National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for total cost paid

  1. Total Estimated Contract Cost: Performance Period Total Fee Paid

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Performance Period Total Fee Paid FY2008 $134,832 FY2009 $142,578 FY2010 $299,878 FY2011 $169,878 Cumulative Fee Paid $747,166 Contract Period: September 2007 - October 2012 $31,885,815 C/P/E Environmental Services, LLC DE-AM09-05SR22405/DE-AT30-07CC60011/SL14 Contractor: Contract Number: Contract Type: Cost Plus Award Fee $357,223 $597,797 $894,699 EM Contractor Fee Site: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC) Contract Name: SLAC Environmental Remediation December 2012 $1,516,646 Fee

  2. Performance Period Total Fee Paid FY2008

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    1,339,286 FY 2012 38,126 FY 2013 42,265 Cumulative Fee Paid 1,766,600 42,265 Cost Plus Incentive FeeCost Plus Fixed Fee 36,602,425 Contract Period: September 2007 -...

  3. Performance Period Total Fee Paid FY2001

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    17,590,414 FY2011 17,558,710 FY2012 14,528,770 Cumulative Fee Paid 126,281,339 Cost Plus Award Fee DE-AC29-01AL66444 Washington TRU Solutions LLC Contractor: Contract Number:...

  4. Project Functions and Activities Definitions for Total Project Cost

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    1997-03-28

    This chapter provides guidelines developed to define the obvious disparity of opinions and practices with regard to what exactly is included in total estimated cost (TEC) and total project cost (TPC).

  5. Total Estimated Contract Cost: Performance Period

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    FY2012 Fee Information Minimum Fee Maximum Fee September 2015 Contract Number: Cost Plus Incentive Fee Contractor: 3,264,909,094 Contract Period: EM Contractor Fee s Idaho...

  6. NREL Reports Soft Costs Now Largest Piece of Solar Installation Total Cost

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

    - News Releases | NREL Reports Soft Costs Now Largest Piece of Solar Installation Total Cost December 2, 2013 Two detailed reports from the Energy Department's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) find that solar financing and other non-hardware costs - often referred to as "soft costs" - now comprise up to 64% of the total price of residential solar energy systems, reflecting how soft costs are becoming an increasingly larger fraction of the cost of installing solar.

  7. CIGNA Study Uncovers Relationship of Disabilities to Total Benefits Costs

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The findings of a new study reveal an interesting trend. Integrating disability programs with health care programs can potentially lower employers' total benefits costs and help disabled employees get back to work sooner and stay at work.

  8. A Total Cost of Ownership Model for Solid Oxide Fuel Cells in...

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

    a total cost of ownership model for emerging applications in stationary fuel cell systems. ... A Total Cost of Ownership Model for Low Temperature PEM Fuel Cells in Combined Heat ...

  9. An Evaluation of the Total Cost of Ownership of Fuel Cell-Powered Material

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

    Handling Equipment | Department of Energy An Evaluation of the Total Cost of Ownership of Fuel Cell-Powered Material Handling Equipment An Evaluation of the Total Cost of Ownership of Fuel Cell-Powered Material Handling Equipment This report by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory discusses an analysis of the total cost of ownership of fuel cell-powered and traditional battery-powered material handling equipment, including the capital costs of battery and fuel cell systems, the cost of

  10. FY 2007 Total System Life Cycle Cost, Pub 2008 | Department of Energy

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

    FY 2007 Total System Life Cycle Cost, Pub 2008 FY 2007 Total System Life Cycle Cost, Pub 2008 The Analysis of the Total System Life Cycle Cost (TSLCC) of the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program presents the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management's (OCRWM) May 2007 total system cost estimate for the disposal of the Nation's spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste (HLW). The TSLCC analysis provides a basis for assessing the adequacy of the Nuclear Waste Fund

  11. Total Estimated Contract Cost: Contract Option Period: Maximum...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    LLC Contract Number: DE-AC30-11CC40015 Contract Type: Cost Plus Award Fee EM Contractor Fee December 2015 Site: Portsmouth Paducah Project Office Contract Name: Operation of DUF6

  12. Total Estimated Contract Cost: Contract Option Period: Maximum...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    & Wilcox Conversion Services, LLC Contract Number: DE-AC30-11CC40015 Contract Type: Cost Plus Award Fee EM Contractor Fee September 2015 Site: Portsmouth Paducah Project Office...

  13. Total Estimated Contract Cost: Contract Option Period: Performance

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Contractor: Bechtel National Inc. Contract Number: DE-AC27-01RV14136 Contract Type: Cost Plus Award Fee NA Maximum Fee 599,588,540 Fee Available 102,622,325 10,868,785,789...

  14. Evaluation of the Total Cost of Ownership of Fuel Cell-Powered Material Handling Equipment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ramsden, T.

    2013-04-01

    This report discusses an analysis of the total cost of ownership of fuel cell-powered and traditional battery-powered material handling equipment (MHE, or more typically 'forklifts'). A number of fuel cell MHE deployments have received funding support from the federal government. Using data from these government co-funded deployments, DOE's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) has been evaluating the performance of fuel cells in material handling applications. NREL has assessed the total cost of ownership of fuel cell MHE and compared it to the cost of ownership of traditional battery-powered MHE. As part of its cost of ownership assessment, NREL looked at a range of costs associated with MHE operation, including the capital costs of battery and fuel cell systems, the cost of supporting infrastructure, maintenance costs, warehouse space costs, and labor costs. Considering all these costs, NREL found that fuel cell MHE can have a lower overall cost of ownership than comparable battery-powered MHE.

  15. A Total Cost of Ownership Model for Low Temperature PEM Fuel...

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

    LBNL-6772E A Total Cost of Ownership Model for Low Temperature PEM Fuel Cells in Combined ... Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Fuel Cells Technologies Office (FCTO) under ...

  16. A Total Cost of Ownership Model for Solid Oxide Fuel Cells in...

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

    A Total Cost of Ownership Model for Solid Oxide Fuel Cells in Combined Heat and Power and ... Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Fuel Cells Technologies Office (FCTO) under ...

  17. U.S. Department of Energy Releases Revised Total System Life Cycle Cost

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

    Estimate and Fee Adequacy Report for Yucca Mountain Project | Department of Energy Revised Total System Life Cycle Cost Estimate and Fee Adequacy Report for Yucca Mountain Project U.S. Department of Energy Releases Revised Total System Life Cycle Cost Estimate and Fee Adequacy Report for Yucca Mountain Project August 5, 2008 - 2:40pm Addthis WASHINGTON, DC -The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today released a revised estimate of the total system life cycle cost for a repository at Yucca

  18. A Total Cost of Ownership Model for Solid Oxide Fuel Cells in Combined Heat

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

    and Power and Power-Only Applications | Department of Energy Solid Oxide Fuel Cells in Combined Heat and Power and Power-Only Applications A Total Cost of Ownership Model for Solid Oxide Fuel Cells in Combined Heat and Power and Power-Only Applications This report prepared by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory describes a total cost of ownership model for emerging applications in stationary fuel cell systems. Solid oxide fuel cell systems (SOFC) for use in combined heat and power (CHP)

  19. An Evaluation of the Total Cost of Ownership of Fuel Cell-Powered...

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

    handling equipment, including the capital costs of battery and fuel cell systems, the cost of supporting infrastructure, maintenance costs, warehouse space costs, and labor costs. ...

  20. An Evaluation of the Total Cost of Ownership of Fuel Cell-Powered Material Handling Equipment

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

    An Evaluation of the Total Cost of Ownership of Fuel Cell- Powered Material Handling Equipment Todd Ramsden National Renewable Energy Laboratory Technical Report NREL/TP-5600-56408 April 2013 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. National Renewable Energy Laboratory 15013 Denver West Parkway Golden, Colorado 80401 303-275-3000 * www.nrel.gov Contract No.

  1. Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Product: Total Crude Oil Liquefied Petroleum Gases PropanePropylene Normal ButaneButylene Other Liquids Oxygenates Fuel Ethanol MTBE Other Oxygenates Biomass-based Diesel Other ...

  2. Total

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

    Product: Total Crude Oil Liquefied Petroleum Gases PropanePropylene Normal ButaneButylene Other Liquids Oxygenates Fuel Ethanol MTBE Other Oxygenates Biomass-based Diesel Fuel ...

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

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

    0.9 Q Q Q Heat Pump......7.7 0.3 Q Q Steam or Hot Water System......Census Division Total West Energy Information Administration ...

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

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

    0.9 Q Q Q Heat Pump......6.2 3.8 2.4 Steam or Hot Water System......Census Division Total Northeast Energy Information ...

  5. 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

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

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

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

  7. Total..........................................................................

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    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

  15. Total Cost Per MwH for all common large scale power generation...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    out of the stack, toxificaiton of the lakes and streams, plant decommision costs. For nuclear yiou are talking about managing the waste in perpetuity. The plant decomission costs...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fthenakis, Vasilis

    2015-03-01

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

  17. Feasibility studies to improve plant availability and reduce total installed cost in IGCC plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sullivan, Kevin; Anasti, William; Fang, Yichuan; Subramanyan, Karthik; Leininger, Tom; Zemsky, Christine

    2015-03-30

    The main purpose of this project is to look at technologies and philosophies that would help reduce the costs of an Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) plant, increase its availability or do both. GE’s approach to this problem is to consider options in three different areas: 1) technology evaluations and development; 2) constructability approaches; and 3) design and operation methodologies. Five separate tasks were identified that fall under the three areas: Task 2 – Integrated Operations Philosophy; Task 3 – Slip Forming of IGCC Components; Task 4 – Modularization of IGCC Components; Task 5 – Fouling Removal; and Task 6 – Improved Slag Handling. Overall, this project produced results on many fronts. Some of the ideas could be utilized immediately by those seeking to build an IGCC plant in the near future. These include the considerations from the Integrated Operations Philosophy task and the different construction techniques of Slip Forming and Modularization (especially if the proposed site is in a remote location or has a lack of a skilled workforce). Other results include ideas for promising technologies that require further development and testing to realize their full potential and be available for commercial operation. In both areas GE considers this project to be a success in identifying areas outside the core IGCC plant systems that are ripe for cost reduction and ity improvement opportunities.

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

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

    Fthenakis, Vasilis

    2015-03-01

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

  19. A Total Cost of Ownership Model for Low Temperature PEM Fuel Cells in Combined Heat and Power and Backup Power Applications

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    This report prepared by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory describes a total cost of ownership model for emerging applications in stationary fuel cell systems.

  20. Barge Truck Total

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

    Barge Truck Total delivered cost per short ton Shipments with transportation rates over total shipments Total delivered cost per short ton Shipments with transportation rates over...

  1. A Total Cost of Ownership Model for Low Temperature PEM Fuel Cells in Combined Heat and Power and Backup Power Applications

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    University of California, Berkeley; Wei, Max; Lipman, Timothy; Mayyas, Ahmad; Chien, Joshua; Chan, Shuk Han; Gosselin, David; Breunig, Hanna; Stadler, Michael; McKone, Thomas; Beattie, Paul; Chong, Patricia; Colella, Whitney; James, Brian

    2014-06-23

    A total cost of ownership model is described for low temperature proton exchange membrane stationary fuel cell systems for combined heat and power (CHP) applications from 1-250kW and backup power applications from 1-50kW. System designs and functional specifications for these two applications were developed across the range of system power levels. Bottom-up cost estimates were made for balance of plant costs, and detailed direct cost estimates for key fuel cell stack components were derived using design-for-manufacturing-and-assembly techniques. The development of high throughput, automated processes achieving high yield are projected to reduce the cost for fuel cell stacks to the $300/kW level at an annual production volume of 100 MW. Several promising combinations of building types and geographical location in the U.S. were identified for installation of fuel cell CHP systems based on the LBNL modelling tool DER CAM. Life-cycle modelling and externality assessment were done for hotels and hospitals. Reduced electricity demand charges, heating credits and carbon credits can reduce the effective cost of electricity ($/kWhe) by 26-44percent in locations such as Minneapolis, where high carbon intensity electricity from the grid is displaces by a fuel cell system operating on reformate fuel. This project extends the scope of existing cost studies to include externalities and ancillary financial benefits and thus provides a more comprehensive picture of fuel cell system benefits, consistent with a policy and incentive environment that increasingly values these ancillary benefits. The project provides a critical, new modelling capacity and should aid a broad range of policy makers in assessing the integrated costs and benefits of fuel cell systems versus other distributed generation technologies.

  2. Reduced computational cost, totally symmetric angular quadrature sets for discrete ordinates radiation transport. Master`s thesis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Oder, J.M.

