses;" " Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity;"  

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

5 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2002;" 5 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2002;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: End Uses;" " Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity;" " Unit: Physical Units or Btu." " "," ",," ","Distillate"," "," ",," "," " " ",,,,"Fuel Oil",,,"Coal" " "," ","Net","Residual","and","Natural ","LPG and","(excluding Coal"," ","RSE" " ","Total","Electricity(a)","Fuel Oil","Diesel Fuel(b)","Gas(c)","NGL(d)","Coke and Breeze)","Other(e)","Row"

316

" Row: End Uses;" " Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity;"  

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

6 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2010;" 6 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2010;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: End Uses;" " Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity;" " Unit: Trillion Btu." " "," ",," ","Distillate"," "," ",," " " ",,,,"Fuel Oil",,,"Coal" " "," ","Net","Residual","and",,"LPG and","(excluding Coal"," " "End Use","Total","Electricity(a)","Fuel Oil","Diesel Fuel(b)","Natural Gas(c)","NGL(d)","Coke and Breeze)","Other(e)"

317

" Row: End Uses;" " Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity;"  

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

6 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2002;" 6 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2002;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: End Uses;" " Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity;" " Unit: Trillion Btu." " "," ",," ","Distillate"," "," ",," "," " " ",,,,"Fuel Oil",,,"Coal",,"RSE" " "," ","Net","Residual","and","Natural ","LPG and","(excluding Coal"," ","Row" "End Use","Total","Electricity(a)","Fuel Oil","Diesel Fuel(b)","Gas(c)","NGL(d)","Coke and Breeze)","Other(e)","Factors"

318

" Row: End Uses;" " Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity;"  

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

5 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2006;" 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)"

319

coal | OpenEI  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

coal coal Dataset Summary Description This dataset is from the report Operational water consumption and withdrawal factors for electricity generating technologies: a review of existing literature (J. Macknick, R. Newmark, G. Heath and K.C. Hallett) and provides estimates of operational water withdrawal and water consumption factors for electricity generating technologies in the United States. Estimates of water factors were collected from published primary literature and were not modified except for unit conversions. Source National Renewable Energy Laboratory Date Released August 28th, 2012 (2 years ago) Date Updated Unknown Keywords coal consumption csp factors geothermal PV renewable energy technologies Water wind withdrawal Data application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet icon Operational water consumption and withdrawal factors for electricity generating technologies (xlsx, 32.3 KiB)

320

Electricity Monthly Update  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Electric Power Sector Coal Stocks: February 2012 Electric Power Sector Coal Stocks: February 2012 Stocks The unseasonably warm temperatures that the continental United States experienced throughout the winter, coupled with low natural gas prices, caused coal stocks at power plants to increase throughout the winter of 2011 - 2012. During this period, coal stocks usually see a seasonal decline due to the added need for electricity generation from coal plants for spacing heating load. However, it was the sixth straight month that coal stocks increased from the previous month, with this trend likely to continue as the country enters into spring. Days of Burn Days of burn Coal capacity The average number of days of burn held at electric power plants is a forward looking estimate of coal supply given a power plant's current

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


321

The Role of Volatiles in Coal Combustion  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Our knowledge of the role of volatiles in coal combustion ranges at this time from the self-evident to the ambiguous. The clearest point on which all agree is that pyrolysis will occur during the total coal co...

Robert H. Essenhigh; Eric M. Suuberg

1987-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

322

Electricity Monthly Update  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Highlights: February 2012 Highlights: February 2012 Warm temperatures across much of the U.S. led to lower retail sales of electricity during February 2012. Natural gas-fired generation increased in every region of the United States when compared to February 2011. Wholesale electricity prices remained in the low end of the annual range for most wholesale markets due to low demand and depressed natural gas prices Key Indicators Feb 2012 % Change from Feb. 2011 Total Net Generation (Thousand MWh) 310,298 -1.0% Residential Retail Price (cents/kWh) 11.55 3.9% Retail Sales (Thousand MWh) 285,684 -3.5% Heating Degree-Days 654 -12.0% Natural Gas Price, Henry Hub ($/MMBtu) 2.60 -38.1% Coal Stocks (Thousand Tons) 186,958 -13.6% Coal Consumption (Thousand Tons) 62,802 -14.6% Natural Gas Consumption

323

Beluga Coal Gasification - ISER  

SciTech Connect

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.

Steve Colt

2008-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

324

Domestic Coal Distribution 2009 Q1 by Destination State: Alabama  

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

4 4 Domestic Coal Distribution 2009 Q1 by Destination State: Alabama (1000 Short Tons) 1 / 64 Domestic Coal Distribution 2009 Q1 by Destination State: Alabama (1000 Short Tons) Origin State Transportation Mode Electricity Generation Coke Plants Industrial Plants Excluding Coke Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Railroad 950 4 84 - 1,038 Alabama River 1,110 - - - 1,110 Alabama Truck 37 170 249 - 456 Alabama Total 2,096 174 333 - 2,603 Arkansas Railroad - 6 - - 6 Colorado Railroad 279 - - - 279 Illinois Railroad 11 - - - 11 Illinois River 109 - - - 109 Illinois Total 119 - - - 119 Indiana River 197 - - - 197 Kentucky Railroad 442 - 28 - 471 Kentucky Truck - - 2 - 2 Kentucky Total 442 - 31 - 473 Kentucky (East) Railroad 357 - 28 - 385 Kentucky (East) Truck - - 2 - 2 Kentucky (East)

325

Electricity Monthly Update  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Electric Power Sector Coal Stocks: November 2011 Electric Power Sector Coal Stocks: November 2011 Stocks As discussed in this month's feature story, electric power sector coal stocks continued to replenish after the summer burn in November, though stockpile levels remain below 2010 and 2009 levels. All coal stockpile levels declined from November 2010, with bituminous coal stockpile levels 9 percent lower than the same month of 2010. Days of Burn Days of burn Coal capacity The average number of days of burn held at electric power plants is a forward looking estimate of coal supply given a power plantâ€(tm)s current stockpile and past consumption patterns. The average number of days of burn held on hand at electric power plants dropped slightly from last month and remained below levels seen in November of 2010 or 2009. While

326

Electric Vehicle Research Group  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

.................................................................................9 From diesel to electric: a new era in personnel transport for underground coal minesElectric Vehicle Research Group Annual Report 2012 #12;Table of Contents Executive Summary................................................................................8 C2-25 Electric Vehicle Drivetrain

Liley, David

327

Development of an Advanced Fine Coal Suspension Dewatering Process  

SciTech Connect

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.

B. K. Parekh; D. P. Patil

2008-04-30T23:59:59.000Z

328

The US coal industry 1996  

SciTech Connect

Several years ago a friend and former classmate, Dr. Doug Dahl, put the coal industry into perspective. At that time he worked for Consol, whose parent company was DuPont. I will use his story, but update it with today`s statistics. As can be seen in Figure 1, total US coal production continues to show healthy growth. In 1995 we produced 1,032,000,000 tons, and 1,046,000,000 tons are projected for 1996. Unfortunately as seen in Figure 2, the average price per ton of coal sold is still dropping. The coal industry is experiencing the unusual situation of falling coal prices with increasing coal demand! In 1994 (1995 data not available) the average price for a ton of coal was only $19.41. Multiplying the two numbers, yields the total sales value for our entire industry, $20.1 billion in 1994. That`s roughly half the approximately $40 billion per year sales value for a single chemical company, DuPont, Dr. Dahl`s parent company. As Dr. Dahl pointed out, the coal industry just isn`t that big. As we can see in Figure 3, the yearly trends show that the total value of the US coal production is shrinking. The total value has fallen through the 90`s and follows the average price per ton trend. Even increases in production have generally not been enough to offset the falling prices.

Campbell, J.A.L. [Custom Coals International, Inc., Oklahoma City, OK (United States)

1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

329

Coal conversion experimental methods for validation of pressurized entrained-flow gasifier simulation.  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

??Gasification of coal provides society with electricity, commodity chemicals, substitute natural gas, and consumer products. With the continued use of coal in the United States… (more)

Wagner, David Ray

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

330

International Energy Outlook 2000 - Coal  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Although coal use is expected to be displaced by natural gas in some parts of the world, Although coal use is expected to be displaced by natural gas in some parts of the world, only a slight drop in its share of total energy consumption is projected by 2020. Coal continues to dominate many national fuel markets in developing Asia. Historically, trends in coal consumption have varied considerably by region. Despite declines in some regions, world coal consumption has increased from 84 quadrillion British thermal units (Btu) in 1985 to 93 quadrillion Btu in 1997. Regions that have seen increases in coal consumption include the United States, Japan, and developing Asia. Declines have occurred in Western Europe, Eastern Europe, and the countries of the former Soviet Union (FSU). In Western Europe, coal consumption declined by 33 percent between 1985 and 1997, displaced in considerable measure by

331

International Energy Outlook 2001 - Coal  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Coal Coal picture of a printer Printer Friendly Version (PDF) Although coal use is expected to be displaced by natural gas in some parts of the world, only a slight drop in its share of total energy consumption is projected by 2020. Coal continues to dominate many national fuel markets in developing Asia. World coal consumption has been in a period of generally slow growth since the late 1980s, a trend that is expected to continue. Although 1999 world consumption, at 4.7 billion short tons,9 was 15 percent higher than coal use in 1980, it was lower than in any year since 1984 (Figure 51). The International Energy Outlook 2001 (IEO2001) reference case projects some growth in coal use between 1999 and 2020, at an average annual rate of 1.5 percent, but with considerable variation among regions.

332

"Table A37. Total Expenditures for Purchased Energy Sources by Census Region,"  

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

7. Total Expenditures for Purchased Energy Sources by Census Region," 7. Total Expenditures for Purchased Energy Sources by Census Region," " Census Division, and Economic Characteristics of the Establishment, 1994" " (Estimates in Million Dollars)" " "," "," "," ",," "," "," "," "," ","RSE" " "," "," ","Residual","Distillate","Natural"," "," ","Coke"," ","Row" "Economic Characteristics(a)","Total","Electricity","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(b)","Gas(c)","LPG","Coal","and Breeze","Other(d)","Factors"

333

Healy Clean Coal Project: A DOE Assessment  

SciTech Connect

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.

National Energy Technology Laboratory

2003-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

334

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Report 2012  

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

U.S. Coal Consumption by End Use Sector, Census Division, and State, 2012 and 2011 U.S. Coal Consumption by End Use Sector, Census Division, and State, 2012 and 2011 (thousand short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Report 2012 Table 26. U.S. Coal Consumption by End Use Sector, Census Division, and State, 2012 and 2011 (thousand short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Report 2012 2012 2011 Total Census Division and State Electric Power 1 Other Industrial Coke Commercial and Institutional Electric Power 1 Other Industrial Coke Commercial and Institutional 2012 2011 Percent Change New England 1,920 81 - - 3,025 w - - 2,001 w w Connecticut 415 - - - 325 - - - 415 325 27.5 Maine 32 w - - 38 w - - w w -16.4 Massachusetts 954 w - - 1,763 w - - w w -44.4 New Hampshire 520 - - - 898 - - - 520 898 -42.2 Middle Atlantic 44,838 2,440 w w 53,970 2,926 w w 52,750

335

Table A1. Total Primary Consumption of Energy for All Purposes by Census  

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

1 " 1 " " (Estimates in Btu or Physical Units)" " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," " " "," "," ",," "," ",," "," ","Coke and"," "," " " "," ",,"Net","Residual","Distillate","Natural Gas(d)"," ","Coal","Breeze"," ","RSE" "SIC"," ","Total","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(c)","(billion","LPG","(1000","(1000","Other(e)","Row"

336

Table A1. Total First Use (formerly Primary Consumption) of Energy for All Pu  

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

2" 2" " (Estimates in Trillion Btu)" " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",," " " "," "," ",," "," ",," "," ",," ","Shipments","RSE" "SIC"," ",,"Net","Residual","Distillate",," ",,"Coke and"," ","of Energy Sources","Row" "Code(a)","Industry Group and Industry","Total(b)","Electricity(c)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(d)","Natural Gas(e)","LPG","Coal","Breeze","Other(f)","Produced Onsite(g)","Factors"

337

Table A1. Total First Use (formerly Primary Consumption) of Energy for All Pu  

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

1 " 1 " " (Estimates in Btu or Physical Units)" " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",," " " "," "," ",," "," ",," "," ","Coke and"," ","Shipments"," " " "," ",,"Net","Residual","Distillate","Natural Gas(e)"," ","Coal","Breeze"," ","of Energy Sources","RSE" "SIC"," ","Total(b)","Electricity(c)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(d)","(billion","LPG","(1000","(1000","Other(f)","Produced Onsite(g)","Row"

338

Table A1. Total Primary Consumption of Energy for All Purposes by Census  

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

2" 2" " (Estimates in Trillion Btu)" " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," " " "," ",," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," ","RSE" "SIC"," ",,"Net","Residual","Distillate "," "," "," ","Coke"," ","Row" "Code(a)","Industry Groups and Industry"," Total","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(c)","Natural Gas(d)","LPG","Coal","and Breeze","Other(e)","Factors"

339

Coal pump  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

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.