    1997-12-01

    Several new quadrature sets for use in the discrete ordinates method of solving the Boltzmann neutral particle transport equation are derived. These symmetric quadratures extend the traditional symmetric quadratures by allowing ordinates perpendicular to one or two of the coordinate axes. Comparable accuracy with fewer required ordinates is obtained. Quadratures up to seventh order are presented. The validity and efficiency of the quadratures is then tested and compared with the Sn level symmetric quadratures relative to a Monte Carlo benchmark solution. The criteria for comparison include current through the surface, scalar flux at the surface, volume average scalar flux, and time required for convergence. Appreciable computational cost was saved when used in an unstructured tetrahedral cell code using highly accurate characteristic methods. However, no appreciable savings in computation time was found using the new quadratures compared with traditional Sn methods on a regular Cartesian mesh using the standard diamond difference method. These quadratures are recommended for use in three-dimensional calculations on an unstructured mesh.

  3. Students gain valuable supercomputing skills while getting paid

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

    Computer summer institute Community Connections: Your link to news and opportunities from Los Alamos National Laboratory Latest Issue: September 1, 2016 all issues All Issues » submit Students gain valuable supercomputing skills while getting paid Laboratory summer institute provides unique internship experience September 1, 2015 Laboratory intern Destiny Velasquez. Laboratory intern Destiny Velasquez. Contact Community Programs Director Kathy Keith Email Editor Ute Haker Email Over the past

  4. Cutting-Edge Savannah River Site Project Avoids Millions in Costs, Removes Chemical Solvents from Underground: Project avoided costs totaling more than $15 million, removed tons of chemical solvents from beneath the Savannah River Site

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    AIKEN, S.C. – Workers recently completed a multiyear project that removed more than 33,000 gallons of non-radioactive chemical solvents from beneath a portion of the Savannah River Site (SRS), preventing those pollutants from entering the local water table and helping the site avoid costs of more than $15 million.

  5. Summary Max Total Units

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

    Summary Max Total Units *If All Splits, No Rack Units **If Only FW, AC Splits 1000 52 28 28 2000 87 59 35 3000 61 33 15 4000 61 33 15 Totals 261 153 93 ***Costs $1,957,500.00 $1,147,500.00 $697,500.00 Notes: added several refrigerants removed bins from analysis removed R-22 from list 1000lb, no Glycol, CO2 or ammonia Seawater R-404A only * includes seawater units ** no seawater units included *** Costs = (total units) X (estimate of $7500 per unit) 1000lb, air cooled split systems, fresh water

  6. Total Imports

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

    Data Series: Imports - Total Imports - Crude Oil Imports - Crude Oil, Commercial Imports - by SPR Imports - into SPR by Others Imports - Total Products Imports - Total Motor Gasoline Imports - Finished Motor Gasoline Imports - Reformulated Gasoline Imports - Reformulated Gasoline Blended w/ Fuel Ethanol Imports - Other Reformulated Gasoline Imports - Conventional Gasoline Imports - Conv. Gasoline Blended w/ Fuel Ethanol Imports - Conv. Gasoline Blended w/ Fuel Ethanol, Ed55 & < Imports -

  7. 21 briefing pages total

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

    not necessarily mean entitlement to a payment p. 9 Key Definitions Reservist-a member ... reservist differential Law bars payment of differential for civilian paid hours ...

  8. Country Total

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

    Country Total Percent of U.S. total Canada 61,078 1% China 3,323,297 57% Germany 154,800 3% Japan 12,593 0% India 47,192 1% South Korea 251,105 4% All Others 2,008,612 34% Total 5,858,677 100% Table 7 . Photovoltaic module import shipments by country, 2014 (peak kilowatts) Note: All Others includes Cambodia, Czech Republic, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Mexico, Netherlands, Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan and Turkey Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-63B, 'Annual Photovoltaic

  9. INDEPENDENT COST REVIEW (ICR)

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

    ... Report SOP Standard Operating Procedure TEC Total Estimated Cost TIPR Technical ... FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 Total PED Construction TEC OPC TPC Note: above values include MR...

  10. Soft Costs | Department of Energy

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

    costs program works to lower the non-hardware costs of ... data analysis, business innovation, and training. ... for as much as 64% of the total cost of a new solar system. ...

  11. State Total

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

    State Total Percent of U.S. total Alabama 482 0.0% Alaska 81 0.0% Arizona 194,476 3.3% Arkansas 336 0.0% California 3,163,120 53.0% Colorado 47,240 0.8% Connecticut 50,745 0.9% Delaware 6,600 0.1% District of Columbia 751 0.0% Florida 18,593 0.3% Georgia 47,660 0.8% Hawaii 78,329 1.3% Illinois 5,795 0.1% Indiana 37,016 0.6% Iowa 14,281 0.2% Kansas 1,809 0.0% Kentucky 520 0.0% Louisiana 12,147 0.2% Maine 1,296 0.0% Maryland 63,077 1.1% Massachusetts 157,415 2.6% Michigan 4,210 0.1% Minnesota

  12. Startup Costs

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    1997-03-28

    This chapter discusses startup costs for construction and environmental projects, and estimating guidance for startup costs.

  13. Determination of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) Using Total Carbon Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ekechukwu, A.A.

    2002-05-10

    Several methods have been proposed to replace the Freon(TM)-extraction method to determine total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH) content. For reasons of cost, sensitivity, precision, or simplicity, none of the replacement methods are feasible for analysis of radioactive samples at our facility. We have developed a method to measure total petroleum hydrocarbon content in aqueous sample matrixes using total organic carbon (total carbon) determination. The total carbon content (TC1) of the sample is measured using a total organic carbon analyzer. The sample is then contacted with a small volume of non-pokar solvent to extract the total petroleum hydrocarbons. The total carbon content of the resultant aqueous phase of the extracted sample (TC2) is measured. Total petroleum hydrocarbon content is calculated (TPH = TC1-TC2). The resultant data are consistent with results obtained using Freon(TM) extraction followed by infrared absorbance.

  14. Workers' Compensation Costs Rising Across the Nation

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    For the first time since 1992, benefits paid to workers and employers' costs for workers' compensation rose faster than wages by James L Nash (jnash@penton.com) The National Academy of Social Insurance (NASI) study, which provides the only comprehensive national data on the largely state-run program, states that premiums charged by insurers rose by eight percent in 2001.

  15. Operating Costs

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    1997-03-28

    This chapter is focused on capital costs for conventional construction and environmental restoration and waste management projects and examines operating cost estimates to verify that all elements of the project have been considered and properly estimated.

  16. Independent Cost Estimate (ICE)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Independent Cost Estimate (ICE). On August 8-12, the Office of Project Management Oversight and Assessments (PM) will conduct an ICE on the NNSA Albuquerque Complex Project (NACP) at Albuquerque, NM. This estimate will support the Critical Decision (CD) for establishing the performance baseline and approval to start construction (CD-2/3). This project is at CD-1, with a total project cost range of $183M to $251M.

  17. Levelized Power Generation Cost Codes

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    1996-04-30

    LPGC is a set of nine microcomputer programs for estimating power generation costs for large steam-electric power plants. These programs permit rapid evaluation using various sets of economic and technical ground rules. The levelized power generation costs calculated may be used to compare the relative economics of nuclear and coal-fired plants based on life-cycle costs. Cost calculations include capital investment cost, operation and maintenance cost, fuel cycle cost, decommissioning cost, and total levelized power generationmore » cost. These programs can be used for quick analyses of power generation costs using alternative economic parameters, such as interest rate, escalation rate, inflation rate, plant lead times, capacity factor, fuel prices, etc. The two major types of electric generating plants considered are pressurized water reactor (PWR) and pulverized coal-fired plants. Data are also provided for the Large Scale Prototype Breeder (LSPB) type liquid metal reactor.« less

  18. Cost analysis guidelines

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Strait, R.S.

    1996-01-10

    The first phase of the Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride Management Program (Program)--management strategy selection--consists of several program elements: Technology Assessment, Engineering Analysis, Cost Analysis, and preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Cost Analysis will estimate the life-cycle costs associated with each of the long-term management strategy alternatives for depleted uranium hexafluoride (UF6). The scope of Cost Analysis will include all major expenditures, from the planning and design stages through decontamination and decommissioning. The costs will be estimated at a scoping or preconceptual design level and are intended to assist decision makers in comparing alternatives for further consideration. They will not be absolute costs or bid-document costs. The purpose of the Cost Analysis Guidelines is to establish a consistent approach to analyzing of cost alternatives for managing Department of Energy`s (DOE`s) stocks of depleted uranium hexafluoride (DUF6). The component modules that make up the DUF6 management program differ substantially in operational maintenance, process-options, requirements for R and D, equipment, facilities, regulatory compliance, (O and M), and operations risk. To facilitate a consistent and equitable comparison of costs, the guidelines offer common definitions, assumptions or basis, and limitations integrated with a standard approach to the analysis. Further, the goal is to evaluate total net life-cycle costs and display them in a way that gives DOE the capability to evaluate a variety of overall DUF6 management strategies, including commercial potential. The cost estimates reflect the preconceptual level of the designs. They will be appropriate for distinguishing among management strategies.

  19. BPA's Costs

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

    links Financial Information Financial Public Processes Asset Management Cost Verification Process Rate Cases BP-18 Rate Case Related Publications Meetings and Workshops Customer...

  20. Evaluation of the Super ESPC Program: Level 2 -- Recalculated Cost Savings

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shonder, John A; Hughes, Patrick

    2009-04-01

    This report presents the results of Level 2 of a three-tiered evaluation of the U.S. Department of Energy Federal Energy Management Program's Super Energy Savings Performance Contract (Super ESPC) Program. Level 1 of the analysis studied all of the Super ESPC projects for which at least one Annual Measurement & Verification (M&V) Report had been produced by April 2006. For those 102 projects in aggregate, we found that the value of cost savings reported by the energy service company (ESCO) in the Annual M&V Reports was 108% of the cost savings guaranteed in the contracts. We also compared estimated energy savings (which are not guaranteed, but are the basis for the guaranteed cost savings) to the energy savings reported by the ESCO in the Annual M&V Report. In aggregate, reported energy savings were 99.8% of estimated energy savings on the basis of site energy, or 102% of estimated energy savings based on source energy. Level 2 focused on a random sample of 27 projects taken from the 102 Super ESPC projects studied in Level 1. The objectives were, for each project in the sample, to: repeat the calculations of the annual energy and cost savings in the most recent Annual M&V Report to validate the ESCO's results or correct any errors, and recalculate the value of the reported energy, water, and operations and maintenance (O&M) savings using actual utility prices paid at the project site instead of the 'contract' energy prices - the prices that are established in the project contract as those to be used by the ESCO to calculate the annual cost savings, which determine whether the guarantee has been met. Level 3 analysis will be conducted on three to five projects from the Level 2 sample that meet validity criteria for whole-building or whole-facility data analysis. This effort will verify energy and cost savings using statistical analysis of actual utility use, cost, and weather data. This approach, which can only be used for projects meeting particular validity

  1. ,"Total Natural Gas Consumption

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

    Gas Consumption (billion cubic feet)",,,,,"Natural Gas Energy Intensity (cubic feetsquare foot)" ,"Total ","Space Heating","Water Heating","Cook- ing","Other","Total ","Space...

  2. Rethinking Standby & Fixed Cost Charges: Regulatory & Rate Design Pathways to Deeper Solar PV Cost Reductions

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    While solar PV's impact on utilities has been frequently discussed the past year, little attention has been paid to the potentially impact posed by solar PV-specific rate designs (often informally referred to as solar "fees" or "taxes") upon non-hardware "soft" cost reductions. In fact, applying some rate designs to solar PV customers could potentially have a large impact on the economics of PV systems.

  3. Solar Basics for Homebuilders: Reducing the Total Cost of Ownership

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Solar photovoltaic (PV) energy systems are new in many residential real estate markets, and a growing number of homebuilders are integrating PV into new homes to attract customers and increase...

  4. U.S. Total Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil

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

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Composite 76.69 101.87 100.93 100.49 92.02 48.40 1968-2015 Domestic 78.01 100.71 100.72 102.91 94.05 49.95 1968-2015 Imported 75.86 ...

  5. Property:Geothermal/TotalProjectCost | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Churchill Co., NV Geothermal Project + 14,571,873 + A Demonstration System for Capturing Geothermal Energy from Mine Waters beneath Butte, MT Geothermal Project + 2,155,497 + A...

  6. Total Estimated Contract Cost: Contract Option Period: Maximum Fee

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Definition and Scope Answer/Comment 1 What significant policy challenges are likely to remain unaddressed if we employ Title XIII's definition? The following points are not referencedd in EISA 1301. ・Power provider should also control the output fluctuation of renewable resources. ・The end user should have the choice of which form of power storage to be used. Certain types of energy conservation and storage could work better in different applications (e.g. not only electricity power but also

  7. Total Estimated Contract Cost: Contract Option Period: Performance

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Performance Period Fee Earned FY2000 thru 2008 $102,622,325 FY2009 $12,259,719 FY2010 $35,789,418 FY2011 $24,126,240 FY2012 $24,995,209 FY2013 $6,340,762 FY2014 $16,285,867 FY2015 $35,931,000 $8,595,000 FY2016 $20,891,000 $9,310,000 FY2017 $24,849,000 FY2018 $99,100,000 FY2019 $129,700,000 Cumulative Fee $240,324,540 $595,298,540 $12,259,719 $35,789,418 $38,554,240 $41,785,209 $16,698,762 $37,117,867 Maximum Fee $595,298,540 Fee Available $102,622,325 $10,921,302,346 Completion Contract:

  8. ,"U.S. Total Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil"

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

    ...22016" ,"Excel File Name:","petprirac2dcunusa.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http:www.eia.govdnavpetpetprirac2dcunusa.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information ...

  9. ,"U.S. Total Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil"

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

    ...12016" ,"Excel File Name:","petprirac2dcunusa.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http:www.eia.govdnavpetpetprirac2dcunusa.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information ...

  10. levelized costs

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

    levelized costs - Sandia Energy Energy Search Icon Sandia Home Locations Contact Us Employee Locator Energy & Climate Secure & Sustainable Energy Future Stationary Power Energy Conversion Efficiency Solar Energy Wind Energy Water Power Supercritical CO2 Geothermal Natural Gas Safety, Security & Resilience of the Energy Infrastructure Energy Storage Nuclear Power & Engineering Grid Modernization Battery Testing Nuclear Energy Defense Waste Management Programs Advanced Nuclear

  11. Total Space Heat-

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey: Energy End-Use Consumption Tables Total Space Heat- ing Cool- ing Venti- lation Water Heat- ing Light- ing Cook- ing Refrig- eration...

  12. ,"Total Fuel Oil Expenditures

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

    A. Fuel Oil Expenditures by Census Region for All Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Fuel Oil Expenditures (million dollars)",,,,"Fuel Oil Expenditures (dollars)" ,,,,,"per Gallon",,,,"per...

  13. ,"Total Fuel Oil Consumption

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

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

  14. Total Space Heat-

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Revised: December, 2008 Total Space Heat- ing Cool- ing Venti- lation Water Heat- ing Light- ing Cook- ing Refrig- eration Office Equip- ment Com- puters Other All Buildings...

  15. Total Space Heat-

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Released: September, 2008 Total Space Heat- ing Cool- ing Venti- lation Water Heat- ing Light- ing Cook- ing Refrig- eration Office Equip- ment Com- puters Other All Buildings*...

  16. ,"Total Fuel Oil Expenditures

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

    . Fuel Oil Expenditures by Census Region for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Fuel Oil Expenditures (million dollars)",,,,"Fuel Oil Expenditures (dollars)" ,,,,,"per...

  17. ,"Total Fuel Oil Consumption

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

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

  18. ,"Total Fuel Oil Expenditures

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

    4. Fuel Oil Expenditures by Census Region, 1999" ,"Total Fuel Oil Expenditures (million dollars)",,,,"Fuel Oil Expenditures (dollars)" ,,,,,"per Gallon",,,,"per Square Foot"...

  19. Parallel Total Energy

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2004-10-21

    This is a total energy electronic structure code using Local Density Approximation (LDA) of the density funtional theory. It uses the plane wave as the wave function basis set. It can sue both the norm conserving pseudopotentials and the ultra soft pseudopotentials. It can relax the atomic positions according to the total energy. It is a parallel code using MP1.

  20. U.S. Total Exports

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total to Chile Sabine Pass, LA Total to China Kenai, AK Sabine Pass, LA Total to Egypt ... Sabine Pass, LA Total to Russia Total to South Korea Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA Total ...

  1. Estimating Specialty Costs

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    1997-03-28

    Specialty costs are those nonstandard, unusual costs that are not typically estimated. Costs for research and development (R&D) projects involving new technologies, costs associated with future regulations, and specialty equipment costs are examples of specialty costs. This chapter discusses those factors that are significant contributors to project specialty costs and methods of estimating costs for specialty projects.

  2. Total Space Heat-

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Survey: Energy End-Use Consumption Tables Total Space Heat- ing Cool- ing Venti- lation Water Heat- ing Light- ing Cook- ing Refrig- eration Office Equip- ment Com- puters Other...

  3. ARM - Measurement - Total carbon

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

    carbon ARM Data Discovery Browse Data Comments? We would love to hear from you! Send us a note below or call us at 1-888-ARM-DATA. Send Measurement : Total carbon The total concentration of carbon in all its organic and non-organic forms. Categories Atmospheric Carbon, Aerosols Instruments The above measurement is considered scientifically relevant for the following instruments. Refer to the datastream (netcdf) file headers of each instrument for a list of all available measurements, including

  4. Cost Study Manual

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

    2 Cost Study Manual Executive Summary This Cost Study Manual documents the procedures for preparing a Cost Study to compare the cost of a contractor's employee benefits to the industry average from a broad-based national benefit cost survey. The annual Employee Benefits Cost Study Comparison (Cost Study) assists with the analysis of contractors' employee benefits costs. The Contracting Officer (CO) may require corrective action when the average benefit per capita cost or the benefit cost as a

  5. Potential for savings in compliance costs for reducing ground-level ozone possible by instituting seasonal versus annual nitric oxide emission limits

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lookman, A.A.

    1996-12-31

    Ground-level ozone is formed in the atmosphere from its precursor emissions, namely nitric oxide (NO{sub x}) and volatile organic compounds (VOC), with its rate of formation dependent on atmospheric conditions. Since ozone levels tend to be highest during the summer months, seasonal controls of precursors have been suggested as a means of reducing the costs of decreasing ozone concentrations to acceptable levels. This paper attempts to quantify what the potential savings if seasonal control were instituted for coal-fired power plants, assuming that only commercially available NO{sub x} control technologies are used. Cost savings through seasonal control is measured by calculating the total annualized cost of NO{sub x} removal at a given amount of seasonal control for different target levels of annual control. For this study, it is assumed that trading of NO{sub x} emissions will be allowed, as has been proposed by the Ozone Transportation Commission (OTC). The problem has been posed as a binary integer linear programming problem, with decision variables being which control to use at each power plant. The results indicate that requiring annual limits which are lower than seasonal limits can substantially reduce compliance costs. These savings occur because requiring stringent compliance only on a seasonal basis allows power plants to use control methods for which the variable costs are paid for only part of the year, and through the use of gas-based controls, which are much cheaper to operate in the summer months.

  6. Total DOE/NNSA

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    8 Actuals 2009 Actuals 2010 Actuals 2011 Actuals 2012 Actuals 2013 Actuals 2014 Actuals 2015 Actuals Total DOE/NNSA 4,385 4,151 4,240 4,862 5,154 5,476 7,170 7,593 Total non-NNSA 3,925 4,017 4,005 3,821 3,875 3,974 3,826 3765 Total Facility 8,310 8,168 8,245 8,683 9,029 9,450 10,996 11,358 non-NNSA includes DOE offices and Strategic Parternship Projects (SPP) employees NNSA M&O Employee Reporting

  7. PAFC Cost Challenges

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

    PAFC Cost Challenges Sridhar Kanuri Manager, PAFC Technology *Sridhar.Kanuri@utcpower.com 2 AGENDA Purecell® 400 cost challenge Cost reduction opportunities Summary 3 PURECELL ® FUEL CELL SYSTEM First cost 2010 cost reduction is being accomplished by incremental changes in technology & low cost sourcing Technology advances are required to reduce further cost and attain UTC Power's commercialization targets 2010 First unit 2010 Last unit Commercialization target Powerplant cost 4

  8. TOTAL WORKFORCE Males

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    76 Females Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 27 24 86 134 65 24 192 171 1189 423 PAY PLAN SES 96 EX 4 EJ/EK 60 EN 05 39 EN 04 159 EN 03 21 EN 00 8 NN (Engineering) 398 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 1165 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 54 NV (Nuc Mat Courier) 325 GS 15 3 GS 14 1 GS 13 1 GS 10 1 Total includes 2318 permanent and 17 temporary employees. DIVERSITY 2335 1559 66.8% American Indian Alaska Native African American Asian American Pacific Islander Hispanic White 33.2% National

  9. Yearly Energy Costs for Buildings

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    1991-03-20

    COSTSAFR3.0 generates a set of compliance forms which will be attached to housing Requests for Proposals (RFPs) issued by Departments or Agencies of the Federal Government. The compliance forms provide a uniform method for estimating the total yearly energy cost for each proposal. COSTSAFR3.0 analyzes specific housing projects at a given site, using alternative fuel types, and considering alternative housing types. The program is designed around the concept of minimizing overall costs through energy conservationmore » design, including first cost and future utility costs, and estabilishes a standard design to which proposed housing designs are compared. It provides a point table for each housing type that can be used to determine whether a proposed design meets the standard and how a design can be modified to meet the standard.« less

  10. Costs of Storing and Transporting Hydrogen | Department of Energy

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

    Costs of Storing and Transporting Hydrogen Costs of Storing and Transporting Hydrogen An analysis was performed to estimate the costs associated with storing and transporting hydrogen. These costs can be added to a hydrogen production cost to determine the total delivered cost of hydrogen. 25106.pdf (1.34 MB) More Documents & Publications Survey of the Economics of Hydrogen Technologies H2A Hydrogen Delivery Infrastructure Analysis Models and Conventional Pathway Options Analysis Results -

  11. Development of surface mine cost estimating equations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1980-09-26

    Cost estimating equations were developed to determine capital and operating costs for five surface coal mine models in Central Appalachia, Northern Appalachia, Mid-West, Far-West, and Campbell County, Wyoming. Engineering equations were used to estimate equipment costs for the stripping function and for the coal loading and hauling function for the base case mine and for several mines with different annual production levels and/or different overburden removal requirements. Deferred costs were then determined through application of the base case depreciation schedules, and direct labor costs were easily established once the equipment quantities (and, hence, manpower requirements) were determined. The data points were then fit with appropriate functional forms, and these were then multiplied by appropriate adjustment factors so that the resulting equations yielded the model mine costs for initial and deferred capital and annual operating cost. (The validity of this scaling process is based on the assumption that total initial and deferred capital costs are proportional to the initial and deferred costs for the primary equipment types that were considered and that annual operating cost is proportional to the direct labor costs that were determined based on primary equipment quantities.) Initial capital costs ranged from $3,910,470 in Central Appalachia to $49,296,785; deferred capital costs ranged from $3,220,000 in Central Appalachia to $30,735,000 in Campbell County, Wyoming; and annual operating costs ranged from $2,924,148 in Central Appalachia to $32,708,591 in Campbell County, Wyoming. (DMC)

  12. Cost Model and Cost Estimating Software

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    1997-03-28

    This chapter discusses a formalized methodology is basically a cost model, which forms the basis for estimating software.

  13. Generation cost unbundling: Untangling the gordian knot

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Conkling, R.L.

    1997-03-01

    One useful byproduct of California`s efforts to restructure its electricity industry comes in the form of Southern California Edison`s proposal to facilitate unbundling by adopting a superior cost allocation method. Utilities and regulators elsewhere should take notice. Clearing the deck for generating competition is the urgent order of the day in electric restructuring. The critical question is: What are the generation costs to be unbundled? Schemes for restructuring, both in California and elsewhere, have called for the stranded component of utility generating costs to be recovered through customer payments of a non-bypassable competition transition charge (CTC). The stranded cost component of generation is the difference between total costs and the revenues received from future market-based prices. This makes a total cost determination for the calculation of the CTC essential, not optional.

  14. New Berkeley Lab Report Tracks a Decade of PV Installed Cost Trends

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barbose, Galen; Peterman, Carla; Wiser, Ryan

    2009-04-15

    Installations of PV systems have been expanding at a rapid pace in recent years. In the United States, the market for PV is driven by national, state, and local government incentives, including upfront cash rebates, production-based incentives, requirements that electricity suppliers purchase a certain amount of solar energy, and Federal and state tax benefits. These programs are, in part, motivated by the popular appeal of solar energy and by the positive attributes of PV - e.g., modest environmental impacts, avoidance of fuel price risks, coincidence with peak electrical demand, and the location of PV at the point of use. Given the relatively high cost of PV, however, a key goal of these policies is to encourage cost reductions over time. Therefore, as policy incentives have become more significant and as PV deployment has accelerated, so too has the desire to track the installed cost of PV systems over time, by system characteristics, by system location, and by component. A new Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory report, 'Tracking the Sun: The Installed Cost of Photovoltaics in the U.S. from 1998-2007', helps to fill this need by summarizing trends in the installed cost (i.e., the cost paid by the system owner) of grid-connected PV systems in the U.S. The report is based on an analysis of project-level cost data from nearly 37,000 residential and non-residential PV systems completed from 1998-2007 and installed on the utility-customer-side of the meter. These systems total 363 MW, equal to 76% of all grid-connected PV capacity installed in the U.S. through 2007, representing the most comprehensive data source available on the installed cost of PV in the United States. The data were obtained from administrators of PV incentive programs around the country, who typically collect installed cost data for systems receiving incentives. A total of 16 programs, spanning 12 states, ultimately provided data for the study. Reflecting the broader geographical trends in the

  15. Incorporating psychological influences in probabilistic cost analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kujawski, Edouard; Alvaro, Mariana; Edwards, William

    2004-01-08

    Today's typical probabilistic cost analysis assumes an ''ideal'' project that is devoid of the human and organizational considerations that heavily influence the success and cost of real-world projects. In the real world ''Money Allocated Is Money Spent'' (MAIMS principle); cost underruns are rarely available to protect against cost overruns while task overruns are passed on to the total project cost. Realistic cost estimates therefore require a modified probabilistic cost analysis that simultaneously models the cost management strategy including budget allocation. Psychological influences such as overconfidence in assessing uncertainties and dependencies among cost elements and risks are other important considerations that are generally not addressed. It should then be no surprise that actual project costs often exceed the initial estimates and are delivered late and/or with a reduced scope. This paper presents a practical probabilistic cost analysis model that incorporates recent findings in human behavior and judgment under uncertainty, dependencies among cost elements, the MAIMS principle, and project management practices. Uncertain cost elements are elicited from experts using the direct fractile assessment method and fitted with three-parameter Weibull distributions. The full correlation matrix is specified in terms of two parameters that characterize correlations among cost elements in the same and in different subsystems. The analysis is readily implemented using standard Monte Carlo simulation tools such as {at}Risk and Crystal Ball{reg_sign}. The analysis of a representative design and engineering project substantiates that today's typical probabilistic cost analysis is likely to severely underestimate project cost for probability of success values of importance to contractors and procuring activities. The proposed approach provides a framework for developing a viable cost management strategy for allocating baseline budgets and contingencies. Given the

  16. Activity Based Costing

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    1997-03-28

    Activity Based Costing (ABC) is method for developing cost estimates in which the project is subdivided into discrete, quantifiable activities or a work unit. This chapter outlines the Activity Based Costing method and discusses applicable uses of ABC.