Bonin, John H. (Sunnyvale, CA); Meyer, John W. (Palo Alto, CA); Daniel, Jr., Arnold D. (Alameda County, CA)

1983-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

340

NYMEX Coal Futures - Energy Information Administration  

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

NYMEX Coal Futures Near-Month Contract Final Settlement Price 2013 NYMEX Coal Futures Near-Month Contract Final Settlement Price 2013 Data as of: December 13, 2013 | Release Date: December 16, 2013 | Next Release Date: December 30, 2013 U.S. coal exports, chiefly Central Appalachian bituminous, make up a significant percentage of the world export market and are a relevant factor in world coal prices. Because coal is a bulk commodity, transportation is an important aspect of its price and availability. In response to dramatic changes in both electric and coal industry practices, the New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX) after conferring with coal producers and consumers, sought and received regulatory approval to offer coal futures and options contracts. On July 12, 2001, NYMEX began trading Central Appalachian Coal futures under the QL symbol.

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


341

Chapter 3 - Coal-fired Power Plants  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Abstract Coal provides around 40% of the world’s electricity, more than any other source. Most modern coal-fired power stations burn pulverized coal in a boiler to raise steam for a steam turbine. High efficiency is achieved by using supercritical boilers made of advanced alloys that produce high steam temperatures, and large, high-efficiency steam turbines. Alternative types of coal-fired power plants include fluidized bed boilers that can burn a variety of poor fuels, as well as coal gasifiers that allow coal to be turned into a combustible gas that can be burned in a gas turbine. Emissions from coal plants include sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, and trace metals, all of which must be controlled. Capturing carbon dioxide from a coal plant is also under consideration. This can be achieved using post-combustion capture, a pre-combustion gasification process, or by burning coal in oxygen instead of air.

Paul Breeze

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

342

CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS MADE WITH COAL COMBUSTION BY-PRODUCTS  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

ash and bottom ash are produced as by-products of coal-fired electricity generation. In many countries coal ashes are by-products of the coal combustion, their properties are influenced by the nature of understanding behavior of masonry products made from coal ashes. The objective of this research program

Wisconsin-Milwaukee, University of

343

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Michigan Electricity Profile 2010 Michigan profile Michigan Electricity Profile 2010 Michigan profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Michigan) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) MRO/RFC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 29,831 11 Electric Utilities 21,639 10 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 8,192 14 Net Generation (megawatthours) 111,551,371 13 Electric Utilities 89,666,874 13 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 21,884,497 16 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 254 6 Nitrogen Oxide 89 6 Carbon Dioxide 74,480 11 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 5.0 8 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.8 19 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,472 20 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 103,649,219 12 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 94,565,247 11

344

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Ohio Electricity Profile 2010 Ohio profile Ohio Electricity Profile 2010 Ohio profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Ohio) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) RFC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 33,071 8 Electric Utilities 20,179 13 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 12,892 7 Net Generation (megawatthours) 143,598,337 7 Electric Utilities 92,198,096 10 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 51,400,241 7 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 610 1 Nitrogen Oxide 122 3 Carbon Dioxide 121,964 4 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 9.4 1 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.9 17 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,872 8 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 154,145,418 4 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 105,329,797 9

345

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Wisconsin Electricity Profile 2010 Wisconsin profile Wisconsin Electricity Profile 2010 Wisconsin profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Wisconsin) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) MRO/RFC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 17,836 23 Electric Utilities 13,098 19 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 4,738 20 Net Generation (megawatthours) 64,314,067 24 Electric Utilities 45,579,970 22 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 18,734,097 18 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 145 12 Nitrogen Oxide 49 25 Carbon Dioxide 47,238 19 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 5.0 9 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.7 20 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,619 16 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 68,752,417 22 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 68,752,417 21

346

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Tennessee Electricity Profile 2010 Tennessee full report Tennessee Electricity Profile 2010 Tennessee full report Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Tennessee) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) RFC/SERC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 21,417 19 Electric Utilities 20,968 11 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 450 49 Net Generation (megawatthours) 82,348,625 19 Electric Utilities 79,816,049 15 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 2,532,576 45 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 138 13 Nitrogen Oxide 33 31 Carbon Dioxide 48,196 18 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 3.7 14 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 0.9 40 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,290 26 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 103,521,537 13 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 103,521,537 10

347

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Arizona Electricity Profile 2010 Arizona profile Arizona Electricity Profile 2010 Arizona profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Arizona) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) WECC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 26,392 15 Electric Utilities 20,115 14 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 6,277 16 Net Generation (megawatthours) 111,750,957 12 Electric Utilities 91,232,664 11 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 20,518,293 17 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 33 33 Nitrogen Oxide 57 17 Carbon Dioxide 55,683 15 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.7 43 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.1 31 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,099 35 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 72,831,737 21 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 72,831,737 20

348

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Kentucky Electricity Profile 2010 Kentucky profile Kentucky Electricity Profile 2010 Kentucky profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Kentucky) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) RFC/SERC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 20,453 21 Electric Utilities 18,945 16 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 1,507 38 Net Generation (megawatthours) 98,217,658 17 Electric Utilities 97,472,144 7 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 745,514 48 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 249 7 Nitrogen Oxide 85 7 Carbon Dioxide 93,160 7 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 5.6 5 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.9 15 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2,091 3 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 93,569,426 14 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 93,569,426 12

349

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Alabama Electricity Profile 2010 Alabama profile Alabama Electricity Profile 2010 Alabama profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Alabama) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) SERC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 32,417 9 Electric Utilities 23,642 7 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 8,775 12 Net Generation (megawatthours) 152,150,512 6 Electric Utilities 122,766,490 2 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 29,384,022 12 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 218 10 Nitrogen Oxide 66 14 Carbon Dioxide 79,375 9 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 3.2 18 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.0 36 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,150 33 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 90,862,645 15 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 90,862,645 13

350

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Arkansas Electricity Profile 2010 Arkansas profile Arkansas Electricity Profile 2010 Arkansas profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Arkansas) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) SERC/SPP Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 15,981 25 Electric Utilities 11,488 23 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 4,493 24 Net Generation (megawatthours) 61,000,185 25 Electric Utilities 47,108,063 20 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 13,892,122 27 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 74 22 Nitrogen Oxide 40 29 Carbon Dioxide 34,018 28 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.7 22 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.5 24 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,229 29 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 48,194,285 29 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 48,194,285 27

351

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Maryland Electricity Profile 2010 Maryland profile Maryland Electricity Profile 2010 Maryland profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Maryland) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) RFC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 12,516 33 Electric Utilities 80 47 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 12,436 9 Net Generation (megawatthours) 43,607,264 33 Electric Utilities 2,996 48 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 43,604,268 9 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 45 28 Nitrogen Oxide 25 34 Carbon Dioxide 26,369 33 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.3 29 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.3 29 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,333 24 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 65,335,498 24 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 36,082,473 31

352

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Mexico Electricity Profile 2010 New Mexico profile Mexico Electricity Profile 2010 New Mexico profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (New Mexico) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) SPP/WECC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 8,130 36 Electric Utilities 6,345 33 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 1,785 36 Net Generation (megawatthours) 36,251,542 37 Electric Utilities 30,848,406 33 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 5,403,136 37 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 15 38 Nitrogen Oxide 56 19 Carbon Dioxide 29,379 31 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.9 42 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 3.4 5 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,787 11 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 22,428,344 39 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 22,428,344 38

353

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Mexico Electricity Profile 2010 New Mexico profile Mexico Electricity Profile 2010 New Mexico profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (New Mexico) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) SPP/WECC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 8,130 36 Electric Utilities 6,345 33 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 1,785 36 Net Generation (megawatthours) 36,251,542 37 Electric Utilities 30,848,406 33 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 5,403,136 37 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 15 38 Nitrogen Oxide 56 19 Carbon Dioxide 29,379 31 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.9 42 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 3.4 5 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,787 11 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 22,428,344 39 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 22,428,344 38

354

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Ohio Electricity Profile 2010 Ohio profile Ohio Electricity Profile 2010 Ohio profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Ohio) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) RFC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 33,071 8 Electric Utilities 20,179 13 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 12,892 7 Net Generation (megawatthours) 143,598,337 7 Electric Utilities 92,198,096 10 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 51,400,241 7 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 610 1 Nitrogen Oxide 122 3 Carbon Dioxide 121,964 4 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 9.4 1 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.9 17 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,872 8 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 154,145,418 4 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 105,329,797 9

355

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Arkansas Electricity Profile 2010 Arkansas profile Arkansas Electricity Profile 2010 Arkansas profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Arkansas) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) SERC/SPP Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 15,981 25 Electric Utilities 11,488 23 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 4,493 24 Net Generation (megawatthours) 61,000,185 25 Electric Utilities 47,108,063 20 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 13,892,122 27 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 74 22 Nitrogen Oxide 40 29 Carbon Dioxide 34,018 28 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.7 22 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.5 24 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,229 29 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 48,194,285 29 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 48,194,285 27

356

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Iowa Electricity Profile 2010 Iowa profile Iowa Electricity Profile 2010 Iowa profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Iowa) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) MRO/SERC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 14,592 28 Electric Utilities 11,282 24 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 3,310 30 Net Generation (megawatthours) 57,508,721 26 Electric Utilities 46,188,988 21 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 11,319,733 30 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 108 18 Nitrogen Oxide 50 22 Carbon Dioxide 47,211 20 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 4.1 11 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.9 14 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,810 10 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 45,445,269 31 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 45,445,269 28

357

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

West Virginia Electricity Profile 2010 West Virginia profile West Virginia Electricity Profile 2010 West Virginia profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (West Virginia) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) RFC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 16,495 24 Electric Utilities 11,719 21 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 4,775 19 Net Generation (megawatthours) 80,788,947 20 Electric Utilities 56,719,755 18 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 24,069,192 13 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 105 20 Nitrogen Oxide 49 23 Carbon Dioxide 74,283 12 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.9 20 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.3 25 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2,027 5 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 32,031,803 34 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 32,031,803 33

358

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Wisconsin Electricity Profile 2010 Wisconsin profile Wisconsin Electricity Profile 2010 Wisconsin profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Wisconsin) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) MRO/RFC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 17,836 23 Electric Utilities 13,098 19 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 4,738 20 Net Generation (megawatthours) 64,314,067 24 Electric Utilities 45,579,970 22 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 18,734,097 18 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 145 12 Nitrogen Oxide 49 25 Carbon Dioxide 47,238 19 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 5.0 9 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.7 20 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,619 16 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 68,752,417 22 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 68,752,417 21

359

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Colorado Electricity Profile 2010 Colorado profile Colorado Electricity Profile 2010 Colorado profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Colorado) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) RFC/WECC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 13,777 30 Electric Utilities 9,114 28 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 4,662 22 Net Generation (megawatthours) 50,720,792 30 Electric Utilities 39,584,166 28 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 11,136,626 31 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 45 29 Nitrogen Oxide 55 20 Carbon Dioxide 40,499 24 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.0 32 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 2.4 10 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,760 12 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 52,917,786 27 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 52,917,786 24

360

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Carolina Electricity Profile 2010 North Carolina profile Carolina Electricity Profile 2010 North Carolina profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (North Carolina) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) SERC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 27,674 12 Electric Utilities 25,553 6 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 2,121 34 Net Generation (megawatthours) 128,678,483 10 Electric Utilities 121,251,138 3 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 7,427,345 34 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 131 14 Nitrogen Oxide 57 16 Carbon Dioxide 73,241 13 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.2 31 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.0 34 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,255 28 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 136,414,947 9 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 136,414,947 5

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


361

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Kansas Electricity Profile 2010 Kansas profile Kansas Electricity Profile 2010 Kansas profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Kansas) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) MRO/SPP Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 12,543 32 Electric Utilities 11,732 20 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 812 45 Net Generation (megawatthours) 47,923,762 32 Electric Utilities 45,270,047 24 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 2,653,716 44 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 41 30 Nitrogen Oxide 46 26 Carbon Dioxide 36,321 26 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.9 33 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 2.1 13 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,671 14 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 40,420,675 32 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 40,420,675 30

362

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Nebraska Electricity Profile 2010 Nebraska profile Nebraska Electricity Profile 2010 Nebraska profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Nebraska) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) MRO/SPP Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 7,857 38 Electric Utilities 7,647 30 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 210 50 Net Generation (megawatthours) 36,630,006 36 Electric Utilities 36,242,921 30 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 387,085 50 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 65 24 Nitrogen Oxide 40 30 Carbon Dioxide 24,461 34 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 3.9 12 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 2.4 9 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,472 19 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 29,849,460 36 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 29,849,460 35

363

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Missouri Electricity Profile 2010 Missouri profile Missouri Electricity Profile 2010 Missouri profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Missouri) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) SERC/SPP Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 21,739 18 Electric Utilities 20,360 12 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 1,378 39 Net Generation (megawatthours) 92,312,989 18 Electric Utilities 90,176,805 12 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 2,136,184 46 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 233 8 Nitrogen Oxide 56 18 Carbon Dioxide 78,815 10 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 5.6 6 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.3 26 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,882 7 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 86,085,117 17 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 86,085,117 15