  17. Cellulosic Ethanol Cost Target

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

    Plenary Talk May 21, 2013 Cellulosic Ethanol Cost Target 2 | Biomass Program ... "Our goal is to make cellulosic ethanol practical and cost competitive within 6 ...

  18. An Examination of Avoided Costs in Utah

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bolinger, Mark; Wiser, Ryan

    2005-01-07

    The Utah Wind Working Group (UWWG) believes there are currently opportunities to encourage wind power development in the state by seeking changes to the avoided cost tariff paid to qualifying facilities (QFs). These opportunities have arisen as a result of a recent renegotiation of Pacificorp's Schedule 37 tariff for wind QFs under 3 MW, as well as an ongoing examination of Pacificorp's Schedule 38 tariff for wind QFs larger than 3 MW. It is expected that decisions made regarding Schedule 38 will also impact Schedule 37. Through the Laboratory Technical Assistance Program (Lab TAP), the UWWG has requested (through the Utah Energy Office) that LBNL provide technical assistance in determining whether an alternative method of calculating avoided costs that has been officially adopted in Idaho would lead to higher QF payments in Utah, and to discuss the pros and cons of this method relative to the methodology recently adopted under Schedule 37 in Utah. To accomplish this scope of work, I begin by summarizing the current method of calculating avoided costs in Utah (per Schedule 37) and Idaho (the ''surrogate avoided resource'' or SAR method). I then compare the two methods both qualitatively and quantitatively. Next I present Pacificorp's four main objections to the use of the SAR method, and discuss the reasonableness of each objection. Finally, I conclude with a few other potential considerations that might add value to wind QFs in Utah.

  19. Cost Estimation Package

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    1997-03-28

    This chapter focuses on the components (or elements) of the cost estimation package and their documentation.

  20. Life Cycle Cost Estimate

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    1997-03-28

    Life-cycle costs (LCCs) are all the anticipated costs associated with a project or program alternative throughout its life. This includes costs from pre-operations through operations or to the end of the alternative.This chapter discusses life cycle costs and the role they play in planning.

  1. A chronicle of costs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Elioff, T.

    1994-04-01

    This report contains the history of all estimated costs associated with the superconducting super collider.

  2. Hydrogen Threshold Cost Calculation

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

    Program Record (Offices of Fuel Cell Technologies) Record #: 11007 Date: March 25, 2011 Title: Hydrogen Threshold Cost Calculation Originator: Mark Ruth & Fred Joseck Approved by: Sunita Satyapal Date: March 24, 2011 Description: The hydrogen threshold cost is defined as the hydrogen cost in the range of $2.00-$4.00/gge (2007$) which represents the cost at which hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) are projected to become competitive on a cost per mile basis with the competing

  3. Hydrogen Pathway Cost Distributions

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

    Pathway Cost Distributions Jim Uihlein Fuel Pathways Integration Tech Team January 25, 2006 2 Outline * Pathway-Independent Cost Goal * Cost Distribution Objective * Overview * H2A Influence * Approach * Implementation * Results * Discussion Process * Summary 3 Hydrogen R&D Cost Goal * Goal is pathway independent * Developed through a well defined, transparent process * Consumer fueling costs are equivalent or less on a cents per mile basis * Evolved gasoline ICE and gasoline-electric

  4. OOTW COST TOOLS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HARTLEY, D.S.III; PACKARD, S.L.

    1998-09-01

    This document reports the results of a study of cost tools to support the analysis of Operations Other Than War (OOTW). It recommends the continued development of the Department of Defense (DoD) Contingency Operational Support Tool (COST) as the basic cost analysis tool for 00TWS. It also recommends modifications to be included in future versions of COST and the development of an 00TW mission planning tool to supply valid input for costing.

  5. U.S. Total Exports

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

    Barbados Total To Brazil Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA Total to Canada Eastport, ID Calais, ME Detroit, MI Marysville, MI Port Huron, MI Crosby, ND Portal, ND Sault St. Marie, MI St. Clair, MI Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Buffalo, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Sweetgrass, MT Total to Chile Sabine Pass, LA Total to China Kenai, AK Sabine Pass, LA Total to Egypt Freeport, TX Total to India

  6. Total Eolica | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Eolica Jump to: navigation, search Name: Total Eolica Place: Spain Product: Project developer References: Total Eolica1 This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by expanding...

  7. ASPEN costing manual

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Schwint, K.J.

    1986-07-25

    The ASPEN program contains within it a Cost Estimation System (CES) which estimates the purchase cost and utility consumption rates for major pieces of equipment in a process flowsheet as well as installed equipment costs. These estimates are ''preliminary-study grade'' with an accuracy of plus or minus 30%. The ASPEN program also contains within it an Economic Evaluation System (EES) which estimates overall capital investment costs, annual operating expenses and profitability indices for a chemical plant. This ASPEN costing manual has been written as a guide for those inexperienced in the use of ASPEN and unfamiliar with standard cost estimating techniques who want to use the ASPEN CES and EES. The ASPEN Costing Manual is comprised of the following sections: (1) Introduction, (2) ASPEN Input Language, (3) ASPEN Cost Estimation System (CES), (4) ASPEN Cost Blocks; and (5) ASPEN Economic Evaluation System (EES).

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

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

    111.1 86.6 2,720 1,970 1,310 1,941 1,475 821 1,059 944 554 Census Region and Division Northeast.................................... 20.6 13.9 3,224 2,173 836 2,219 1,619 583 903 830 Q New England.......................... 5.5 3.6 3,365 2,154 313 2,634 1,826 Q 951 940 Q Middle Atlantic........................ 15.1 10.3 3,167 2,181 1,049 2,188 1,603 582 Q Q Q Midwest...................................... 25.6 21.0 2,823 2,239 1,624 2,356 1,669 1,336 1,081 961 778 East North

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

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

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

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

    ,171 1,618 1,031 845 630 401 Census Region and Division Northeast................................................... 20.6 2,334 1,664 562 911 649 220 New England.......................................... 5.5 2,472 1,680 265 1,057 719 113 Middle Atlantic........................................ 15.1 2,284 1,658 670 864 627 254 Midwest...................................................... 25.6 2,421 1,927 1,360 981 781 551 East North Central.................................. 17.7 2,483 1,926 1,269

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

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

    20.6 25.6 40.7 24.2 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer ........... 35.5 6.9 8.1 14.2 6.4 Use a Personal Computer......................... 75.6 13.7 17.5 26.6 17.8 Number of Desktop PCs 1.......................................................... 50.3 9.3 11.9 18.2 11.0 2.......................................................... 16.2 2.9 3.5 5.5 4.4 3 or More............................................. 9.0 1.5 2.1 2.9 2.5 Number of Laptop PCs

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

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

    0.7 21.7 6.9 12.1 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer ........... 35.5 14.2 7.2 2.8 4.2 Use a Personal Computer......................... 75.6 26.6 14.5 4.1 7.9 Number of Desktop PCs 1.......................................................... 50.3 18.2 10.0 2.9 5.3 2.......................................................... 16.2 5.5 3.0 0.7 1.8 3 or More............................................. 9.0 2.9 1.5 0.5 0.8 Number of Laptop PCs

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

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

    26.7 28.8 20.6 13.1 22.0 16.6 38.6 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer ........... 35.5 17.1 10.8 4.2 1.8 1.6 10.3 20.6 Use a Personal Computer......................... 75.6 9.6 18.0 16.4 11.3 20.3 6.4 17.9 Number of Desktop PCs 1.......................................................... 50.3 8.3 14.2 11.4 7.2 9.2 5.3 14.2 2.......................................................... 16.2 0.9 2.6 3.7 2.9 6.2 0.8 2.6 3 or More............................................. 9.0 0.4 1.2

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

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

    47.1 19.0 22.7 22.3 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer ........... 35.5 16.9 6.5 4.6 7.6 Use a Personal Computer......................... 75.6 30.3 12.5 18.1 14.7 Number of Desktop PCs 1.......................................................... 50.3 21.1 8.3 10.7 10.1 2.......................................................... 16.2 6.2 2.8 4.1 3.0 3 or More............................................. 9.0 2.9 1.4 3.2 1.6 Number of Laptop PCs

  15. Total.................................................................

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

    49.2 15.1 15.6 11.1 7.0 5.2 8.0 Have Cooling Equipment............................... 93.3 31.3 15.1 15.6 11.1 7.0 5.2 8.0 Use Cooling Equipment................................ 91.4 30.4 14.6 15.4 11.1 6.9 5.2 7.9 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............... 1.9 1.0 0.5 Q Q Q Q Q Do Not Have Cooling Equipment................... 17.8 17.8 N N N N N N Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System............................................. 65.9 3.9 15.1 15.6 11.1 7.0 5.2 8.0 Without a Heat

  16. Total.................................................................

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

    14.7 7.4 12.5 12.5 18.9 18.6 17.3 9.2 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment........ 1.2 N Q Q 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.2 Q Have Main Space Heating Equipment........... 109.8 14.7 7.4 12.4 12.2 18.5 18.3 17.1 9.2 Use Main Space Heating Equipment............. 109.1 14.6 7.3 12.4 12.2 18.2 18.2 17.1 9.1 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It............... 0.8 Q Q Q Q 0.3 Q N Q Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas................................................... 58.2 9.2 4.9 7.8 7.1 8.8 8.4 7.8 4.2 Central

  17. Total..................................................................

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

    . 111.1 14.7 7.4 12.5 12.5 18.9 18.6 17.3 9.2 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment..................... 17.8 3.9 1.8 2.2 2.1 3.1 2.6 1.7 0.4 Have Cooling Equipment................................. 93.3 10.8 5.6 10.3 10.4 15.8 16.0 15.6 8.8 Use Cooling Equipment.................................. 91.4 10.6 5.5 10.3 10.3 15.3 15.7 15.3 8.6 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it................. 1.9 Q Q Q Q 0.6 0.4 0.3 Q Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central

  18. Total...................................................................

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

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

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

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

    Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System............................................... 65.9 47.5 4.0 2.8 7.9 3.7 Without a Heat Pump.................................. 53.5 37.8 3.4 2.2 7.0 3.1 With a Heat Pump....................................... 12.3 9.7 0.6 0.5 1.0 0.6 Window/Wall Units.......................................... 28.9 14.9 2.3 3.5 6.0 2.1 1 Unit........................................................... 14.5 6.6 1.0 1.6 4.2 1.2 2

  20. Total.......................................................................

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

    0.6 15.1 5.5 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer ................... 35.5 6.9 5.3 1.6 Use a Personal Computer................................ 75.6 13.7 9.8 3.9 Number of Desktop PCs 1.................................................................. 50.3 9.3 6.8 2.5 2.................................................................. 16.2 2.9 1.9 1.0 3 or More..................................................... 9.0 1.5 1.1 0.4 Number of Laptop PCs

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

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

    5.6 17.7 7.9 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer ................... 35.5 8.1 5.6 2.5 Use a Personal Computer................................ 75.6 17.5 12.1 5.4 Number of Desktop PCs 1.................................................................. 50.3 11.9 8.4 3.4 2.................................................................. 16.2 3.5 2.2 1.3 3 or More..................................................... 9.0 2.1 1.5 0.6 Number of Laptop PCs

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

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

    4.2 7.6 16.6 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer ................... 35.5 6.4 2.2 4.2 Use a Personal Computer................................ 75.6 17.8 5.3 12.5 Number of Desktop PCs 1.................................................................. 50.3 11.0 3.4 7.6 2.................................................................. 16.2 4.4 1.3 3.1 3 or More..................................................... 9.0 2.5 0.7 1.8 Number of Laptop PCs

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

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

    25.6 40.7 24.2 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment............... 1.2 Q Q Q 0.7 Have Main Space Heating Equipment.................. 109.8 20.5 25.6 40.3 23.4 Use Main Space Heating Equipment.................... 109.1 20.5 25.6 40.1 22.9 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It...................... 0.8 N N Q 0.6 Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas.......................................................... 58.2 11.4 18.4 13.6 14.7 Central Warm-Air Furnace................................ 44.7 6.1

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

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

    5.6 17.7 7.9 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment............... 1.2 Q Q N Have Main Space Heating Equipment.................. 109.8 25.6 17.7 7.9 Use Main Space Heating Equipment.................... 109.1 25.6 17.7 7.9 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It...................... 0.8 N N N Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas.......................................................... 58.2 18.4 13.1 5.3 Central Warm-Air Furnace................................ 44.7 16.2 11.6 4.7 For One Housing

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

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

    0.7 21.7 6.9 12.1 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment............... 1.2 Q Q N Q Have Main Space Heating Equipment.................. 109.8 40.3 21.4 6.9 12.0 Use Main Space Heating Equipment.................... 109.1 40.1 21.2 6.9 12.0 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It...................... 0.8 Q Q N N Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas.......................................................... 58.2 13.6 5.6 2.3 5.7 Central Warm-Air Furnace................................ 44.7 11.0 4.4

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

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

    7.1 7.0 8.0 12.1 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment............... 1.2 Q Q Q 0.2 Have Main Space Heating Equipment.................. 109.8 7.1 6.8 7.9 11.9 Use Main Space Heating Equipment.................... 109.1 7.1 6.6 7.9 11.4 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It...................... 0.8 N Q N 0.5 Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas.......................................................... 58.2 3.8 0.4 3.8 8.4 Central Warm-Air Furnace................................ 44.7 1.8 Q 3.1 6.0

  7. Total...........................................................................

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

    0.6 15.1 5.5 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................. 17.8 4.0 2.4 1.7 Have Cooling Equipment.......................................... 93.3 16.5 12.8 3.8 Use Cooling Equipment........................................... 91.4 16.3 12.6 3.7 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it.......................... 1.9 0.3 Q Q Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 6.0 5.2 0.8 Without a Heat

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

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

    5.6 17.7 7.9 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................. 17.8 2.1 1.8 0.3 Have Cooling Equipment.......................................... 93.3 23.5 16.0 7.5 Use Cooling Equipment........................................... 91.4 23.4 15.9 7.5 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it.......................... 1.9 Q Q Q Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 17.3 11.3 6.0 Without a Heat

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

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

    4.2 7.6 16.6 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................. 17.8 10.3 3.1 7.3 Have Cooling Equipment.......................................... 93.3 13.9 4.5 9.4 Use Cooling Equipment........................................... 91.4 12.9 4.3 8.5 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it.......................... 1.9 1.0 Q 0.8 Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 10.5 3.9 6.5 Without a Heat

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

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

    Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................... 17.8 4.0 2.1 1.4 10.3 Have Cooling Equipment............................................ 93.3 16.5 23.5 39.3 13.9 Use Cooling Equipment............................................. 91.4 16.3 23.4 38.9 12.9 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................ 1.9 0.3 Q 0.5 1.0 Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 6.0 17.3 32.1 10.5 Without a Heat

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

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

    Cooking Appliances Frequency of Hot Meals Cooked 3 or More Times A Day......................................... 8.2 1.2 1.0 0.2 2 Times A Day...................................................... 24.6 4.0 2.7 1.2 Once a Day........................................................... 42.3 7.9 5.4 2.5 A Few Times Each Week...................................... 27.2 6.0 4.8 1.2 About Once a Week.............................................. 3.9 0.6 0.5 Q Less Than Once a

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

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

    Cooking Appliances Frequency of Hot Meals Cooked 3 or More Times A Day......................................... 8.2 1.4 1.0 0.4 2 Times A Day...................................................... 24.6 5.8 3.5 2.3 Once a Day........................................................... 42.3 10.7 7.8 2.9 A Few Times Each Week...................................... 27.2 5.6 4.0 1.6 About Once a Week.............................................. 3.9 0.9 0.6 0.3 Less Than Once a

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

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

    Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................... 17.8 2.1 1.8 0.3 Have Cooling Equipment............................................ 93.3 23.5 16.0 7.5 Use Cooling Equipment............................................. 91.4 23.4 15.9 7.5 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................ 1.9 Q Q Q Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 17.3 11.3 6.0 Without a Heat

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

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

    Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................... 17.8 1.4 0.8 0.2 0.3 Have Cooling Equipment............................................ 93.3 39.3 20.9 6.7 11.8 Use Cooling Equipment............................................. 91.4 38.9 20.7 6.6 11.7 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................ 1.9 0.5 Q Q Q Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 32.1 17.6 5.2 9.3 Without a Heat

  15. Total.............................................................................

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

    Cooking Appliances Frequency of Hot Meals Cooked 3 or More Times A Day......................................... 8.2 2.6 0.7 1.9 2 Times A Day...................................................... 24.6 6.6 2.0 4.6 Once a Day........................................................... 42.3 8.8 2.9 5.8 A Few Times Each Week...................................... 27.2 4.7 1.5 3.1 About Once a Week.............................................. 3.9 0.7 Q 0.6 Less Than Once a

  16. Total.............................................................................

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

    Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................... 17.8 10.3 3.1 7.3 Have Cooling Equipment............................................ 93.3 13.9 4.5 9.4 Use Cooling Equipment............................................. 91.4 12.9 4.3 8.5 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................ 1.9 1.0 Q 0.8 Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 10.5 3.9 6.5 Without a Heat

  17. Total.............................................................................

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

    Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................... 17.8 8.5 2.7 2.6 4.0 Have Cooling Equipment............................................ 93.3 38.6 16.2 20.1 18.4 Use Cooling Equipment............................................. 91.4 37.8 15.9 19.8 18.0 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................ 1.9 0.9 0.3 0.3 0.4 Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 25.8 10.9 16.6 12.5 Without a Heat

  18. Total..............................................................................

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

    20.6 25.6 40.7 24.2 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment................................ 17.8 4.0 2.1 1.4 10.3 Have Cooling Equipment............................................. 93.3 16.5 23.5 39.3 13.9 Use Cooling Equipment.............................................. 91.4 16.3 23.4 38.9 12.9 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................. 1.9 0.3 Q 0.5 1.0 Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................... 65.9 6.0 17.3 32.1 10.5

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

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

    0.7 21.7 6.9 12.1 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment................................ 17.8 1.4 0.8 0.2 0.3 Have Cooling Equipment............................................. 93.3 39.3 20.9 6.7 11.8 Use Cooling Equipment.............................................. 91.4 38.9 20.7 6.6 11.7 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................. 1.9 0.5 Q Q Q Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................... 65.9 32.1 17.6 5.2 9.3 Without a

  20. Total..............................................................................

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

    111.1 7.1 7.0 8.0 12.1 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer .......................... 35.5 3.0 2.0 2.7 3.1 Use a Personal Computer....................................... 75.6 4.2 5.0 5.3 9.0 Number of Desktop PCs 1......................................................................... 50.3 3.1 3.4 3.4 5.4 2......................................................................... 16.2 0.7 1.1 1.2 2.2 3 or More............................................................ 9.0 0.3

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

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

    7.1 19.0 22.7 22.3 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment................................ 17.8 8.5 2.7 2.6 4.0 Have Cooling Equipment............................................. 93.3 38.6 16.2 20.1 18.4 Use Cooling Equipment.............................................. 91.4 37.8 15.9 19.8 18.0 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................. 1.9 0.9 0.3 0.3 0.4 Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................... 65.9 25.8 10.9 16.6 12.5

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

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

    25.6 40.7 24.2 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer.................................. 35.5 6.9 8.1 14.2 6.4 Use a Personal Computer.............................................. 75.6 13.7 17.5 26.6 17.8 Most-Used Personal Computer Type of PC Desk-top Model......................................................... 58.6 10.4 14.1 20.5 13.7 Laptop Model............................................................. 16.9 3.3 3.4 6.1 4.1 Hours Turned on Per Week Less than 2

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

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

    5.6 17.7 7.9 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer.................................. 35.5 8.1 5.6 2.5 Use a Personal Computer.............................................. 75.6 17.5 12.1 5.4 Most-Used Personal Computer Type of PC Desk-top Model......................................................... 58.6 14.1 10.0 4.0 Laptop Model............................................................. 16.9 3.4 2.1 1.3 Hours Turned on Per Week Less than 2

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

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

    Cooking Appliances Frequency of Hot Meals Cooked 3 or More Times A Day................................................. 8.2 3.0 1.6 0.3 1.1 2 Times A Day.............................................................. 24.6 8.3 4.2 1.3 2.7 Once a Day................................................................... 42.3 15.0 8.1 2.7 4.2 A Few Times Each Week............................................. 27.2 10.9 6.0 1.8 3.1 About Once a Week..................................................... 3.9

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

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

    Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer.................................. 35.5 14.2 7.2 2.8 4.2 Use a Personal Computer.............................................. 75.6 26.6 14.5 4.1 7.9 Most-Used Personal Computer Type of PC Desk-top Model......................................................... 58.6 20.5 11.0 3.4 6.1 Laptop Model............................................................. 16.9 6.1 3.5 0.7 1.9 Hours Turned on Per Week Less than 2

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

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

    4.2 7.6 16.6 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer.................................. 35.5 6.4 2.2 4.2 Use a Personal Computer.............................................. 75.6 17.8 5.3 12.5 Most-Used Personal Computer Type of PC Desk-top Model......................................................... 58.6 13.7 4.2 9.5 Laptop Model............................................................. 16.9 4.1 1.1 3.0 Hours Turned on Per Week Less than 2

  7. Total....................................................................................

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

    Cooking Appliances Frequency of Hot Meals Cooked 3 or More Times A Day................................................. 8.2 3.7 1.6 1.4 1.5 2 Times A Day.............................................................. 24.6 10.8 4.1 4.3 5.5 Once a Day................................................................... 42.3 17.0 7.2 8.7 9.3 A Few Times Each Week............................................. 27.2 11.4 4.7 6.4 4.8 About Once a Week.....................................................

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

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

    111.1 47.1 19.0 22.7 22.3 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer.................................. 35.5 16.9 6.5 4.6 7.6 Use a Personal Computer.............................................. 75.6 30.3 12.5 18.1 14.7 Most-Used Personal Computer Type of PC Desk-top Model......................................................... 58.6 22.9 9.8 14.1 11.9 Laptop Model............................................................. 16.9 7.4 2.7 4.0 2.9 Hours Turned on Per Week Less than 2

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

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

    ..... 111.1 7.1 7.0 8.0 12.1 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer...................................... 35.5 3.0 2.0 2.7 3.1 Use a Personal Computer.................................................. 75.6 4.2 5.0 5.3 9.0 Most-Used Personal Computer Type of PC Desk-top Model............................................................. 58.6 3.2 3.9 4.0 6.7 Laptop Model................................................................. 16.9 1.0 1.1 1.3 2.4 Hours Turned on Per Week Less

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

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

    ... Basements Basement in Single-Family Homes and Apartments in 2-4 Unit Buildings ... Attics Attic in Single-Family Homes and Apartments in 2-4 Unit Buildings ...

  11. Total

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

    ... Climate region 3 Very coldCold 31,898 30,469 28,057 28,228 21,019 30,542 25,067 Mixed-humid 27,873 26,716 24,044 26,365 21,026 27,096 22,812 Mixed-dryHot-dry 12,037 10,484 7,628 ...

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

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

    Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System......Central Air-Conditioning...... 65.9 1.1 6.4 6.4 ...

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

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

    Income Relative to Poverty Line Below 100 Percent......1.3 1.2 0.8 0.4 1. Below 150 percent of poverty line or 60 percent of median State ...

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

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

    ... Below Poverty Line Eligible for Federal Assistance 1 80,000 or More 60,000 to 79,999 ... Below Poverty Line Eligible for Federal Assistance 1 80,000 or More 60,000 to 79,999 ...

  15. Total..........................................................

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

    ... Table HC7.4 Space Heating Characteristics by Household Income, 2005 Below Poverty Line ... Below Poverty Line Eligible for Federal Assistance 1 80,000 or More Space Heating ...

  16. Total..........................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    ... Table HC7.7 Air-Conditioning Usage Indicators by Household Income, 2005 Below Poverty Line ... Table HC7.7 Air-Conditioning Usage Indicators by Household Income, 2005 Below Poverty Line ...

  17. Total..........................................................

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

    ... Living Space Characteristics Below Poverty Line Eligible for Federal Assistance 1 Million ... Living Space Characteristics Below Poverty Line Eligible for Federal Assistance 1 Million ...