364

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Dakota Electricity Profile 2010 North Dakota profile Dakota Electricity Profile 2010 North Dakota profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (North Dakota) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) MRO Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 6,188 40 Electric Utilities 4,912 34 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 1,276 40 Net Generation (megawatthours) 34,739,542 39 Electric Utilities 31,343,796 32 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 3,395,746 41 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 116 17 Nitrogen Oxide 52 21 Carbon Dioxide 31,064 30 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 7.3 3 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 3.3 6 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,971 6 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 12,956,263 42 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 12,956,263 41

365

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Minnesota Electricity Profile 2010 Minnesota profile Minnesota Electricity Profile 2010 Minnesota profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Minnesota) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) MRO Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 14,715 27 Electric Utilities 11,547 22 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 3,168 31 Net Generation (megawatthours) 53,670,227 29 Electric Utilities 45,428,599 23 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 8,241,628 32 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 57 27 Nitrogen Oxide 44 27 Carbon Dioxide 32,946 29 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.3 27 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.8 18 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,353 21 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 67,799,706 23 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 67,799,706 22

366

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Utah Electricity Profile 2010 Utah profile Utah Electricity Profile 2010 Utah profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Utah) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) WECC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 7,497 39 Electric Utilities 6,648 32 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 849 44 Net Generation (megawatthours) 42,249,355 35 Electric Utilities 39,522,124 29 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 2,727,231 43 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 25 34 Nitrogen Oxide 68 13 Carbon Dioxide 35,519 27 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.3 38 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 3.6 4 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,853 9 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 28,044,001 37 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 28,044,001 36

367

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Dakota Electricity Profile 2010 North Dakota profile Dakota Electricity Profile 2010 North Dakota profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (North Dakota) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) MRO Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 6,188 40 Electric Utilities 4,912 34 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 1,276 40 Net Generation (megawatthours) 34,739,542 39 Electric Utilities 31,343,796 32 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 3,395,746 41 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 116 17 Nitrogen Oxide 52 21 Carbon Dioxide 31,064 30 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 7.3 3 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 3.3 6 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,971 6 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 12,956,263 42 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 12,956,263 41

368

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Minnesota Electricity Profile 2010 Minnesota profile Minnesota Electricity Profile 2010 Minnesota profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Minnesota) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) MRO Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 14,715 27 Electric Utilities 11,547 22 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 3,168 31 Net Generation (megawatthours) 53,670,227 29 Electric Utilities 45,428,599 23 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 8,241,628 32 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 57 27 Nitrogen Oxide 44 27 Carbon Dioxide 32,946 29 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.3 27 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.8 18 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,353 21 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 67,799,706 23 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 67,799,706 22

369

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Maryland Electricity Profile 2010 Maryland profile Maryland Electricity Profile 2010 Maryland profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Maryland) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) RFC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 12,516 33 Electric Utilities 80 47 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 12,436 9 Net Generation (megawatthours) 43,607,264 33 Electric Utilities 2,996 48 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 43,604,268 9 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 45 28 Nitrogen Oxide 25 34 Carbon Dioxide 26,369 33 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.3 29 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.3 29 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,333 24 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 65,335,498 24 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 36,082,473 31

370

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Carolina Electricity Profile 2010 North Carolina profile Carolina Electricity Profile 2010 North Carolina profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (North Carolina) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) SERC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 27,674 12 Electric Utilities 25,553 6 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 2,121 34 Net Generation (megawatthours) 128,678,483 10 Electric Utilities 121,251,138 3 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 7,427,345 34 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 131 14 Nitrogen Oxide 57 16 Carbon Dioxide 73,241 13 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.2 31 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.0 34 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,255 28 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 136,414,947 9 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 136,414,947 5

371

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Montana Electricity Profile 2010 Montana profile Montana Electricity Profile 2010 Montana profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Montana) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) MRO/WECC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 5,866 41 Electric Utilities 2,340 38 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 3,526 27 Net Generation (megawatthours) 29,791,181 41 Electric Utilities 6,271,180 39 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 23,520,001 14 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 22 35 Nitrogen Oxide 21 35 Carbon Dioxide 20,370 35 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.6 35 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.6 22 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,507 18 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 13,423,138 41 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 10,803,422 43

372

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Iowa Electricity Profile 2010 Iowa profile Iowa Electricity Profile 2010 Iowa profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Iowa) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) MRO/SERC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 14,592 28 Electric Utilities 11,282 24 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 3,310 30 Net Generation (megawatthours) 57,508,721 26 Electric Utilities 46,188,988 21 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 11,319,733 30 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 108 18 Nitrogen Oxide 50 22 Carbon Dioxide 47,211 20 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 4.1 11 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.9 14 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,810 10 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 45,445,269 31 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 45,445,269 28

373

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Nebraska Electricity Profile 2010 Nebraska profile Nebraska Electricity Profile 2010 Nebraska profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Nebraska) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) MRO/SPP Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 7,857 38 Electric Utilities 7,647 30 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 210 50 Net Generation (megawatthours) 36,630,006 36 Electric Utilities 36,242,921 30 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 387,085 50 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 65 24 Nitrogen Oxide 40 30 Carbon Dioxide 24,461 34 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 3.9 12 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 2.4 9 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,472 19 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 29,849,460 36 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 29,849,460 35

374

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Montana Electricity Profile 2010 Montana profile Montana Electricity Profile 2010 Montana profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Montana) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) MRO/WECC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 5,866 41 Electric Utilities 2,340 38 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 3,526 27 Net Generation (megawatthours) 29,791,181 41 Electric Utilities 6,271,180 39 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 23,520,001 14 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 22 35 Nitrogen Oxide 21 35 Carbon Dioxide 20,370 35 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.6 35 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.6 22 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,507 18 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 13,423,138 41 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 10,803,422 43

375

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Wyoming Electricity Profile 2010 Wyoming profile Wyoming Electricity Profile 2010 Wyoming profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Wyoming) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) WECC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 7,986 37 Electric Utilities 6,931 31 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 1,056 41 Net Generation (megawatthours) 48,119,254 31 Electric Utilities 44,738,543 25 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 3,380,711 42 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 67 23 Nitrogen Oxide 61 15 Carbon Dioxide 45,703 21 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 3.1 19 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 2.8 7 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2,094 2 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 17,113,458 40 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 17,113,458 39

376

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Tennessee Electricity Profile 2010 Tennessee full report Tennessee Electricity Profile 2010 Tennessee full report Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Tennessee) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) RFC/SERC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 21,417 19 Electric Utilities 20,968 11 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 450 49 Net Generation (megawatthours) 82,348,625 19 Electric Utilities 79,816,049 15 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 2,532,576 45 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 138 13 Nitrogen Oxide 33 31 Carbon Dioxide 48,196 18 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 3.7 14 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 0.9 40 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,290 26 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 103,521,537 13 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 103,521,537 10

377

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Colorado Electricity Profile 2010 Colorado profile Colorado Electricity Profile 2010 Colorado profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Colorado) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) RFC/WECC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 13,777 30 Electric Utilities 9,114 28 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 4,662 22 Net Generation (megawatthours) 50,720,792 30 Electric Utilities 39,584,166 28 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 11,136,626 31 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 45 29 Nitrogen Oxide 55 20 Carbon Dioxide 40,499 24 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.0 32 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 2.4 10 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,760 12 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 52,917,786 27 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 52,917,786 24

378

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Kansas Electricity Profile 2010 Kansas profile Kansas Electricity Profile 2010 Kansas profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Kansas) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) MRO/SPP Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 12,543 32 Electric Utilities 11,732 20 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 812 45 Net Generation (megawatthours) 47,923,762 32 Electric Utilities 45,270,047 24 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 2,653,716 44 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 41 30 Nitrogen Oxide 46 26 Carbon Dioxide 36,321 26 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.9 33 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 2.1 13 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,671 14 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 40,420,675 32 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 40,420,675 30

379

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Pennsylvania Electricity Profile 2010 Pennsylvania profile Pennsylvania Electricity Profile 2010 Pennsylvania profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Pennsylvania) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) RFC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 45,575 4 Electric Utilities 455 44 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 45,120 2 Net Generation (megawatthours) 229,752,306 2 Electric Utilities 1,086,500 42 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 228,665,806 2 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 387 3 Nitrogen Oxide 136 2 Carbon Dioxide 122,830 3 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 3.7 13 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.3 27 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,179 32 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 148,963,968 5 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 114,787,417 6

380

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Pennsylvania Electricity Profile 2010 Pennsylvania profile Pennsylvania Electricity Profile 2010 Pennsylvania profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Pennsylvania) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) RFC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 45,575 4 Electric Utilities 455 44 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 45,120 2 Net Generation (megawatthours) 229,752,306 2 Electric Utilities 1,086,500 42 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 228,665,806 2 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 387 3 Nitrogen Oxide 136 2 Carbon Dioxide 122,830 3 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 3.7 13 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.3 27 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,179 32 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 148,963,968 5 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 114,787,417 6

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


381

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Wyoming Electricity Profile 2010 Wyoming profile Wyoming Electricity Profile 2010 Wyoming profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Wyoming) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) WECC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 7,986 37 Electric Utilities 6,931 31 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 1,056 41 Net Generation (megawatthours) 48,119,254 31 Electric Utilities 44,738,543 25 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 3,380,711 42 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 67 23 Nitrogen Oxide 61 15 Carbon Dioxide 45,703 21 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 3.1 19 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 2.8 7 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2,094 2 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 17,113,458 40 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 17,113,458 39

382

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Kentucky Electricity Profile 2010 Kentucky profile Kentucky Electricity Profile 2010 Kentucky profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Kentucky) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) RFC/SERC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 20,453 21 Electric Utilities 18,945 16 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 1,507 38 Net Generation (megawatthours) 98,217,658 17 Electric Utilities 97,472,144 7 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 745,514 48 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 249 7 Nitrogen Oxide 85 7 Carbon Dioxide 93,160 7 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 5.6 5 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.9 15 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2,091 3 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 93,569,426 14 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 93,569,426 12

383

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Michigan Electricity Profile 2010 Michigan profile Michigan Electricity Profile 2010 Michigan profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Michigan) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) MRO/RFC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 29,831 11 Electric Utilities 21,639 10 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 8,192 14 Net Generation (megawatthours) 111,551,371 13 Electric Utilities 89,666,874 13 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 21,884,497 16 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 254 6 Nitrogen Oxide 89 6 Carbon Dioxide 74,480 11 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 5.0 8 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.8 19 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,472 20 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 103,649,219 12 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 94,565,247 11

384

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Alabama Electricity Profile 2010 Alabama profile Alabama Electricity Profile 2010 Alabama profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Alabama) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) SERC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 32,417 9 Electric Utilities 23,642 7 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 8,775 12 Net Generation (megawatthours) 152,150,512 6 Electric Utilities 122,766,490 2 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 29,384,022 12 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 218 10 Nitrogen Oxide 66 14 Carbon Dioxide 79,375 9 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 3.2 18 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.0 36 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,150 33 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 90,862,645 15 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 90,862,645 13

385

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Utah Electricity Profile 2010 Utah profile Utah Electricity Profile 2010 Utah profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Utah) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) WECC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 7,497 39 Electric Utilities 6,648 32 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 849 44 Net Generation (megawatthours) 42,249,355 35 Electric Utilities 39,522,124 29 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 2,727,231 43 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 25 34 Nitrogen Oxide 68 13 Carbon Dioxide 35,519 27 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.3 38 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 3.6 4 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1,853 9 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 28,044,001 37 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 28,044,001 36

386

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Indiana Electricity Profile 2010 Indiana profile Indiana Electricity Profile 2010 Indiana profile Table 1. 2010 Summary Statistics (Indiana) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) RFC Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts) 27,638 13 Electric Utilities 23,008 8 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 4,630 23 Net Generation (megawatthours) 125,180,739 11 Electric Utilities 107,852,560 5 Independent Power Producers & Combined Heat and Power 17,328,179 20 Emissions (thousand metric tons) Sulfur Dioxide 385 4 Nitrogen Oxide 120 4 Carbon Dioxide 116,283 5 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 6.8 4 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 2.1 12 Carbon Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2,048 4 Total Retail Sales (megawatthours) 105,994,376 11 Full Service Provider Sales (megawatthours) 105,994,376 8

387

Coal cleaning program for Kazakstan  

SciTech Connect

In 1992 the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) started sponsoring general projects in the Energy and Environmental Sector to improve health and well-being, to improve the efficiency of the existing fuel and energy base, and to assist in the establishment of a strong private sector. Coal Cleaning Program, covered in this report, is one of the recently completed projects by Burns and Roe, which is a prime USAID contractor in the field of energy and environment for the NIS. The basis for coal cleaning program is that large coal resources exist in northeast Kazakstan and coal represents the major fuel for heat and electricity generation at present and in the foreseeable future. The coal mined at Karaganda and Ekibastuz, the two main coal mining areas of Kazakstan, currently contains up to 55% ash, whereas most boilers in Kazakstan are designed to fire a coal with an ash content no greater than 36%. The objective of the task was to determine optimum, state-of-the-art coal cleaning and mining processes which are applicable to coals in Kazakstan considering ultimate coal quality of 36% ash, environmental quality, safety and favorable economics.