  18. Total..........................................................

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

    ... Table HC7.12 Home Electronics Usage Indicators by Household Income, 2005 Below Poverty ... Table HC7.12 Home Electronics Usage Indicators by Household Income, 2005 Below Poverty ...

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

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

    ... Table HC7.10 Home Appliances Usage Indicators by Household Income, 2005 Below Poverty Line ... Below Poverty Line Eligible for Federal Assistance 1 40,000 to 59,999 60,000 to 79,999 ...

  20. Total

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

    1,001 to 5,000 2,777 8,041 10,232 2.9 786 56 5,001 to 10,000 1,229 8,900 9,225 7.2 965 62 10,001 to 25,000 884 14,105 14,189 16.0 994 65 25,001 to 50,000 332 11,917 11,327 35.9 1,052 72 50,001 to 100,000 199 13,918 12,345 69.9 1,127 80 100,001 to 200,000 90 12,415 11,310 137.9 1,098 89 200,001 to 500,000 38 10,724 10,356 284.2 1,035 99 Over 500,000 8 7,074 9,196 885.0 769 117 Principal building activity Education 389 12,239 10,885 31.5 1,124 53 Food sales 177 1,252 1,172 7.1 1,067 121 Food

  1. Total

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

    1,001 to 5,000 2,777 8,041 10,232 2.9 786 56 5,001 to 10,000 1,229 8,900 9,225 7.2 965 62 10,001 to 25,000 884 14,105 14,189 16.0 994 65 25,001 to 50,000 332 11,917 11,327 35.9 1,052 72 50,001 to 100,000 199 13,918 12,345 69.9 1,127 80 100,001 to 200,000 90 12,415 11,310 137.9 1,098 89 200,001 to 500,000 38 10,724 10,356 284.2 1,035 99 Over 500,000 8 7,074 9,196 885.0 769 117 Principal building activity Education 389 12,239 10,885 31.5 1,124 53 Food sales 177 1,252 1,172 7.1 1,067 121 Food

  2. Total

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

    1,001 to 5,000 2,777 8,041 10,232 2.9 786 56 5,001 to 10,000 1,229 8,900 9,225 7.2 965 62 10,001 to 25,000 884 14,105 14,189 16.0 994 65 25,001 to 50,000 332 11,917 11,327 35.9 1,052 72 50,001 to 100,000 199 13,918 12,345 69.9 1,127 80 100,001 to 200,000 90 12,415 11,310 137.9 1,098 89 200,001 to 500,000 38 10,724 10,356 284.2 1,035 99 Over 500,000 8 7,074 9,196 885.0 769 117 Principal building activity Education 389 12,239 10,885 31.5 1,124 53 Food sales 177 1,252 1,172 7.1 1,067 121 Food

  3. Total

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

    Median square feet per building (thousand) Median square feet per worker Median operating hours per week Median age of buildings (years) All buildings 5,557 87,093 88,182 5.0 1,029 50 32 Building floorspace (square feet) 1,001 to 5,000 2,777 8,041 10,232 2.8 821 49 37 5,001 to 10,000 1,229 8,900 9,225 7.0 1,167 50 31 10,001 to 25,000 884 14,105 14,189 15.0 1,444 56 32 25,001 to 50,000 332 11,917 11,327 35.0 1,461 60 29 50,001 to 100,000 199 13,918 12,345 67.0 1,442 60 26 100,001 to 200,000 90

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

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

    ... Type of Renter-Occupied Housing Unit Housing Units (millions) Single-Family Units ... At Home Behavior Home Used for Business Yes......

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

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

    ... Type of Owner-Occupied Housing Unit U.S. Housing Units (millions) Single-Family Units ... At Home Behavior Home Used for Business Yes......

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

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

    ... Housing Characteristics Tables Single-Family Units Detached Type of Housing Unit Table ... At Home Behavior Home Used for Business Yes......

  7. Total..........................................................

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

    ... Housing Units (millions) UrbanRural Location (as Self-Reported) Living Space ... Housing Units (millions) UrbanRural Location (as Self-Reported) Living Space ...

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

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

    ... Housing Units (millions) UrbanRural Location (as Self-Reported) City Town Suburbs Rural ... Housing Units (millions) UrbanRural Location (as Self-Reported) City Town Suburbs Rural ...

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

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

    ... 41.8 2,603 2,199 1,654 941 795 598 1-Car Garage...... 9.5 2,064 1,664 1,039 775 624 390 2-Car Garage......

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

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

    ... Average Square Feet per Apartment in a -- Apartments (millions) Major Outside Wall Construction Siding (Aluminum, Vinyl, Steel)...... 35.3 3.5 1,286 1,090 325 852 786 461 ...

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

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

    Living Space Characteristics Detached Attached Energy Information Administration 2005 Residential Energy Consumption Survey: Preliminary Housing Characteristics Tables Table HC3.2 ...

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Table HC4.2 Living Space Characteristics by Renter-Occupied Housing Units, 2005 2 to 4 Units 5 or More Units Mobile Homes Energy Information Administration 2005 Residential Energy ...

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

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

    ... Per Household Member Average Square Feet Energy Information Administration 2005 Residential Energy Consumption Survey: Preliminary Housing Characteristics Tables Table HC1.2.2 ...

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

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

    ... 111.1 20.6 15.1 5.5 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment...... 17.8 4.0 2.4 1.7 Have Cooling Equipment...... 93.3 ...

  15. PHENIX WBS notes. Cost and schedule review copy

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-02-01

    The Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Book begins with this Overview section, which contains the high-level summary cost estimate, the cost profile, and the global construction schedule. The summary cost estimate shows the total US cost and the cost in terms of PHENIX construction funds for building the PHENIX detector. All costs in the WBS book are shown in FY 1993 dollars. Also shown are the institutional and foreign contributions, the level of pre-operations funding, and the cost of deferred items. Pie charts are presented at PHENIX WBS level 1 and 2 that show this information. The PHENIX construction funds are shown broken down to PHENIX WBS level 3 items per fiscal year, and the resulting profile is compared to the RHIC target profile. An accumulated difference of the two profiles is also shown. The PHENIX global construction schedule is presented at the end of the Overview section. Following the Overview are sections for each subsystem. Each subsystem section begins with a summary cost estimate, cost profile, and critical path. The total level 3 cost is broken down into fixed costs (M&S), engineering costs (EDIA) and labor costs. Costs are further broken down in terms of PHENIX construction funds, institutional and foreign contributions, pre-operations funding, and deferred items. Also shown is the contingency at level 3 and the level 4 breakdown of the total cost. The cost profile in fiscal years is shown at level 3. The subsystem summaries are followed by the full cost estimate and schedule sheets for that subsystem. These detailed sheets are typically carried down to level 7 or 8. The cost estimate Total, M&S, EDIA, and Labor breakdowns, as well as contingency, for each WBS entry.

  16. PHENIX Work Breakdown Structure. Cost and schedule review copy

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-02-01

    The Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Book begins with this Overview section, which contains the high-level summary cost estimate, the cost profile, and the global construction schedule. The summary cost estimate shows the total US cost and the cost in terms of PHENIX construction funds for building the PHENIX detector. All costs in the WBS book are shown in FY 1993 dollars. Also shown are the institutional and foreign contributions, the level of pre-operations funding, and the cost of deferred items. Pie charts are presented at PHENIX WBS level 1 and 2 that show this information. The PHENIX construction funds are shown broken down to PHENIX WBS level 3 items per fiscal year, and the resulting profile is compared to the RHIC target profile. An accumulated difference of the two profiles is also shown. The PHENIX global construction schedule is presented at the end of the Overview section. Following the Overview are sections for each subsystem. Each subsystem section begins with a summary cost estimate, cost profile, and critical path. The total level 3 cost is broken down into fixed costs (M&S), engineering costs (EDIA) and labor costs. Costs are further broken down in terms of PHENIX construction funds, institutional and foreign contributions, pre-operations funding, and deferred items. Also shown is the contingency at level 3 and the level 4 breakdown of the total cost. The cost profile in fiscal years is shown at level 3. The subsystem summaries are followed by the full cost estimate and schedule sheets for that subsystem. These detailed sheets are typically carried down to level 7 or 8. The cost estimate shows Total, M&S, EDIA, and Labor breakdowns, as well as contingency, for each WBS entry.

  17. Vehicle Cost Calculator

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Annual Fuel Cost gal Annual GHG Emissions (lbs of CO2) Vehicle Cost Calculator See Assumptions and Methodology Back Next U.S. Department of Energy Energy Efficiency and ...

  18. Direct/Indirect Costs

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    1997-03-28

    This chapter provides recommended categories for direct and indirect elements developed by the Committee for Cost Methods Development (CCMD) and describes various estimating techniques for direct and indirect costs.

  19. Power Plant Cycling Costs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kumar, N.; Besuner, P.; Lefton, S.; Agan, D.; Hilleman, D.

    2012-07-01

    This report provides a detailed review of the most up to date data available on power plant cycling costs. The primary objective of this report is to increase awareness of power plant cycling cost, the use of these costs in renewable integration studies and to stimulate debate between policymakers, system dispatchers, plant personnel and power utilities.

  20. Pollution prevention cost savings potential

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Celeste, J.

    1994-12-01

    The waste generated by DOE facilities is a serious problem that significantly impacts current operations, increases future waste management costs, and creates future environmental liabilities. Pollution Prevention (P2) emphasizes source reduction through improved manufacturing and process control technologies. This concept must be incorporated into DOE`s overall operating philosophy and should be an integral part of Total Quality Management (TQM) program. P2 reduces the amount of waste generated, the cost of environmental compliance and future liabilities, waste treatment, and transportation and disposal costs. To be effective, P2 must contribute to the bottom fine in reducing the cost of work performed. P2 activities at LLNL include: researching and developing innovative manufacturing; evaluating new technologies, products, and chemistries; using alternative cleaning and sensor technologies; performing Pollution Prevention Opportunity Assessments (PPOAs); and developing outreach programs with small business. Examples of industrial outreach are: innovative electroplating operations, printed circuit board manufacturing, and painting operations. LLNL can provide the infrastructure and technical expertise to address a wide variety of industrial concerns.

  1. COST BREAKDOWN AWARD NO: START DATE: EXPIRATION DATE: FISCAL YEAR BREAKDOWN OF FUNDS

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

    COST BREAKDOWN AWARD NO: START DATE: EXPIRATION DATE: FISCAL YEAR BREAKDOWN OF FUNDS ELEMENTS FY FY FY FY FY TOTAL Direct Labor Overhead Materials Supplies Travel Other Direct Costs Subcontractors Total Direct Costs G&A Expense Total All Costs DOE Share* Awardee Share* Overhead Rate G&A Rate 1. The cost elements indicated are provided as an example only. Your firm should indicate the costs elements you have used on your invoices. 2. You should indicate the cost incurred for each of your

  2. Are renewables portfolio standards cost-effective emission abatement policy?

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Katerina Dobesova; Jay Apt; Lester B. Lave

    2005-11-15

    Renewables portfolio standards (RPS) could be an important policy instrument for 3P and 4P control. The authors examine the costs of renewable power, accounting for the federal production tax credit, the market value of a renewable credit, and the value of producing electricity without emissions of SO{sub 2}, NOx, mercury, and CO{sub 2}. The focus is on Texas, which has a large RPS and is the largest U.S. electricity producer and one of the largest emitters of pollutants and CO{sub 2}. The private and social costs of wind generation in an RPS is compared with the current cost of fossil generation, accounting for the pollution and CO{sub 2} emissions. It was found that society paid about 5.7 cents/kWh more for wind power, counting the additional generation, transmission, intermittency, and other costs. The higher cost includes credits amounting to 1.1 cents/kWh in reduced SO{sub 2}, NOx, and Hg emissions. These pollution reductions and lower CO{sub 2} emissions could be attained at about the same cost using pulverized coal (PC) or natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) plants with carbon capture and sequestration (CCS); the reductions could be obtained more cheaply with an integrated coal gasification combined cycle (IGCC) plant with CCS. 35 refs., 7 tabs.

  3. Syngas Mixed Alcohol Cost Validation

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

    Techno-economic analysis (TEA) - Feedback to the research efforts Specific objective in 2012: Provide TEA and validate DOE BETO's goal to demonstrate technologies capable of producing cost competitive ethanol from biomass by the year 2012. 2 Quad Chart Overview 3 Start Date Oct 1, 2006 End Date Sept 30, 2012 % Complete 100% Timeline for Mixed Alcohols Year Total [Gasification/Pyrolysis] FY12 $860k [$700k/$160k] FY13 $1,000k [$250k/$750k] FY14 $1,050k [$350k/$700k] projected Years 10 (FY04 to

  4. Level: National Data and Regional Totals; Row: NAICS Codes, Value...

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

    ... for which payment was made, quantities transferred in, quantities purchased and paid for by a central purchasing entity, and quantities for which payment was made in kind. ...