Popovic, N. [Burns and Roe Enterprises, Oradell. NJ (United States); Daley, D.P. [Burns and Roe Services Corp., Pittsburgh, PA (United States); Jacobsen, P.S. [Jacobsen (P. Stanley), Littleton, CO (United States)

1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

388

Table 16. Recoverable Coal Reserves and Average Recovery Percentage at Producing Underground Coal Mines by State and Mining Method,  

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

Recoverable Coal Reserves and Average Recovery Percentage at Producing Underground Coal Mines by State and Mining Method, Recoverable Coal Reserves and Average Recovery Percentage at Producing Underground Coal Mines by State and Mining Method, 2012 (million short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Report 2012 Table 16. Recoverable Coal Reserves and Average Recovery Percentage at Producing Underground Coal Mines by State and Mining Method, 2012 (million short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Report 2012 Continuous 1 Conventional and Other 2 Longwall 3 Total Coal-Producing State Recoverable Coal Reserves at Producing Mines Average Recovery Percentage Recoverable Coal Reserves at Producing Mines Average Recovery Percentage Recoverable Coal Reserves at Producing Mines Average Recovery Percentage Recoverable Coal Reserves at Producing Mines Average Recovery Percentage

389

Central Appalachia: Production potential of low-sulfur coal  

SciTech Connect

The vast preponderance of eastern US low sulfur and 1.2-lbs SO{sub 2}/MMBtu compliance coal comes from a relatively small area composed of 14 counties located in eastern Kentucky, southern West Virginia and western Virginia. These 14 counties accounted for 68% of all Central Appalachian coal production in 1989 as well as 85% of all compliance coal shipped to electric utilities from this region. A property-by-property analysis of total production potential in 10 of the 14 counties (Floyd, Knott, Letcher, Harlan, Martin and Pike in Kentucky and Boone, Kanawha, Logan and Mingo in West Virginia) resulted in the following estimates of active and yet to be developed properties: (1) total salable reserves for all sulfur levels were 5.9 billion tons and (2) 1.2-lbs. SO{sub 2}/MMBtu compliance'' reserves totaled 2.38 billion tons. This potential supply of compliance coal is adequate to meet the expanded utility demand expected under acid rain for the next 20 years. Beyond 2010, compliance supplies will begin to reach depletion levels in some areas of the study region. A review of the cost structure for all active mines was used to categorize the cost structure for developing potential supplies. FOB cash costs for all active mines in the ten counties ranged from $15 per ton to $35 per ton and the median mine cost was about $22 per ton. A total of 47 companies with the ability to produce and ship coal from owned or leased reserves are active in the ten-county region. Identified development and expansion projects controlled by active companies are capable of expanding the region's current production level by over 30 million tons per year over the next twenty years. Beyond this period the issue of reserve depletion for coal of all sulfur levels in the ten county region will become a pressing issue. 11 figs., 12 tabs.

Watkins, J. (Hill and Associates, Inc., Annapolis, MD (United States))

1991-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

390

Coal in the Northern Rocky Mountains and Great Plains Region -- Clean, compliant, and available  

SciTech Connect

The Northern Rocky Mountains and Great Plains region produced over 340 million short tons of coal in 1997, approximately 30 percent of the nation`s total coal production. Coals from this region are shipped to 26 states in the western, midwest, southern, and eastern US and production is projected to increase to 415 million short tons by 2015; the projected increase will be utilized primarily for production of electric power. The coals are economically attractive because they can be produced by surface mining, and do not require costly beneficiation to be compliant with emission standards. The coals are compliant because their chemical composition was influenced by tectonic settings of the coal basins and provenance of the sediments entering the basins. Tectonics during the Paleocene also influenced rates of precipitation and depositional systems. These factors, in concert, controlled the amount, distribution, and levels of sulfur, ash, and trace elements of environmental concern in the region`s coals. The emphasis of this paper is on the chemistry of these thick, high-quality coals and the geologic controls that resulted in their accumulation.

Stricker, G.D.; Ellis, M.S.; Flores, R.M.; Bader, L.R. [Geological Survey, Denver, CO (United States)

1998-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

391

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Electricity Profile 2012 Table 1. 2012 Summary statistics (Missouri) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) SERCSPP Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity (megawatts)...

392

EIA - State Electricity Profiles  

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

Arkansas Electricity Profile 2012 Table 1. 2012 Summary Statistics (Arkansas) Item Value U.S. Rank NERC Region(s) SERCSPP Primary Energy Source Coal Net Summer Capacity...

393

Domestic Coal Distribution 2009 Q2 by Destination State: Alabama  

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

61 61 Domestic Coal Distribution 2009 Q2 by Destination State: Alabama (1000 Short Tons) 1 / 61 Domestic Coal Distribution 2009 Q2 by Destination State: Alabama (1000 Short Tons) Origin State Transportation Mode Electricity Generation Coke Plants Industrial Plants Excluding Coke Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Railroad 875 12 33 - 920 Alabama River 855 - - - 855 Alabama Truck 155 84 230 - 469 Alabama Total 1,885 96 263 - 2,244 Colorado Railroad 123 - - - 123 Illinois River 145 - - - 145 Indiana River 246 - - - 246 Indiana Truck 37 - - - 37 Indiana Total 283 - - - 283 Kentucky Railroad 426 - 30 - 457 Kentucky (East) Railroad 172 - 30 - 202 Kentucky (West) Railroad 255 - - - 255 Oklahoma Railroad - 6 - - 6 Utah Railroad 30 - - - 30 Virginia Railroad - 14 - - 14 West Virginia Railroad - 75 - -

394

Coal Fly Ash Chemistry and Carbon Dioxide Infusion Process to Enhance its Utilization  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

The increased use of coal in production of electricity is predicted to ... continue well into the 21st century. Thus, coal burning power plants play a key role ... the United States. Like any other process, coal ...

Katta J. Reddy

1999-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

395

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013  

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

U.S. Coal Stocks, 2007 - 2013 U.S. Coal Stocks, 2007 - 2013 (thousand short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 Table 37. U.S. Coal Stocks, 2007 - 2013 (thousand short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 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 2007 March 31 141,389 2,444 5,756 - 149,588 34,007 183,595 June 30 154,812 2,364 5,672 - 162,849 32,484 195,333 September 30 142,666 1,972 5,811 - 150,448 30,090 180,538 December 31 151,221 1,936 5,624 - 158,781 33,977 192,758 2008 March 31 146,497 1,462 4,818 448 153,225 34,876 188,101 June 30 152,542 1,756 4,983 478 159,760 32,086 191,846

396

Coal surface control for advanced physical fine coal cleaning technologies  

SciTech Connect

This final report presents the research work carried out on the Coal Surface Control for Advanced Physical Fine Coal Cleaning Technologies project, sponsored by the US Department of Energy, Pittsburgh Energy Technology Center (DOE/PETC). The project was to support the engineering development of the selective agglomeration technology in order to reduce the sulfur content of US coals for controlling SO[sub 2] emissions (i.e., acid rain precursors). The overall effort was a part of the DOE/PETCs Acid Rain Control Initiative (ARCI). The overall objective of the project is to develop techniques for coal surface control prior to the advanced physical fine coal cleaning process of selective agglomeration in order to achieve 85% pyrite sulfur rejection at an energy recovery greater than 85% based on run-of-mine coal. The surface control is meant to encompass surface modification during grinding and laboratory beneficiation testing. The project includes the following tasks: Project planning; methods for analysis of samples; development of standard beneficiation test; grinding studies; modification of particle surface; and exploratory R D and support. The coal samples used in this project include three base coals, Upper Freeport - Indiana County, PA, Pittsburgh NO. 8 - Belmont County, OH, and Illinois No. 6 - Randolph County, IL, and three additional coals, Upper Freeport - Grant County- WV, Kentucky No. 9 Hopkins County, KY, and Wyodak - Campbell County, WY. A total of 149 drums of coal were received.

Morsi, B.I.; Chiang, S.H.; Sharkey, A.; Blachere, J.; Klinzing, G.; Araujo, G.; Cheng, Y.S.; Gray, R.; Streeter, R.; Bi, H.; Campbell, P.; Chiarlli, P.; Ciocco, M.; Hittle, L.; Kim, S.; Kim, Y.; Perez, L.; Venkatadri, R.

1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

397

Electricity Monthly Update  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Electric Power Sector Coal Stocks: December 2011 Electric Power Sector Coal Stocks: December 2011 Stocks Temperate weather throughout the fall has allowed electric power sector coal stocks to replenish from the summer burn. All coal stockpile levels were essentially flat when compared to December 2010 and were a mostly up year-to-date. Days of Burn Days of burn Coal capacity The average number of days of burn held at electric power plants is a forward looking estimate of coal supply given a power plantâ€(tm)s current stockpile and past consumption patterns. The average number of days of burn held on hand at electric power plants was essentially flat compared to last month and remained below levels seen in December of 2010 or 2009. While stockpile levels have recovered from summer lows, the increasing

398

New developments in coal briquetting technology  

SciTech Connect

Briquetting of coal has been with us for well over a century. In the earliest applications of coal briquetting, less valuable fine coal was agglomerated into briquettes using a wide variety of binders, including coal tar, pitch and asphalt. Eventually, roll briquetters came into more widespread use, permitting the process to become a continuous one. Coal briquetting went out of favor during the 1950s in most of the industrialized world. The major reason for this decline in use was the discovery that the coal gas distillates used for binders were harmful to human health. Also, the abundance of cheap petroleum made coal briquettes a less attractive alternative as an industrial or domestic fuel. The re-emergence of coal as a primary industrial fuel and also its increased prominence as a fuel for thermal electric power stations led to a large increase in the annual volume of coal being mined worldwide. Coal preparation technology steadily improved over the years with the general exception of fine coal preparation. The processes available for treating this size range were considerably more expensive per unit mass of coal treated than coarse coal processes. Also, costly dewatering equipment was required after cleaning to remove surface moisture. Even with dewatering, the high surface area per unit mass of fine coal versus coarse coal resulted in high moisture contents. Therefore, little incentive existed to improve the performance of fine coal processes since this would only increase the amount of wet coal fines which would have to be dealt with. With such an ever-increasing volume of coal fines being created each year, there emerged an interest in recovering this valuable product. Several schemes were developed to recover coal fines discarded in abandoned tailings impoundments by previous operations.

Tucker, P.V. [Kilborn Inc., Ontario (Canada); Bosworth, G.B. [Kilborn Engineering Pacific Ltd., Vancouver, British Columbia (Canada); Kalb, G.W. [KKS Systems Inc., Wheeling, WV (United States)

1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

399

Coal production 1984. [USA; 1984  

SciTech Connect

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.

Not Available

1984-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

400

Monthly Flash Estimates of Electric Power Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Burn Non-Lignite Coal Burn Non-Lignite Coal Page 7 8. Month-to-Month Comparisons: Electric Power Retail Sales and Average Prices Page 8 9. Retail Sales Trends Page 9 10. Average Retail Price Trends Page 10 11. Heating and Cooling Degree Days Page 11 12. Documentation Page 12 Monthly Flash Estimates of Data for: October 2010 Section 1. Commentary Electric Power Data In October 2010, the contiguous United States experienced temperatures that were above average. Accordingly, the total population-weighted heating degree days for the United States were 15.6 percent below the October normal. Retail sales of electricity remained relatively unchanged from October 2009. Over the same period, the average U.S. retail price of electricity increased 1.8 percent. For the 12-month period ending October 2010, the average U.S.

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


401

"YEAR","MONTH","STATE","UTILITY CODE","UTILITY NAME","RESIDENTIAL PHOTOVOLTAIC ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","COMMERCIAL PHOTOVOLTAIC ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","INDUSTRIAL PHOTOVOLTAIC ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","TRANSPORTATION PHOTOVOLTAIC ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","TOTAL PHOTOVOLTAIC ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","RESIDENTIAL PHOTOVOLTAIC INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","COMMERCIAL PHOTOVOLTAIC INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","INDUSTRIAL PHOTOVOLTAIC INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","TRANSPORTATION PHOTOVOLTAIC INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","TOTAL PHOTOVOLTAIC INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","RESIDENTIAL PHOTOVOLTAIC NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","COMMERCIAL PHOTOVOLTAIC NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","INDUSTRIAL PHOTOVOLTAIC NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","TRANSPORTATIONPHOTOVOLTAIC NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","TOTAL PHOTOVOLTAIC NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","RESIDENTIAL WIND ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","COMMERCIAL WIND ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","INDUSTRIAL WIND ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","TRANSPORTATION WIND ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","TOTAL WIND ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","RESIDENTIAL WIND INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","COMMERCIAL WIND INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","INDUSTRIAL WIND INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","TRANSPORTATION WIND INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","TOTAL WIND INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","RESIDENTIAL WIND NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","COMMERCIAL WIND NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","INDUSTRIAL WIND NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","TRANSPORTATION WIND NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","TOTAL WIND NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","RESIDENTIAL OTHER ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","COMMERCIAL OTHER ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","INDUSTRIAL OTHER ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","TRANSPORTATION OTHER ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","TOTAL OTHER ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","RESIDENTIAL OTHER INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","COMMERCIAL OTHER INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","INDUSTRIAL OTHER INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","TRANSPORTATION OTHER INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","TOTAL OTHER INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","RESIDENTIAL OTHER NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","COMMERCIAL OTHER NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","INDUSTRIAL OTHER NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","TRANSPORTATION OTHER NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","TOTAL OTHER NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","RESIDENTIAL TOTAL ENERGY SOLD BACK TO THE UTILITY (MWh)","COMMERCIAL TOTAL ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","INDUSTRIAL TOTAL ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","TRANSPORTATION TOTAL ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","TOTAL ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","RESIDENTIAL TOTAL INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","COMMERCIAL TOTAL INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","INDUSTRIAL TOTAL INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","TRANSPORTATION TOTAL INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","TOTAL INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","RESIDENTIAL TOTAL NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","COMMERCIAL TOTAL NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","INDUSTRIAL TOTAL NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","TRANSPORTATION TOTAL NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","TOTAL NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","RESIDENTIAL ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK TO THE UTILITY FOR ALL STATES SERVED(MWh)","COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK TO THE UTILITY FOR ALL STATES SERVED(MWh)","INDUSTRIAL ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK TO THE UTILITY FOR ALL STATES SERVED(MWh)","TRANSPORTATION ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK TO THE UTILITY FOR ALL STATES SERVED(MWh)","TOTAL ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK TO THE UTILITYFOR ALL STATES SERVED(MWh)","RESIDENTIAL INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY FOR ALL STATES SERVED(MW)","COMMERCIAL INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY FOR ALL STATES SERVED(MW)","INDUSTRIAL INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY FOR ALL STATES SERVED(MW)","TRANSPORTATION INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY FOR ALL STATES SERVED(MW)","INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY FOR ALL STATES SERVED(MW)","RESIDENTIAL NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT FOR ALL STATES SERVED","COMMERCIAL NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT FOR ALL STATES SERVED","INDUSTRIAL NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT FOR ALL STATES SERVED","TRANSPORTATION NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT FOR ALL STATES SERVED","NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT FOR ALL STATES SERVED"  

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

TRANSPORTATIONPHOTOVOLTAIC NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","TOTAL PHOTOVOLTAIC NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","RESIDENTIAL WIND ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","COMMERCIAL WIND ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","INDUSTRIAL WIND ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","TRANSPORTATION WIND ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","TOTAL WIND ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","RESIDENTIAL WIND INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","COMMERCIAL WIND INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","INDUSTRIAL WIND INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","TRANSPORTATION WIND INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","TOTAL WIND INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","RESIDENTIAL WIND NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","COMMERCIAL WIND NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","INDUSTRIAL WIND NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","TRANSPORTATION WIND NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","TOTAL WIND NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","RESIDENTIAL OTHER ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","COMMERCIAL OTHER ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","INDUSTRIAL OTHER ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","TRANSPORTATION OTHER ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","TOTAL OTHER ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","RESIDENTIAL OTHER INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","COMMERCIAL OTHER INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","INDUSTRIAL OTHER INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","TRANSPORTATION OTHER INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","TOTAL OTHER INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","RESIDENTIAL OTHER NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","COMMERCIAL OTHER NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","INDUSTRIAL OTHER NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","TRANSPORTATION OTHER NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","TOTAL OTHER NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","RESIDENTIAL TOTAL ENERGY SOLD BACK TO THE UTILITY (MWh)","COMMERCIAL TOTAL ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","INDUSTRIAL TOTAL ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","TRANSPORTATION TOTAL ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","TOTAL ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","RESIDENTIAL TOTAL INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","COMMERCIAL TOTAL INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","INDUSTRIAL TOTAL INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","TRANSPORTATION TOTAL INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","TOTAL INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY (MW)","RESIDENTIAL TOTAL NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","COMMERCIAL TOTAL NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","INDUSTRIAL TOTAL NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","TRANSPORTATION TOTAL NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","TOTAL NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","RESIDENTIAL ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK TO THE UTILITY FOR ALL STATES SERVED(MWh)","COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK TO THE UTILITY FOR ALL STATES SERVED(MWh)","INDUSTRIAL ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK TO THE UTILITY FOR ALL STATES SERVED(MWh)","TRANSPORTATION ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK TO THE UTILITY FOR ALL STATES SERVED(MWh)","TOTAL ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK TO THE UTILITYFOR ALL STATES SERVED(MWh)","RESIDENTIAL INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY FOR ALL STATES SERVED(MW)","COMMERCIAL INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY FOR ALL STATES SERVED(MW)","INDUSTRIAL INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY FOR ALL STATES SERVED(MW)","TRANSPORTATION INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY FOR ALL STATES SERVED(MW)","INSTALLED NET METERING CAPACITY FOR ALL STATES SERVED(MW)","RESIDENTIAL NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT FOR ALL STATES SERVED","COMMERCIAL NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT FOR ALL STATES SERVED","INDUSTRIAL NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT FOR ALL STATES SERVED","TRANSPORTATION NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT FOR ALL STATES SERVED","NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT FOR ALL STATES SERVED"

402

Annual Coal Report - Energy Information Administration  

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

Annual Coal Report Annual Coal Report Release Date: December 12, 2013 | Next Release Date: November 2014 | full report Previous Annual Coal / Coal Industry Annual Reports historical data (PDF): 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 before 2001 Industry Annual 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 Go The Annual Coal Report (ACR) provides annual data on U.S. coal production, number of mines, productive capacity, recoverable reserves, employment, productivity, consumption, stocks, and prices. All data for 2012 and prior years are final. Highlights for 2012: U.S. coal production decreased 7.2 percent from 2011, driven by lower electric power sector demand, to roughly 1.02 billion short tons. Productive capacity of U.S. coal mines decreased 3.5 percent to 1.28

403

Definition: Bituminous coal | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Bituminous coal Bituminous coal Jump to: navigation, search Dictionary.png Bituminous coal A dense coal, usually black, sometimes dark brown, often with well-defined bands of bright and dull material, used primarily as fuel in steam-electric power generation, with substantial quantities also used for heat and power applications in manufacturing and to make coke; contains 45-86% carbon.[1][2] View on Wikipedia Wikipedia Definition Bituminous coal or black coal is a relatively soft coal containing a tarlike substance called bitumen. It is of higher quality than lignite coal but of poorer quality than anthracite. Formation is usually the result of high pressure being exerted on lignite. Its composition can be black and sometimes dark brown; often there are well-defined bands of bright and dull

404

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

SciTech Connect

ADA Environmental Solutions (ADA-ES) has successfully completed a research and development program granted by the Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) to develop a family of non-toxic flue gas conditioning agents to provide utilities and industries with a cost-effective means of complying with environmental regulations on particulate emissions and opacity. An extensive laboratory screening of potential additives was completed followed by full-scale trials at four utility power plants. The developed cohesivity additives have been demonstrated on a 175 MW utility boiler that exhibited poor collection of unburned carbon in the electrostatic precipitator. With cohesivity conditioning, opacity spiking caused by rapping reentrainment was reduced and total particulate emissions were reduced by more than 30%. Ammonia conditioning was also successful in reducing reentrainment on the same unit. Conditioned fly ash from the process is expected to be suitable for dry or wet disposal and for concrete admixture.

C. Jean Bustard

2003-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

405

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

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

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

406

"Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Source(b)","Electricity(c)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(d)","Natural Gas(e)","NGL(f)","Coal","Breeze","Other(g)","Produced Onsite(h)"  

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

1.4 Relative Standard Errors for Table 1.4;" 1.4 Relative Standard Errors for Table 1.4;" " Unit: Percents." ,,"Any",,,,,,,,,"Shipments" "NAICS",,"Energy","Net","Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and",,"Coke and",,"of Energy Sources" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Source(b)","Electricity(c)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(d)","Natural Gas(e)","NGL(f)","Coal","Breeze","Other(g)","Produced Onsite(h)" ,,"Total United States" 311,"Food",0.4,0.4,19.4,8.9,2,6.9,5.4,0,10.1,9.1 3112," Grain and Oilseed Milling",0,0,21.1,14.7,8.4,13.3,7.9,"X",17.9,9.1

407

Adsorption and Strain: The CO2-Induced Swelling of Coal  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

.07.014 #12;Abstract Enhanced coal bed methane recovery (ECBM) consists in injecting carbon dioxide in coal behavior (B), adsorp- tion, molecular simulations Methane production from unminable coal seams -denoted as Coal Bed Methane (CBM)- has amounted in 2008 to about 10% of the total natural gas production

Paris-Sud XI, Université de

408

Electricity Monthly Update  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

January 2012 | Release Date: Mar. 27, January 2012 | Release Date: Mar. 27, 2012 | Next Release Date: Apr. 27, 2012 | Re-Release Date: November 28, 2012 (correction) Previous Issues Issue: November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 Previous issues Format: html xls Go Highlights: January 2012 Warm temperatures across much of the U.S. led to lower retail sales of electricity during January 2012. Coal-fired generation decreased in every region of the United States when compared to January 2011. Coal stocks recovered due to decreased consumption this January compared to the same month of 2011. Key Indicators Jan 2012 % Change from Jan. 2011 Total Net Generation (Thousand MWh) 340,743 -6.4%

409

A centurial history of technological change and learning curves or pulverized coal-fired utility boilers  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

and Japan, where higher coal prices justi?ed the higher costof the total O&M cost and the coal price remained relatively

Yeh, Sonia; Rubin, Edward

2007-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

410

Catalytic Coal Gasification Process  

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

Catalytic Coal Gasification Process Catalytic Coal Gasification Process for the Production of Methane-Rich Syngas Opportunity Research is active on the patent pending technology, titled "Production of Methane-Rich Syngas from Fuels Using Multi-functional Catalyst/Capture Agent." This technology is available for licensing and/or further collaborative research from the U.S. Department of Energy's National Energy Technology Laboratory. Overview Reducing pollution emitted by coal and waste power plants in an economically viable manner and building power plants that co-generate fuels and chemicals during times of low electricity demand are pressing goals for the energy industry. One way to achieve these goals in an economically viable manner is through the use of a catalytic gasifier that

411

COAL & POWER SYSTEMS  

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

COAL & POWER SYSTEMS COAL & POWER SYSTEMS STRATEGIC & MULTI-YEAR PROGRAM PLANS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY * OFFICE OF FOSSIL ENERGY GREENER, SOONER... THROUGH TECHNOLOGY INTRODUCTION .......... i-1 STRATEGIC PLAN ........ 1-1 PROGRAM PLANS Vision 21 .......................... 2-1 Central Power Systems ...... 3-1 Distributed Generation ..... 4-1 Fuels ................................ 5-1 Carbon Sequestration ....... 6-1 Advanced Research ........... 7-1 TABLE OF CONTENTS STRATEGIC & MULTI-YEAR PROGRAM PLANS STRENGTH THROUGH SCIENCE... A "GREENER, SOONER" PHILOSOPHY Coal, natural gas, and oil fuel about 70 percent of the electricity generated in the United States. As promising as renewable and other alternative fuels are, it will be several decades before they can make significant energy contributions to the Nation's

412

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...

413

CO2 Mitigation Economics for Existing Coal-Fired Power Plants  

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

Engineering & Economic Consultants Engineering & Economic Consultants Website: www.sfapacific.com 444 Castro Street, Suite 720 Mountain View, California 94041 Telephone: (650) 969-8876 Fax: (650) 969-1317 Email: Simbeck@sfapacific.com CO 2 MITIGATION ECONOMICS FOR EXISTING COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS Presented at the U.S. Dept. of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) First National Conference on Carbon Sequestration May 14-17, 2001 Washington, DC by Dale R. Simbeck Vice President Technology SFA Pacific, Inc. Mountain View, CA ABSTRACT Electric power generation represents one of the largest sources of CO 2 emissions in North America. A major issue in the analysis of CO 2 mitigation options is the fact that over 45% of total electric power generation in North America is from coal. These existing coal-based power

414

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

SciTech Connect

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.

NONE

1998-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

415

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

SciTech Connect

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.

NONE

1998-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

416

Annual Energy Outlook 2014: Electricity Working Group Meeting...  

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

Electricity Analysis Team Office of Electricity, Coal, Nuclear, and Renewables Analysis Office of Energy Analysis Annual Energy Outlook 2014: Electricity Working Group Meeting July...

417

All fired-up about coal : technology & policy recommendations for the 2030 United Kingdom energy strategy  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Given United Kingdom (UK) carbon dioxide emissions policies that direct attention at the electricity segment, the focus is on the largest electricity polluter, coal, and the immediately pressing issue of UK coal policy. ...