  5. Workplace Charging Installation Costs

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Installation costs and services vary considerably, so employers are encouraged to obtain a number of quotes before moving forward with any installation. An initial site investigation should include:

  6. Low Cost, Durable Seal

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

    UTC Power Corporation February 14, 2007 This presentation does not contain any proprietary or confidential information 1 LOW COST, DURABLE SEAL Outline * Project Objective * ...

  7. substantially reduced production costs

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

    production costs - Sandia Energy Energy Search Icon Sandia Home Locations Contact Us Employee Locator Energy & Climate Secure & Sustainable Energy Future Stationary Power Energy ...

  8. SOFT COST GRAND CHALLENGE

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

    energycenter.org California Center for Sustainable Energy Soft Cost Grand Challenge May 22, 2014 Accelerating the transition to a sustainable world powered by clean energy 2...

  9. Characteristics RSE Column Factor: Total

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

    and 1994 Vehicle Characteristics RSE Column Factor: Total 1993 Family Income Below Poverty Line Eli- gible for Fed- eral Assist- ance 1 RSE Row Factor: Less than 5,000 5,000...

  10. ARM - Measurement - Total cloud water

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

    cloud water ARM Data Discovery Browse Data Comments? We would love to hear from you! Send us a note below or call us at 1-888-ARM-DATA. Send Measurement : Total cloud water The total concentration (mass/vol) of ice and liquid water particles in a cloud; this includes condensed water content (CWC). Categories Cloud Properties Instruments The above measurement is considered scientifically relevant for the following instruments. Refer to the datastream (netcdf) file headers of each instrument for a

  11. Simple Modular LED Cost Model

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The LED Cost Model, developed by the DOE Cost Modeling Working Group, provides a simplified method for analyzing the manufacturing costs of an LED package. The model focuses on the major cost...

  12. Cost Estimating Handbook for Environmental Restoration

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1990-09-01

    Environmental restoration (ER) projects have presented the DOE and cost estimators with a number of properties that are not comparable to the normal estimating climate within DOE. These properties include: An entirely new set of specialized expressions and terminology. A higher than normal exposure to cost and schedule risk, as compared to most other DOE projects, due to changing regulations, public involvement, resource shortages, and scope of work. A higher than normal percentage of indirect costs to the total estimated cost due primarily to record keeping, special training, liability, and indemnification. More than one estimate for a project, particularly in the assessment phase, in order to provide input into the evaluation of alternatives for the cleanup action. While some aspects of existing guidance for cost estimators will be applicable to environmental restoration projects, some components of the present guidelines will have to be modified to reflect the unique elements of these projects. The purpose of this Handbook is to assist cost estimators in the preparation of environmental restoration estimates for Environmental Restoration and Waste Management (EM) projects undertaken by DOE. The DOE has, in recent years, seen a significant increase in the number, size, and frequency of environmental restoration projects that must be costed by the various DOE offices. The coming years will show the EM program to be the largest non-weapons program undertaken by DOE. These projects create new and unique estimating requirements since historical cost and estimating precedents are meager at best. It is anticipated that this Handbook will enhance the quality of cost data within DOE in several ways by providing: The basis for accurate, consistent, and traceable baselines. Sound methodologies, guidelines, and estimating formats. Sources of cost data/databases and estimating tools and techniques available at DOE cost professionals.

  13. Decommissioning Unit Cost Data

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sanford, P. C.; Stevens, J. L.; Brandt, R.

    2002-02-26

    The Rocky Flats Closure Site (Site) is in the process of stabilizing residual nuclear materials, decommissioning nuclear facilities, and remediating environmental media. A number of contaminated facilities have been decommissioned, including one building, Building 779, that contained gloveboxes used for plutonium process development but did little actual plutonium processing. The actual costs incurred to decommission this facility formed much of the basis or standards used to estimate the decommissioning of the remaining plutonium-processing buildings. Recent decommissioning activities in the first actual production facility, Building 771, implemented a number of process and procedural improvements. These include methods for handling plutonium contaminated equipment, including size reduction, decontamination, and waste packaging, as well as management improvements to streamline planning and work control. These improvements resulted in a safer working environment and reduced project cost, as demonstrated in the overall project efficiency. The topic of this paper is the analysis of how this improved efficiency is reflected in recent unit costs for activities specific to the decommissioning of plutonium facilities. This analysis will allow the Site to quantify the impacts on future Rocky Flats decommissioning activities, and to develop data for planning and cost estimating the decommissioning of future facilities. The paper discusses the methods used to collect and arrange the project data from the individual work areas within Building 771. Regression and data correlation techniques were used to quantify values for different types of decommissioning activities. The discussion includes the approach to identify and allocate overall project support, waste management, and Site support costs based on the overall Site and project costs to provide a ''burdened'' unit cost. The paper ultimately provides a unit cost basis that can be used to support cost estimates for

  14. Transmission line capital costs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hughes, K.R.; Brown, D.R.

    1995-05-01

    The displacement or deferral of conventional AC transmission line installation is a key benefit associated with several technologies being developed with the support of the U.S. Department of Energy`s Office of Energy Management (OEM). Previous benefits assessments conducted within OEM have been based on significantly different assumptions for the average cost per mile of AC transmission line. In response to this uncertainty, an investigation of transmission line capital cost data was initiated. The objective of this study was to develop a database for preparing preliminary estimates of transmission line costs. An extensive search of potential data sources identified databases maintained by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) as superior sources of transmission line cost data. The BPA and WAPA data were adjusted to a common basis and combined together. The composite database covers voltage levels from 13.8 to 765 W, with cost estimates for a given voltage level varying depending on conductor size, tower material type, tower frame type, and number of circuits. Reported transmission line costs vary significantly, even for a given voltage level. This can usually be explained by variation in the design factors noted above and variation in environmental and land (right-of-way) costs, which are extremely site-specific. Cost estimates prepared from the composite database were compared to cost data collected by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for investor-owned utilities from across the United States. The comparison was hampered because the only design specifications included with the FERC data were voltage level and line length. Working within this limitation, the FERC data were not found to differ significantly from the composite database. Therefore, the composite database was judged to be a reasonable proxy for estimating national average costs.

  15. CATEGORY Total Procurement Total Small Business Small Disadvantaged

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    CATEGORY Total Procurement Total Small Business Small Disadvantaged Business Woman Owned Small Business HubZone Small Business Veteran-Owned Small Business Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business FY 2013 Dollars Accomplished $1,049,087,940 $562,676,028 $136,485,766 $106,515,229 $12,080,258 $63,473,852 $28,080,960 FY 2013 % Accomplishment 54.40% 13.00% 10.20% 1.20% 6.60% 2.70% FY 2014 Dollars Accomplished $868,961,755 $443,711,175 $92,478,522 $88,633,031 $29,867,820 $43,719,452 $26,826,374

  16. Workplace Charging Equipment Costs

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Charging stations are available from a variety of manufacturers in a range of models for all charging applications. For a single port charging station, Level 1 hardware costs range from $300-$1,500...

  17. Cost Estimating Guide

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2011-05-09

    This Guide provides uniform guidance and best practices that describe the methods and procedures that could be used in all programs and projects at DOE for preparing cost estimates. No cancellations.

  18. Liquefaction and Pipeline Costs

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

    Distribution Pipeline Costs Collected historical Oil & Gas Journal data, and surveyed for ... mile Downtown: 1 to 8 in. Downtown: 4 to 20 in. Urban H2A Right of Way Oil & Gas Journal

  19. Soft Costs Fact Sheet

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

    Energy SunShot Initiative is a collaborative national effort to make solar energy technologies cost-competitive with conventional forms of energy by the end of the decade. ...

  20. Estimating Renewable Energy Costs

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Some renewable energy measures, such as daylighting, passive solar heating, and cooling load avoidance, do not add much to the cost of a building. However, renewable energy technologies typically...

  1. Vehicle Cost Calculator

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Choose a vehicle to compare fuel cost and emissions with a conventional vehicle. Select FuelTechnology Electric Hybrid Electric Plug-in Hybrid Electric Natural Gas (CNG) Flex Fuel ...

  2. Cost Estimating Guide

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2011-05-09

    This Guide provides uniform guidance and best practices that describe the methods and procedures that could be used in all programs and projects at DOE for preparing cost estimates.

  3. Cost Estimating Guide

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    1997-03-28

    The objective of this Guide is to improve the quality of cost estimates and further strengthen the DOE program/project management system. The original 25 separate chapters and three appendices have been combined to create a single document.

  4. System Cost Model

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    1996-03-27

    SCM is used for estimation of the life-cycle impacts (costs, health and safety risks) of waste management facilities for mixed low-level, low-level, and transuranic waste. SCM uses parametric cost functions to estimate life-cycle costs for various treatment, storage, and disposal modules which reflect planned and existing waste management facilities at Department of Energy (DOE) installations. SCM also provides transportation costs for intersite transfer of DOE wastes. SCM covers the entire DOE waste management complex tomore » allow system sensitivity analysis including: treatment, storage, and disposal configuration options; treatment technology selection; scheduling options; transportation options; waste stream and volume changes; and site specific conditions.« less

  5. Power Plant Cycling Costs

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

    ... Intertek APTECH has organized the cycling cost data in consultation with NREL and WECC by the following eight generator plant types: 1. Small coal-fired sub-critical steam (35-299 ...

  6. Vehicle Cost Calculator

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Choose a vehicle to compare fuel cost and emissions with a conventional vehicle. Select Fuel/Technology Electric Hybrid Electric Plug-in Hybrid Electric Natural Gas (CNG) Flex Fuel (E85) Biodiesel (B20) Next Vehicle Cost Calculator Update Your Widget Code This widget version will stop working on March 31. Update your widget code. × Widget Code Select All Close U.S. Department of Energy Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

  7. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

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

    0 New Hampshire - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle ...

  8. Tracking the Sun III; The Installed Cost of Photovoltaics in the United States from 1998-2009

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barbose, Galen; Darghouth, Naim; Wiser, Ryan

    2010-12-13

    ,000 residential and non-residential PV systems in the U.S., all of which are installed at end-use customer facilities (herein referred to as 'customer-sited' systems). The combined capacity of systems in the data sample totals 874 MW, equal to 70% of all grid-connected PV capacity installed in the United States through 2009 and representing one of the most comprehensive sources of installed PV cost data for the U.S. The report also briefly compares recent PV installed costs in the United States to those in Germany and Japan. Finally, it should be noted that the analysis presented here focuses on descriptive trends in the underlying data, serving primarily to summarize the data in tabular and graphical form; later analysis may explore some of these trends with more-sophisticated statistical techniques. The report begins with a summary of the data collection methodology and resultant dataset (Section 2). The primary findings of the analysis are presented in Section 3, which describes trends in installed costs prior to receipt of any financial incentives: over time and by system size, component, state, system ownership type (customer-owned vs. third party-owned), host customer segment (residential vs. commercial vs. public-sector vs. non-profit), application (new construction vs. retrofit), and technology type (building-integrated vs. rack-mounted, crystalline silicon vs. thin-film, and tracking vs. fixed-axis). Section 4 presents additional findings related to trends in PV incentive levels over time and among states (focusing specifically on state and utility incentive programs as well as state and federal tax credits), and trends in the net installed cost paid by system owners after receipt of such incentives. Brief conclusions are offered in the final section, and several appendices provide additional details on the analysis methodology and additional tabular summaries of the data.

  9. Soft Costs | Department of Energy

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

    Soft Costs » Soft Costs Soft Costs The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) SunShot Initiative's soft costs program works to lower the non-hardware costs of solar and accelerate the adoption of solar energy technologies throughout the United States. In support of the SunShot Initiative goals, the soft costs program works in the following strategic areas: networking and technical assistance, data analysis, business innovation, and training. Soft Costs Activity Areas, Business Innovation, Networking

  10. Economic Competitiveness of U.S. Utility-Scale Photovoltaics Systems in 2015: Regional Cost Modeling of Installed Cost ($/W) and LCOE ($/kWh)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fu, Ran; James, Ted L.; Chung, Donald; Gagne, Douglas; Lopez, Anthony; Dobos, Aron

    2015-06-14

    Utility-scale photovoltaics (PV) system growth is largely driven by the economic metrics of total installed costs and levelized cost of electricity (LCOE), which differ by region. This study details regional cost factors, including environment (wind speed and snow loads), labor costs, material costs, sales taxes, and permitting costs using a new system-level bottom-up cost modeling approach. We use this model to identify regional all-in PV installed costs for fixed-tilt and one-axis tracker systems in the United States with consideration of union and non-union labor costs in 2015. LCOEs using those regional installed costs are then modeled and spatially presented. Finally, we assess the cost reduction opportunities of increasing module conversion efficiencies on PV system costs in order to indicate the possible economic impacts of module technology advancements and help future research and development (R&D) effects in the context of U.S. SunShot targets.