Donnelly, Kathy A. (Kathy Ann)

2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

418

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013  

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

U.S. Coal Consumption by End-Use Sector, 2007 - 2013 U.S. Coal Consumption by End-Use Sector, 2007 - 2013 (thousand short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 Table 32. U.S. Coal Consumption by End-Use Sector, 2007 - 2013 (thousand short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 Other Industrial Commercial and Institutional Year and Quarter Electric Power Sector 1 Coke Plants CHP 2 Non- CHP 3 Total CHP 4 Non- CHP 5 Total Total 2007 January - March 257,516 5,576 5,834 8,743 14,578 547 510 1,058 278,727 April - June 246,591 5,736 5,552 8,521 14,074 426 279 705 267,106 July - September 283,556 5,678 5,546 8,180 13,725 458 247 705 303,665 October - December 257,478 5,726 5,605 8,634 14,238 495 563 1,058 278,500 Total 1,045,141 22,715 22,537 34,078 56,615

419

Coal extraction  

SciTech Connect

Coal is extracted using a mixed solvent which includes a substantially aromatic component and a substantially naphthenic component, at a temperature of 400/sup 0/ to 500/sup 0/C. Although neither component is an especially good solvent for coal by itself, the use of mixed solvent gives greater flexibility to the process and offers efficiency gains.

Clarke, J.W.; Kimber, G.M.; Rantell, T.D.; Snape, C.E.

1985-06-04T23:59:59.000Z

420

Quarterly Coal Distribution Report - Energy Information Administration  

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

Quarterly Coal Distribution Report Quarterly Coal Distribution Report Release Date: October 01, 2013 | Next Release Date: January 3, 2014 | full report The Quarterly Coal Distribution Report (QCDR) provides detailed U.S. domestic coal distribution data by coal origin state, coal destination state, mode of transportation, and consuming sector. Quarterly data for all years are preliminary and will be superseded by the release of the corresponding "Annual Coal Distribution Report." Highlights for the second quarter 2013: Total domestic coal distribution was an estimated 205.8 million short tons (mmst) in the second quarter 2013. This value is 0.7 mmst (i.e. 0.3 percent) higher than the previous quarter and 6.3 mmst (i.e. 3.1 percent) higher than the second quarter of 2012 estimates.

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


421

Annual Coal Distribution Report - Energy Information Administration  

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

Annual Coal Distribution Report Annual Coal Distribution Report Release Date: December 19, 2013 | Next Release Date: November 2014 | full report | Revision/Correction 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 2012 are final, and this report supersedes the 2012 quarterly coal distribution reports. Highlights for 2012: Total coal distributions for 2012 were 1,003.1 million short tons (mmst), a decrease of 7.9% compared to 2011. Distributions to domestic destinations were 877.3 mmst, a decrease of 104.1 mmst (i.e. 10.6% decrease) compared to 2011. Distributions to

422

International Energy Outlook 2006 - World Coal Markets  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Coal Markets Coal Markets International Energy Outlook 2006 Chapter 5: World Coal Markets In the IEO2006 reference case, world coal consumption nearly doubles from 2003 to 2030, with the non-OECD countries accounting for 81 percent of the increase. CoalÂ’s share of total world energy consumption increases from 24 percent in 2003 to 27 percent in 2030. Figure 48. World Coal Consumption by Region, 1980-2030 (Billion Short Tons). Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Figure Data Figure 49. Coal Share of World energy Consumption by Sector 2003, 2015, and 2030 (Percent). Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Figure Data Table 10. World Recoverable Coal Reserves (Billion Short Tons) Printer friendly version

423

" Electricity Sales/Transfers Out",96,4  

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

4. Total First Use (formerly Primary Consumption) of Energy for All Purposes" 4. Total First Use (formerly Primary Consumption) of Energy for All Purposes" " by Selected Energy Sources, 1994" " (Estimates in Trillion Btu)" ,,"RSE" ,,"Row" "Selected Energy Sources","Total","Factors" ,"Total United States" "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",," " " Renewable Resources",10,10 " Electricity Sales/Transfers Out",96,4 "Coke and Breeze",449,8 "Residual Fuel Oil",490,3

424

THE USE OF FERRIC SULFATE - ACID MEDIA FOR THE DESULFURIZATION OF MODEL COMPOUNDS OF COAL  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

1 (W.Va. ) Sulfate Organic Ash (%) Coal (ref. 32) Total Sin slag or bottom ash, coal gasification or liquefaction asthe Sulfur and Ash Content of High-Sulfur Coals by Peroxide-

Clary, Lloyd R.

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

425

Section 5 - Coal  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Coal has the longest history of use among the fossil fuels, with use as a fuel dating to 3000 BC in China and Wales. Marco Polo’s “Description of the World” (1298) comments on many novel customs and practices of China, including the use of “stones that burn like logs” (coal). By the thirteenth century the mining of coal was widespread in England in regions such as Durham, Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire, Staffordshire, and North and South Wales. By the early seventeenth century nearly half of England’s maritime trade consisted of coal exports. Coal was the fuel that launched the Industrial Revolution in Europe and then the United States. By the late 1890s, the U.S. assumed the lead in world coal production. Britain now ranked second, after having been the world leader since the beginnings of the formal industry in the 1500s. Germany was third, an indication of its growing industrial power relative to continental rival France. Coal’s leading role in energy use peaked in the early twentieth century, after which it was supplanted by oil and natural gas. By the late twentieth century China’s rapid economic expansion, surging demand for electricity, and prodigious coal resources combined to propel it to become the world leader in production. Continuous improvements in coal mining technology have produced lower costs, improved safety, and greater labor productivity. John Buddle introduced the first air pump to ventilate coal mines (1803), followed shortly by the miner’s safety lamps that were developed independently by Sir Humphry Davy, William Clanny, and George Stephenson (1813-1816). Coal mining underwent a rapid transition in the 1880s to mechanical coal cutting in mines in the United Kingdom, the United States, and Russia. The St. Joseph Lead Company of Missouri (1900) invented the first underground mine roof bolts that became a key safety feature in underground coal mines. The first commercially successful bucket wheel excavator was used at the Luise Mine in Braunkohlemwerke, Germany (1925), followed by the first successful continuous miners in U.S. underground coal mining (1948). The first mechanized U.S. longwall mining system appeared in 1951, and was followed by the self-advancing hydraulic longwall support system that provided greater support for the roof of the mine. LeTourneau Technologies, Inc. of Texas manufactured the largest rubber tired front-end wheel loader in the world, the L-2350, which would play an important role in loading coal in Wyoming’s large surface mines (2005). Coal mining has always been a very hazardous occupation, and has produced some of history’s worst industrial disasters. The Courrières mine disaster, Europe's worst mining accident, caused the death of 1,099 miners in Northern France (1906). An explosion in a coal mine in Liaoning province in northeastern China killed more than 1,500 Chinese miners (1942), as did other major accidents in Ky?sh?, Japan (1914), Wankie, Rhodesia (1972), Wales (1913), Bihar, India (1965), and West Virginia, U.S. (1907), to name just a few. Legislation such as the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act in the U.S. (1969) improved working conditions in many nations. The Great Smog of London (1952) occurred after an exceptionally cold winter forced homes and factories to burn large quantities of coal. A temperature inversion formed, trapping pollutants above the ground. More than 4,000 people died from respiratory ailments within the following week. The use of coal has been impacted by legislation to control the environmental impacts associated with its mining and combustion. The first known environmental regulation of coal dates to 1306 when King Edward II of England prohibited burning sea coal while Parliament was in session because of its offensive smoke. Sulfur dioxide from coal combustion was tied to acid rain in the 1960s, and carbon dioxide emissions became a concern beginning in the 1980s when climate change emerged as a critical environmental issue.

Cutler J. Cleveland; Christopher Morris

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

426

Coal availability and coal recoverability studies: A reevaluation of the United States coal resources  

SciTech Connect

A cooperative program between the US Geological Survey (USGS), US Bureau of Mines (USBM), and geological agencies of the principal coal-bearing States has began to (1) identify and delineate current major land-use/environmental and technologic/geologic restrictions on the availability of coal resources; (2) estimate the amount of remaining coal resources that may be available for development under those constraints; (3) estimate the amount that can be economically extracted and marketed; and (4) identify possible social and economic disruptions that could occur within local and regional economies as coal resources are exhausted. Within major coal-producing regions, selected 7.5-minute quadrangles are chosen to represent variations in geology, topography, and land-use patterns so that results might be extrapolated throughout the entire region. After identifying State and Federal coal mining regulations, USGS and State scientists consult with local coal-industry engineers, geologists, and mine operators to ascertain local mining practices. Coal bed outcrop lines, current and past mined areas, and restrictions to mining are plotted at 1:24,000 scale and geographic information system (GIS) techniques are applied. Coal availability/recoverability studies have expanded into the central and northern Appalachian regions, Illinois basin, and Powder River basin. The first four basins, with 75% of current US coal production, should be completed by 1998. The total program is designed to cover 150 quadrangles from within the 11 major coal regions of the US. These 11 regions represent 97% of current US coal production. Planned project completion is 2001.

Carter, M.D. [Geological Survey, Reston, VA (United States); Teeters, D.D. [Bureau of Mines, Denver, CO (United States)

1995-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

427

Coal | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Coal Coal Jump to: navigation, search Click to return to AEO2011 page AEO2011 Data From AEO2011 report Full figure data for Figure 101. Reference Case Tables Table 1. Total Energy Supply, Disposition, and Price Summary Table 15. Coal Supply, Disposition and Price Table 21. Carbon Dioxide Emissions by Sector and Source - New England Table 22. Carbon Dioxide Emissions by Sector and Source- Middle Atlantic Table 23. Carbon Dioxide Emissions by Sector and Source - East North Central Table 24. Carbon Dioxide Emissions by Sector and Source - West North Central Table 25. Carbon Dioxide Emissions by Sector and Source - South Atlantic Table 26. Carbon Dioxide Emissions by Sector and Source - East South Central Table 27. Carbon Dioxide Emissions by Sector and Source - West South

428

Monthly Flash Estimates of Electric Power Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

November 2010 November 2010 Section 1. Commentary Electric Power Data The contiguous United States experienced temperatures that were near normal in November 2010. Accordingly, the total population-weighted heating degree days for the United States were 3.0 percent below the November normal. In November 2010, retail sales of electricity increased 2.0 percent from November 2009. Over the same period, the average U.S. retail price of electricity increased 2.8 percent. For the 12-month period ending November 2010, the average U.S. retail price of electricity increased 0.3 percent over the previous 12-month period ending November 2009. Total electric power generation in the United States increased 3.6 percent compared to November 2009. Over the same period, coal generation remained relatively unchanged, while natural gas generation increased 8.8 percent and

429

Carbon dioxide recovery from an integrated coal gasifier, combined cycle plant using membrane separation and a CO2 gas turbine  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

A scheme is described for electricity production based on coal gasification with recovery of carbon dioxide. In this scheme, coal is gasified into a coal gas, consisting mainly of hydrogen and carbon monoxide. A ...

Chris Hendriks

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

430

A GIS-based Assessment of Coal-based Hydrogen Infrastructure Deployment in the State of Ohio  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

electricity and CO 2 from coal with commercially readyHong B, Slatick E. Carbon dioxide emission factors for coal.EIA Quarterly Coal Report January–April 1994:1–8. 1994. DOE/

Johnson, Nils; Yang, Christopher; Ogden, J

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

431

Annual Coal Distribution Tables  

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

Foreign Distribution of U.S. Coal by Major Coal-Exporting States and Foreign Distribution of U.S. Coal by Major Coal-Exporting States and Destination, 2001 Coal-Exporting State and Destination Metallurgical Steam Total Alaska - 761 761 South Korea - 761 761 Alabama 4,667 167 4,834 Argentina 155 - 155 Belgium 989 - 989 Brazil 1,104 - 1,104 Bulgaria 82 - 82 Egypt 518 - 518 Italy 115 - 115 Netherlands 56 83 139 Spain 412 84 496 Turkey 581 - 581 United Kingdom 654 - 654 Kentucky 2,130 - 2,130 Canada 920 - 920 France 22 - 22 Iceland 9 - 9 Italy 430 - 430 Netherlands 417 - 417 Spain 9 - 9 United Kingdom 323 - 323 Pennsylvania 1,086 14,326 15,722 Belgium - 203 203 Brazil 372 - 373 Canada - 12,141 12,418 France - 84 84 Germany 495 165 661 Ireland - 136 136 Netherlands 219 879 1,097 Norway - - 7 Peru - - 21 Portugal - 634 634 United Kingdom - 85 85 Venezuela - - 3 Utah - 1,420 1,420 Japan - 1,334 1,334 Taiwan - 86 86 Virginia 4,531

432

Zero emission coal  

SciTech Connect

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.

Ziock, H.; Lackner, K.

2000-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

433

1 - Social and economic value of coal  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Abstract: As the world’s leading source of electric power, coal is the continuing cornerstone of economic development, social progress, and a higher quality of life. Coal is powering the twenty-first century economic miracles rapidly unfolding in China and India, as reliability, affordability, and availability make coal the fuel of choice in the developing world. Demand modeling from both the International Energy Agency and US Energy Information Administration indicates that coal will provide the most amount of incremental energy over the next two decades. Looking forward, with the expanding implementation of clean coal technologies, the door to coal’s global leadership role will remain open as the world strives to meet the ever-rising demand for energy while reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

J. Clemente; F. Clemente

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

434

Annual Energy Outlook with Projections to 2025-Market Trends - Coal  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Coal Coal Index (click to jump links) Coal Production and Prices Coal Mining Labor Productivity Coal Consumption Coal Production and Prices Emissions Caps Lead to More Use of Low-Sulfur Coal From Western Mines Continued improvements in mine productivity (which have averaged 5.9 percent per year since 1980) are projected to cause falling real minemouth prices throughout the forecast relative to historical levels. Higher electricity demand and lower prices, in turn, are projected to yield increasing coal demand, but the demand is subject to the overall sulfur emissions cap in the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, which encourages progressively greater reliance on the lowest sulfur coals (from Wyoming, Montana, Colorado, and Utah). Figure 106. Coal production by region, 1970-2025 (million short tons). Having problems, call our National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800 for help.

435

ELECTRIC  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

ELECTRIC 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 quantity of at lezst 5 grams would probably be sufficient for our purpose, and this was included in our 3@icntion for license to the Atonic Energy Coskqission.. This license has been approved, 2nd rre would Llp!Jreciate informztion as to how to ?r*oceed to obtain thit: m2teria.l.

436

Domestic Coal Distribution 2009 Q1 by Origin State: Alabama  

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

Q1 by Origin State: Alabama 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 Generation Coke Plants Industrial Plants Excluding Coke Commercial & Institutional Total Alabama Railroad 950 4 84 - 1,038 Alabama River 1,110 - - - 1,110 Alabama Truck 37 170 249 - 456 Alabama Total 2,096 174 333 - 2,603 Florida Railroad - - 22 - 22 Georgia Railroad 45 - - - 45 Georgia Truck s - 20 - 21 Georgia Total 45 - 20 - 65 Hawaii Ocean Vessel s - - - s Indiana Railroad - 78 - - 78 Indiana Truck - 32 - - 32 Indiana Total - 110 - - 110 South Carolina Truck - - 2 - 2 Tennessee Truck - - 1 - 1 Texas Railroad 72 - - - 72 Origin State Total 2,213 284 378 - 2,875 Ocean Vessel s - - - s Railroad 1,066 82 106 - 1,255 River 1,110 - - - 1,110 Truck 37 202 272 - 511 2 / 58

437

Quarterly Coal Report October-December 2000  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4Q) 4Q) Distribution Category UC-950 Quarterly Coal Report October-December 2000 Energy Information Administration Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 This report was prepared by the Energy Information Administration, the independent statistical and analytical agency within the Department of Energy. The information contained herein should not be construed as advocating or reflecting any policy position of the Department of Energy or any other organization. Contacts This publication was prepared by Paulette Young under the direction of Betsy O'Brien, Director, Coal, Electric and Renewables Division, Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels. Questions addressing the Appendix A, U.S. Coal Imports section

438

Quarterly Coal Report January-March 1996  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1Q) 1Q) Distribution Category UC-950 Quarterly Coal Report January-March 1996 Energy Information Administration Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 This report was prepared by the Energy Information Administration, the independent statistical and analytical agency within the Department of Energy. The information contained herein should not be construed as advocating or reflecting any policy position of the Department of Energy or any other organization. Contacts This publication was prepared by Paulette Young under the direction of Noel C. Balthasar, Chief, Coal Data Branch, Coal and Electric Data and Renewables Division, Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alter- nate Fuels. Specific information about

439

Fine Particle and Mercury Formation and Control during Coal Combustion.  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

??Pulverized coal combustion is widely used worldwide for the production of electricity. However, it is one of the primary emission sources of air pollutants, including… (more)

Wang, Xiaofei

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

440

China's Coal: Demand, Constraints, and Externalities  

SciTech Connect

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.

Aden, Nathaniel; Fridley, David; Zheng, Nina

2009-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


441

Coal consumption | OpenEI  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

consumption consumption Dataset Summary Description Total annual coal consumption by country, 1980 to 2009 (available as Quadrillion Btu). Compiled by Energy Information Administration (EIA). Source EIA Date Released Unknown Date Updated Unknown Keywords coal Coal consumption EIA world Data text/csv icon total_coal_consumption_1980_2009quadrillion_btu.csv (csv, 38.3 KiB) Quality Metrics Level of Review Peer Reviewed Comment Temporal and Spatial Coverage Frequency Time Period 1980 - 2009 License License Other or unspecified, see optional comment below Comment Rate this dataset Usefulness of the metadata Average vote Your vote Usefulness of the dataset Average vote Your vote Ease of access Average vote Your vote Overall rating Average vote Your vote Comments Login or register to post comments

442

"Table A24. Total Expenditures for Purchased Energy Sources by Census Region,"  

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

4. Total Expenditures for Purchased Energy Sources by Census Region," 4. Total Expenditures for Purchased Energy Sources by Census Region," " Industry Group, and Selected Industries, 1991" " (Estimates in Million Dollars)" ,,,,,,,,,,,"RSE" "SIC"," "," "," ","Residual","Distillate ","Natural"," "," ","Coke"," ","Row" "Code(a)","Industry Groupsc and Industry","Total","Electricity","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(b)","Gas(c)","LPG","Coal","and Breeze","Other(d)","Factors" ,,"Total United States" ,"RSE Column Factors:","0.6 ",0.6,1.3,1.3,0.7,1.2,1.2,1.5,1.1

443

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

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

3. Electric Power Sector Net Generation, 2009-2010 3. Electric Power Sector Net Generation, 2009-2010 (Million Kilowatthours) Census Division and Fuel 2009 2010 Percent Change 2009 - 2010 New England Coal 14,378 14,244 -0.9 Hydroelectric 7,759 6,861 -11.6 Natural Gas 48,007 54,680 13.9 Nuclear 36,231 38,361 5.9 Other (1) 9,186 9,063 -1.3 Total 115,559 123,210 6.6 Middle Atlantic Coal 121,873 129,935 6.6 Hydroelectric 28,793 26,463 -8.1 Natural Gas 89,808 104,341 16.2 Nuclear 155,140 152,469 -1.7 Other (1) 13,011 13,600 4.5 Total 408,625 426,808 4.4 East North Central Coal 412,245 426,390 3.4 Hydroelectric 2,939 2,480 -15.6 Natural Gas 25,139 35,733 42.1 Nuclear 145,214 154,900 6.7 Other (1) 11,684 15,628 33.8 Total 597,221 635,130 6.3 West North Central Coal 224,237 229,301 2.3

444

Coal and nuclear power: Illinois' energy future  

SciTech Connect

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.

Not Available

1982-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

445

Analysis and scaling of a two-stage fluidized bed for drying of fine coal particles using Shannon entropy, thermodynamic exergy and statistical methods.  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

??Liquid water (moisture) in coal causes a number of economic and environmental issues for the mining and electrical power generation industries. Coal preparation plants utilize… (more)

Rowan, Steven Lee.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

446

Quarterly Coal Report - Energy Information Administration  

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

Quarterly Coal Report Quarterly Coal Report Release Date: October 02, 2013 | Next Release Date: December 2013 | full report Previous Quarterly Coal Data historical data (PDF): 1st quarter 2013 4th quarter 2012 3rd quarter 2012 2nd quarter 2012 1st quarter 2012 4th quarter 2011 3rd quarter 2011 2nd quarter 2011 1st quarter 2011 prior to 2011 Go The Quarterly Coal Report (QCR) provides detailed quarterly data on U.S. coal production, exports, imports, receipts, prices, consumption, quality, stocks, and refined coal. Data on U.S. coke production, consumption, stocks, imports, and exports are also provided. All data for 2011 and prior years are final. All data for 2012 and 2013 are preliminary. Highlights for second quarter 2013: U.S. coal production during second quarter 2013 totaled 243.1

447

"Code(a)","End Use","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Diesel Fuel(c)"," Gas(d)","NGL(e)","Coke and Breeze)"  

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

3 Relative Standard Errors for Table 5.3;" 3 Relative Standard Errors for Table 5.3;" " Unit: Percents." " "," " " "," ",," ","Distillate"," "," " " "," ","Net Demand",,"Fuel Oil",,,"Coal" "NAICS"," ","for ","Residual","and","Natural","LPG and","(excluding Coal" "Code(a)","End Use","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Diesel Fuel(c)"," Gas(d)","NGL(e)","Coke and Breeze)" ,,"Total United States" " 311 - 339","ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES" ,"TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION",2,3,6,2,4,9

448

Alaska Coal Geology: GIS Data | OpenEI  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Coal Geology: GIS Data Coal Geology: GIS Data Dataset Summary Description Estimated Alaska coal resources are largely in Cretaceous and Tertiary rocks distributed in three major provinces. Northern Alaska-Slope, Central Alaska-Nenana, and Southern Alaska-Cook Inlet. Cretaceous resources, predominantly bituminous coal and lignite, are in the Northern Alaska-Slope coal province. Most of the Tertiary resources, mainly lignite to subbituminous coal with minor amounts of bituminous and semianthracite coals, are in the other two provinces. The combined measured, indicated, inferred, and hypothetical coal resources in the three areas are estimated to be 5,526 billion short tons (5,012 billion metric tons), which constitutes about 87 percent of Alaska's coal and surpasses the total coal resources of the conterminous United States by 40 percent. Available here: GIS shapefiles of relevant faults and geology, associated with the following report: http://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds-077/pdf/DDS-77.pdf

449

A resource and technology assessment of coal utilization in India  

SciTech Connect

Electricity production in India is projected to expand dramatically in the near term to energize new industrial development, while also easing the energy shortages throughout the country. Much of the new growth in electricity production will be fueled by domestic coal resources; however, there is worldwide concern about increased coal use, as greater carbon dioxide emissions from coal combustion will exacerbate climate change. At the same time, there are now a number of different existing and emerging technological options for coal conversion and greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction worldwide that could potentially be useful for the Indian coal-power sector. This paper reviews coal utilization in India and examines current and emerging coal power technologies with near- and long-term potential for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from coal power generation. 107 refs., 8 figs., 6 tabs.

Chikkatur, A.P. [Harvard University, Cambridge, MA (United States). Kennedy School of Government

2008-10-15T23:59:59.000Z

450

Domestic Distribution of U.S. Coal by Destination State,  

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

2008 2008 Final May 2010 2008 Changes in Coal Distribution Table Format and Data Sources Introduction The Coal Distribution Report - Annual 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-exporting State. This Final 2008 Coal Distribution Report - Annual, supersedes the Preliminary 2008 Coal Distribution Report - Annual. This report relies on the most current data available from EIA's various monthly, quarterly and annual surveys of the coal industry and electric power generation industry. In addition, the report contains actual annual data instead of imputed data for smaller electric generation plants that are excluded from the

451

Zevenhoven & Kilpinen CROSS EFFECTS, TOTAL SYSTEM LAY-OUT 13.6.2001 10-1 Figure 10.1 Typical pulverised coal combustion and gas clean-up system: dry scrubber +  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

pulverised coal combustion and gas clean-up system: dry scrubber + baghouse filter for SO2 and particulate For a conventional pulverised coal-fired power plant a set-up is shown in Figure 10.1, with a gas clean-up system scrubber (pH ~ 6) 60 - 70 7 Re-heater 350 - 400 8 SCR DeNOx 300 - 400 9 Active coke bed 100 - 150 Figure 10

Zevenhoven, Ron

452

Coal surface control for advanced fine coal flotation  

SciTech Connect

The primary objective of this research project is to develop advanced flotation methods for coal cleaning in order to achieve near total pyritic-sulfur removal at 90% Btu recovery, using coal samples procured from six major US coal seams. Concomitantly, the ash content of these coals is to be reduced to 6% or less. Work this quarter concentrated on the following: washability studies, which included particle size distribution of the washability samples, and chemical analysis of washability test samples; characterization studies of induction time measurements, correlation between yield, combustible-material recovery (CMR), and heating-value recovery (HVR), and QA/QC for standard flotation tests and coal analyses; surface modification and control including testing of surface-modifying reagents, restoration of hydrophobicity to lab-oxidized coals, pH effects on coal flotation, and depression of pyritic sulfur in which pyrite depression with calcium cyanide and pyrite depression with xanthated reagents was investigated; flotation optimization and circuitry included staged reagent addition, cleaning and scavenging, and scavenging and middling recycling. Weathering studies are also discussed. 19 figs., 28 tabs.

Fuerstenau, D.W.; Sastry, K.V.S.; Hanson, J.S.; Harris, G.; Sotillo, F.; Diao, J. (California Univ., Berkeley, CA (USA)); Somasundaran, P.; Harris, C.C.; Vasudevan, T.; Liu, D.; Li, C. (Columbia Univ., New York, NY (USA)); Hu, Weibai; Zou, Y.; Chen, W. (Utah Univ., Salt Lake City, UT (USA)); Choudhry, V.; Sehgal, R.; Ghosh, A. (Praxis Engineers, Inc., Milpitas, CA (USA))

1990-08-15T23:59:59.000Z

453

Coal and Coal-Biomass to Liquids  

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

and Coal-Biomass to Liquids News Gasifipedia Coal-Biomass Feed Advanced Fuels Synthesis Systems Analyses International Activity Project Information Project Portfolio Publications...

454

Chapter 3 - Coal Processing and Use for Power Generation  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Coal is an important source of energy and raw material for electric power production. Despite climate change legislation, growth in coal consumption thus far outpaced that of other fossil fuels in the twenty-first century. Coal is a reliable energy source, abundant, easily transported, easily traded and competitive in terms of price compared to other fossil fuels. The technology of coal preparation, coal cleaning and use in power generation is discussed. It covers issues such as coal properties and how these relate to coal performance in power generation, as well as ways to remove sulphur, mineral matter and water before coal combustion to improve the efficiency of power generation and reduce emissions from coal use.

Maria E. Holuszko; Arno de Klerk

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

455

Chemical structure of coal tar during devolatilization  

SciTech Connect

Enormous progress has been made in coal pyrolysis research during the last two decades. Models of coal devolatilization have progressed from simple rate expressions based on total mass release to empirical relationships based on the elemental composition of the parent coal to models that attempt to describe the macromolecular network of the coal. In the last several years, advancements in chemical analysis techniques have allowed quantitative investigations of the chemical structure of both coal and its pyrolysis products, including the nature of the resulting char. A prominent research goal is to accurately predict the rates, yields, and products of devolatilization from measurements of the parent coal structure. The prediction of nitrogen species evolved during devolatilization is of current interest. These goals necessitate modeling the reaction processes on the molecular scale, with activation energies that relate to chemical bond breaking rather than to the mass of products released from the coal. Solid-state {sup 13}C NMR spectroscopy has proven particularly useful in obtaining average values of chemical structure features of coal and char, while liquid phase {sup 1}H NMR spectroscopy has been used to determine some of the chemical features of coal tar. Pyridine extract residues from coal and partially-pyrolyzed coal chars have also been analyzed by solid-state {sup 13}C NMR spectroscopy, and the extracts have been analyzed by {sup 1}H NMR spectroscopy.

Fletcher, T.H.; Watt, M. [Bringham Young Univ., Provo, UT (United States); Bai, S.; Solum, M.S. [Univ. of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT (United States)] [and others

1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

456

Uncertainty in Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions from United States Coal  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

analyses involving coal. Greenhouse gas emissions from fuel use and methane releases at coal mines, fuel.5 million metric tons of methane emissions. Close to 95% of domestic coal was consumed by the electricityUncertainty in Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions from United States Coal Aranya Venkatesh

Jaramillo, Paulina

457

"1. Paradise","Coal","Tennessee Valley Authority",2201 "2. Ghent","Coal","Kentucky Utilities Co",1918  

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

Kentucky" Kentucky" "1. Paradise","Coal","Tennessee Valley Authority",2201 "2. Ghent","Coal","Kentucky Utilities Co",1918 "3. E W Brown","Coal","Kentucky Utilities Co",1546 "4. Mill Creek","Coal","Louisville Gas & Electric Co",1472 "5. Trimble County","Coal","Louisville Gas & Electric Co",1471 "6. H L Spurlock","Coal","East Kentucky Power Coop, Inc",1346 "7. Shawnee","Coal","Tennessee Valley Authority",1330 "8. Big Sandy","Coal","Kentucky Power Co",1060 "9. Riverside Generating LLC","Gas","Riverside Generating Co LLC",825

458

Quarterly Coal Report, October-December 1997  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4Q) 4Q) Distribution Category UC-950 Quarterly Coal Report October-December 1997 Energy Information Administration Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 This report was prepared by the Energy Information Administration, the independent statistical and analytical agency within the Department of Energy. The information contained herein should not be construed as advocating or reflecting any policy position of the Department of Energy or any other organization. Contacts This publication was prepared by Paulette Young under the direction of Mary K. Paull, Project Leader, Coal Data Branch, Coal and Electric Data and Renewables Division, Office of Coal, Nuclear, Elec- tric and Alternate Fuels. Questions addressing the

459

Quarterly Coal Report October-December 1996  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4Q) 4Q) Distribution Category UC-950 Quarterly Coal Report October-December 1996 Energy Information Administration Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 This report was prepared by the Energy Information Administration, the independent statistical and analytical agency within the Department of Energy. The information contained herein should not be construed as advocating or reflecting any policy position of the Department of Energy or any other organization. Contacts This publication was prepared by Paulette Young under the direction of Mary K. Paull, Acting Chief, Coal Data Branch, Coal and Electric Data and Renewables Division, Office of Coal, Nuclear, Elec- tric and Alternate Fuels. Specific information about

460

Quarterly Coal Report, January-March 1998  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1Q) 1Q) Distribution Category UC-950 Quarterly Coal Report January-March 1998 Energy Information Administration Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 This report was prepared by the Energy Information Administration, the independent statistical and analytical agency within the Department of Energy. The information contained herein should not be construed as advocating or reflecting any policy position of the Department of Energy or any other organization. Contacts This publication was prepared by Paulette Young under the direction of Mary K. Paull, Project Leader, Coal Data Branch, Coal and Electric Data and Renewables Division, Office of Coal, Nuclear, Elec- tric and Alternate Fuels. Questions addressing the

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


461

Quarterly Coal Report, January-March 1997  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1Q) 1Q) Distribution Category UC-950 Quarterly Coal Report January-March 1997 Energy Information Administration Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 This report was prepared by the Energy Information Administration, the independent statistical and analytical agency within the Department of Energy. The information contained herein should not be construed as advocating or reflecting any policy position of the Department of Energy or any other organization. Contacts This publication was prepared by Paulette Young under the direction of Mary K. Paull, Acting Chief, Coal Data Branch, Coal and Electric Data and Renewables Division, Office of Coal, Nuclear, Elec- tric and Alternate Fuels. Questions addressing the

462

Quarterly Coal Report, July-September 1997  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

3Q) 3Q) Distribution Category UC-950 Quarterly Coal Report July-September 1997 Energy Information Administration Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 This report was prepared by the Energy Information Administration, the independent statistical and analytical agency within the Department of Energy. The information contained herein should not be construed as advocating or reflecting any policy position of the Department of Energy or any other organization. Contacts This publication was prepared by Paulette Young under the direction of Mary K. Paull, Project Leader, Coal Data Branch, Coal and Electric Data and Renewables Division, Office of Coal, Nuclear, Elec- tric and Alternate Fuels. Questions addressing the

463

Quarterly Coal Report: July-September 2001  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

3Q) 3Q) Distribution Category UC-950 Quarterly Coal Report July - September 2001 Energy Information Administration Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric, and Alternate Fuels U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 This report was prepared by the Energy Information Administration, the independent statistical and analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. The information contained herein should be not be construed as advocating or reflecting any policy position of the U.S. Department of Energy or any other organization. Energy Information Administration/Quarterly Coal Report July - September 2001 ii Contacts This publication was prepared by Paulette Young under the direction of Betsy O'Brien, Director, Coal, Nuclear, and Renewables Fuels Division, Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels within the Energy Information Administration, U.S.

464

Clean coal technology: selective catalytic reduction (SCR) technology for the control of nitrogen oxide emissions from coal-fired boilers  

SciTech Connect

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.

NONE

2005-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

465

Electricity Monthly Update  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

August 2011 | Release Date: October 25, August 2011 | Release Date: October 25, 2011 | Next Release Date: November 21, 2011 Previous Issues Issue: November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 Previous issues Format: html xls Go Highlights: August 2011 Extreme heat in Texas, New Mexico, Colorado and Arizona drove significant increases in the retail sales of electricity in the Southwest. Wind generation increased in much of the United States, except the middle of the country where total generation declined. Bituminous coal stocks dropped 14% from August 2010. Key indicators Same Month 2010 Year to date Total Net Generation -1% 11% Residential Retail Price -6% 11% Cooling Degree-Days -3% 2%

466

Electricity Monthly Update  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

September 2011 | Release Date: Nov. 21, September 2011 | Release Date: Nov. 21, 2011 | Next Release Date: Dec. 21, 2011  | Re-Release Date: November 28, 2012 (correction) Previous Issues Issue: November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 Previous issues Format: html xls Go Highlights: September 2011 Cooler temperatures drove down retail sales of electricity in the Southeast compared to September 2010. Fossil steam generation decreased in much of the United States, except in the ERCOT portion of Texas where total generation increased from September, 2010. Bituminous coal stocks dropped 18% from September 2010. Key Indicators Sept. 2011 % Change from Sept. 2010 Total Net Generation

467

" Electricity Generation by Census Region, Industry Group, and Selected"  

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

2" 2" " (Estimates in Trillion Btu)" " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," " " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," ","RSE" "SIC"," "," "," ","Residual","Distillate"," "," "," ","Coke"," ","Row" "Code(a)","Industry Groups and Industry","Total","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(c)","Natural Gas(d)","LPG","Coal","and Breeze","Other(e)","Factors"

468

DESULFURIZATION OF COAL MODEL COMPOUNDS AND COAL LIQUIDS  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Pollutants Associated With Coal Combustion. • E.P.A.Control Guidelines for Coal-Derived Pollutants .Forms of Sulfur in Coal • . . . . Coal Desulfurization

Wrathall, James Anthony

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

469

Explosions in Coal Mines1  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

... compel, to exert themselves as keenly for the illumination of a murky, dirty coal-pit, as in the transformation of a plot of ground in South Kensington into fairyland. ... when the best safety lamps may be of little use, even if they continue to burn. Such electric lamps must indeed become formidable competitors of the Fleuss lamp (included in ...

1885-12-10T23:59:59.000Z

470

The Paradox of Regulatory Development in China: The Case of the Electricity Industry  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

of Coal Mine Safety Telecom Economic Functional StateEconomic Functional Ministry of Transport Work Safety Social Coaleconomic lifeline?) industries: military engineering, electricity, oil and petrochemical, coal,

Tsai, Chung-min

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

471

Techno-economic assessments of oxy-fuel technology for South African coal-fired power stations  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Abstract Oxy-fuel technology is one of the potential solutions to reduce CO2 emissions from coal-fired power plants. Although vendors offer a “retrofit package,” to the best of our knowledge there has not been a study undertaken that looks at the technical and economic viability of oxy-fuel technology for CO2 capture for South African coal-fired power stations. This study presents a techno-economic analysis for six coal fired power stations in South Africa. Each of these power stations has a total capacity of about 3600 MW. The analysis was done using the oxy-fuel model developed by Carnegie Mellon University in the USA. The model was used to define the performance and costs of retrofitting the boilers. The results obtained showed that the CO2 emission rate was reduced by a factor of 10 for all the plants when retrofitted to oxy-fuel combustion. Between 27 and 29% of the energy generated was used to capture CO2. The energy loss was correlated to the coal properties. Sulphur content in the coal samples affects the energy used for flue gas cooling but did not affect the energy used for CO2 purification and compression. The study also showed there is a need for the flue gas to be treated for \\{NOx\\} and \\{SOx\\} control. The total capital costs and cost of electricity for the six plants were different, resulting with the cost of electricity varying from 101$/MWh to124$/MWh.

B.O. Oboirien; B.C. North; T. Kleyn

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

472

China's Present Situation of Coal Consumption and Future Coal Demand Forecast  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

This article analyzes China's coal consumption changes since 1991 and proportion change of coal consumption to total energy consumption. It is argued that power, iron and steel, construction material, and chemical industries are the four major coal consumption industries, which account for 85% of total coal consumption in 2005. Considering energy consumption composition characteristics of these four industries, major coal demand determinants, potentials of future energy efficiency improvement, and structural changes, etc., this article makes a forecast of 2010s and 2020s domestic coal demand in these four industries. In addition, considering such relevant factors as our country's future economic growth rate and energy saving target, it forecasts future energy demands, using per unit GDP energy consumption method and energy elasticity coefficient method as well. Then it uses other institution's results about future primary energy demand, excluding primary coal demand, for reference, and forecasts coal demands in 2010 and 2020 indirectly. After results comparison between these two methods, it is believed that coal demands in 2010 might be 2620–2850 million tons and in 2020 might be 3090–3490 million tons, in which, coal used in power generation is still the driven force of coal demand growth.

Wang Yan; Li Jingwen

2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

473

"1. John E Amos","Coal","Appalachian Power Co",2900 "2. Harrison Power Station","Coal","Allegheny Energy Supply Co LLC",1954  

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

West Virginia" West Virginia" "1. John E Amos","Coal","Appalachian Power Co",2900 "2. Harrison Power Station","Coal","Allegheny Energy Supply Co LLC",1954 "3. Mt Storm","Coal","Virginia Electric & Power Co",1571 "4. Mitchell","Coal","Ohio Power Co",1560 "5. Mountaineer","Coal","Appalachian Power Co",1310 "6. Pleasants Power Station","Coal","Allegheny Energy Supply Co LLC",1288 "7. Fort Martin Power Station","Coal","Monongahela Power Co",1107 "8. Philip Sporn","Coal","Appalachian Power Co",1020 "9. Kammer","Coal","Ohio Power Co",600

474

Coal preparation: The essential clean coal technology  

SciTech Connect

This chapter is a brief introduction to a broad topic which has many highly specialized areas. The aim is to summarize the essential elements of coal preparation and illustrate its important role in facilitating the clean use of coal. Conventional coal preparation is the essential first step in ensuring the economic and environmentally acceptable use of coal. The aim of coal preparation is to produce saleable products of consistent, specified quality which satisfy customer requirements while optimizing the utilization of the coal resource. Coal preparation covers all aspects of preparing coal for the market. It includes size reduction, blending and