  11. Total Number of Operable Refineries

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

    Data Series: Total Number of Operable Refineries Number of Operating Refineries Number of Idle Refineries Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Operable Capacity (B/CD) Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Operating Capacity (B/CD) Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Idle Capacity (B/CD) Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Operable Capacity (B/SD) Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Operating Capacity (B/SD) Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Idle Capacity (B/SD) Vacuum Distillation Downstream Charge

  12. Design Storm for Total Retention.pdf

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

    Title: Design Storm for "Total Retention" under Individual Permit, Poster, Individual ... International. Environmental Programs Design Storm for "Total Retention" under ...

  13. Waste management facilities cost information for hazardous waste. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shropshire, D.; Sherick, M.; Biagi, C.

    1995-06-01

    This report contains preconceptual designs and planning level life-cycle cost estimates for managing hazardous waste. The report`s information on treatment, storage, and disposal modules can be integrated to develop total life-cycle costs for various waste management options. A procedure to guide the US Department of Energy and its contractor personnel in the use of cost estimation data is also summarized in this report.

  14. Costs Associated With Compressed Natural Gas Vehicle Fueling Infrastructure

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Smith, M.; Gonzales, J.

    2014-09-01

    This document is designed to help fleets understand the cost factors associated with fueling infrastructure for compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles. It provides estimated cost ranges for various sizes and types of CNG fueling stations and an overview of factors that contribute to the total cost of an installed station. The information presented is based on input from professionals in the natural gas industry who design, sell equipment for, and/or own and operate CNG stations.

  15. Technical approaches for reducing cost of power support

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1984-03-01

    Methods for reducing the cost of Chinese-made power supports are discussed. A reasonable selection of functions is proposed, including protection from side collapse, anti-sliding and anti-toppling, prop extension, loading capacity and hydraulic pressure. Material costs constitute 34-44% of the total cost, and so optimisation of design and materials is required. Standardisation of hydraulic components is recommended; and the use of appropriate and effective technological and managerial techniques is advocated. (In Chinese)

  16. Innovative High-Performance Deposition Technology for Low-Cost

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

    Manufacturing of OLED Lighting | Department of Energy Innovative High-Performance Deposition Technology for Low-Cost Manufacturing of OLED Lighting Innovative High-Performance Deposition Technology for Low-Cost Manufacturing of OLED Lighting Lead Performer: OLEDWorks, LLC - Rochester, NY DOE Total Funding: $1,046,452 Cost Share: $1,046,452 Project Term: October 1, 2013 - December 31, 2015 Funding Opportunity: SSL Manufacturing R&D Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) DE-FOA-000079

  17. Factory Cost Model

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    1996-12-17

    The Factory Cost Model (FCM) is an economic analysis tool intended to provide flat panel display (FPD) and other similar discrete component manufacturers with the ability to make first-order estimates of the cost of unit production. This software has several intended uses. Primary among these is the ability to provide first-order economic analysis for future factories. Consequently, the model requires a minimal level of input detail, and accomodates situations where actual production data are notmore » available. This software is designed to be activity based such that most of the calculated direct costs are associated with the steps of a manufacturibg process. The FCM architecture has the ability to accomodate the analysis of existing manufacturing facilities. The FCM can provide assistance with strategic economic decisions surrounding production related matters. For instance, the program can project the effect on costs and resources of a new product''s introduction, or it can assess the potential cost reduction produced by step yield improvements in the manufacturing process.« less

  18. Cost estimate for muddy water palladium production facility at Mound

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McAdams, R.K.

    1988-11-30

    An economic feasibility study was performed on the ''Muddy Water'' low-chlorine content palladium powder production process developed by Mound. The total capital investment and total operating costs (dollars per gram) were determined for production batch sizes of 1--10 kg in 1-kg increments. The report includes a brief description of the Muddy Water process, the process flow diagram, and material balances for the various production batch sizes. Two types of facilities were evaluated--one for production of new, ''virgin'' palladium powder, and one for recycling existing material. The total capital investment for virgin facilities ranged from $600,000 --$1.3 million for production batch sizes of 1--10 kg, respectively. The range for recycle facilities was $1--$2.3 million. The total operating cost for 100% acceptable powder production in the virgin facilities ranged from $23 per gram for a 1-kg production batch size to $8 per gram for a 10-kg batch size. Similarly for recycle facilities, the total operating cost ranged from $34 per gram to $5 per gram. The total operating cost versus product acceptability (ranging from 50%--100% acceptability) was also evaluated for both virgin and recycle facilities. Because production sizes studied vary widely and because scale-up factors are unknown for batch sizes greater than 1 kg, all costs are ''order-of-magnitude'' estimates. All costs reported are in 1987 dollars.

  19. U.S. Total Imports

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

    St. Clair, MI International Falls, MN Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Alamo, TX El Paso, TX Galvan Ranch, TX Hidalgo, TX McAllen, TX Penitas, TX LNG Imports from Algeria Cove Point, MD Everett, MA Lake

  20. Tracking the Sun II: The Installed Cost of Photovoltaics in the U.S. from 1998-2008

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barbose, Galen L; Wiser, Ryan; Peterman, Carla; Darghouth, Naim

    2009-10-05

    which are installed at end-use customer facilities (herein referred to as 'customer-sited' systems). The combined capacity of systems in the data sample totals 566 MW, equal to 71% of all grid-connected PV capacity installed in the U.S. through 2008, representing the most comprehensive source of installed PV cost data for the U.S.9 The report also briefly compares recent PV installed costs in the U.S. to those in Germany and Japan. Finally, it should be noted that the analysis presented here focuses on descriptive trends in the underlying data, and is primarily summarized in tabular and graphical form; later analysis may explore some of these trends with more-sophisticated statistical techniques. The report begins with a summary of the data collection methodology and resultant dataset (Section 2). The primary findings of the analysis are presented in Section 3, which describes trends in installed costs prior to receipt of any financial incentives: over time and by system size, component, state, customer segment (residential vs. commercial vs. public-sector vs. non-profit), application (new construction vs. retrofit), and technology type (building-integrated vs. rack-mounted, crystalline silicon vs. thin-film, and tracking vs. rack-mounted). Section 4 presents additional findings related to trends in PV incentive levels over time and among states (focusing specifically on state and utility incentive programs as well as state and Federal tax credits), and trends in the net installed cost paid by system owners after receipt of such incentives. Brief conclusions are offered in the final section.

  1. Factors Impacting Decommissioning Costs - 13576

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kim, Karen; McGrath, Richard

    2013-07-01

    The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) studied United States experience with decommissioning cost estimates and the factors that impact the actual cost of decommissioning projects. This study gathered available estimated and actual decommissioning costs from eight nuclear power plants in the United States to understand the major components of decommissioning costs. Major costs categories for decommissioning a nuclear power plant are removal costs, radioactive waste costs, staffing costs, and other costs. The technical factors that impact the costs were analyzed based on the plants' decommissioning experiences. Detailed cost breakdowns by major projects and other cost categories from actual power plant decommissioning experiences will be presented. Such information will be useful in planning future decommissioning and designing new plants. (authors)

  2. QGESS: Capital Cost Scaling Methodology

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

    the tonnes of CO2 utilized. The costs of the process are to include infrastructure, raw materials, processing, byproduct disposal, and utilities costs, as well as any other costs....

  3. Low Cost, Durable Seal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Roberts, George; Parsons, Jason; Friedman, Jake

    2010-12-17

    Seal durability is critical to achieving the 2010 DOE operational life goals for both stationary and transportation PEM fuel cell stacks. The seal material must be chemically and mechanically stable in an environment consisting of aggressive operating temperatures, humidified gases, and acidic membranes. The seal must also be producible at low cost. Currentlyused seal materials do not meet all these requirements. This project developed and demonstrated a high consistency hydrocarbon rubber seal material that was able to meet the DOE technical and cost targets. Significant emphasis was placed on characterization of the material and full scale molding demonstrations.

  4. Turbine Cost Systems Engineering Model

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2012-09-30

    turb_costSE is a set of models that link wind turbine component masses (and a few other key variables) to component costs.

  5. U.S. Department of Energy Releases Revised Total System Life...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    U.S. Department of Energy Releases Revised Total System Life Cycle Cost Estimate and Fee Adequacy Report ... U.S. Department of Energy Awards Contracts for Waste Storage Canisters for ...

  6. Heliostat cost reduction study.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jones, Scott A.; Lumia, Ronald. (University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM); Davenport, Roger (Science Applications International Corporation, San Diego, CA); Thomas, Robert C. (Advanced Thermal Systems, Centennial, CO); Gorman, David; Kolb, Gregory J.; Donnelly, Matthew W.

    2007-06-01

    Power towers are capable of producing solar-generated electricity and hydrogen on a large scale. Heliostats are the most important cost element of a solar power tower plant. Since they constitute {approx} 50% of the capital cost of the plant it is important to reduce heliostat cost as much as possible to improve the economic performance of power towers. In this study we evaluate current heliostat technology and estimate a price of $126/m{sup 2} given year-2006 materials and labor costs for a deployment of {approx}600 MW of power towers per year. This 2006 price yields electricity at $0.067/kWh and hydrogen at $3.20/kg. We propose research and development that should ultimately lead to a price as low as $90/m{sup 2}, which equates to $0.056/kWh and $2.75/kg H{sup 2}. Approximately 30 heliostat and manufacturing experts from the United States, Europe, and Australia contributed to the content of this report during two separate workshops conducted at the National Solar Thermal Test Facility.

  7. Total quality management implementation guidelines

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-12-01

    These Guidelines were designed by the Energy Quality Council to help managers and supervisors in the Department of Energy Complex bring Total Quality Management to their organizations. Because the Department is composed of a rich mixture of diverse organizations, each with its own distinctive culture and quality history, these Guidelines are intended to be adapted by users to meet the particular needs of their organizations. For example, for organizations that are well along on their quality journeys and may already have achieved quality results, these Guidelines will provide a consistent methodology and terminology reference to foster their alignment with the overall Energy quality initiative. For organizations that are just beginning their quality journeys, these Guidelines will serve as a startup manual on quality principles applied in the Energy context.

  8. Total Imports of Residual Fuel

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

    Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 View History U.S. Total 9,010 5,030 8,596 6,340 4,707 8,092 1936-2016 PAD District 1 3,127 2,664 2,694 1,250 1,327 2,980 1981-2016 Connecticut 1995-2015 Delaware 280 1995-2016 Florida 858 649 800 200 531 499 1995-2016 Georgia 210 262 149 106 1995-2016 Maine 1995-2015 Maryland 84 1995-2016 Massachusetts 1995-2015 New Hampshire 1995-2015 New Jersey 1,283 843 1,073 734 355 1,984 1995-2016 New York 234 824 210 196 175 1995-2016 North Carolina 1995-2011

  9. Total Imports of Residual Fuel

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

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History U.S. Total 133,646 119,888 93,672 82,173 63,294 68,265 1936-2015 PAD District 1 88,999 79,188 59,594 33,566 30,944 33,789 1981-2015 Connecticut 220 129 1995-2015 Delaware 748 1,704 510 1,604 2,479 1995-2015 Florida 15,713 11,654 10,589 8,331 5,055 7,013 1995-2015 Georgia 5,648 7,668 6,370 4,038 2,037 1,629 1995-2015 Maine 1,304 651 419 75 317 135 1995-2015 Maryland 3,638 1,779 1,238 433 938 539 1995-2015 Massachusetts 123 50 78 542 88 1995-2015 New

  10. Total Adjusted Sales of Kerosene

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

    End Use: Total Residential Commercial Industrial Farm All Other Period: Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: End Use Area 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 View History U.S. 269,010 305,508 187,656 81,102 79,674 137,928 1984-2014 East Coast (PADD 1) 198,762 237,397 142,189 63,075 61,327 106,995 1984-2014 New England (PADD 1A) 56,661 53,363 38,448 15,983 15,991 27,500 1984-2014 Connecticut 8,800 7,437

  11. FY 2009 Progress Report for Lightweighting Materials- 7. Low-Cost Carbon Fiber

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The primary Lightweight Materials activity goal is to validate a cost-effective weight reduction in total vehicle weight while maintaining safety, performance, and reliability.

  12. Improved InGaN LED System Efficacy and Cost via Droop Reduction...

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

    Lumileds, LLC - San Jose, CA Partners: Sandia National Laboratories - Albuquerque, NM DOE Total Funding: 1,495,990 Cost Share: 374,000 Project Term: 912015 - 8312017 Funding ...

  13. Total quality management program planning

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thornton, P.T.; Spence, K.

    1994-05-01

    As government funding grows scarce, competition between the national laboratories is increasing dramatically. In this era of tougher competition, there is no for resistance to change. There must instead be a uniform commitment to improving the overall quality of our products (research and technology) and an increased focus on our customers` needs. There has been an ongoing effort to bring the principles of total quality management (TQM) to all Energy Systems employees to help them better prepare for future changes while responding to the pressures on federal budgets. The need exists for instituting a vigorous program of education and training to an understanding of the techniques needed to improve and initiate a change in organizational culture. The TQM facilitator is responsible for educating the work force on the benefits of self-managed work teams, designing a program of instruction for implementation, and thus getting TQM off the ground at the worker and first-line supervisory levels so that the benefits can flow back up. This program plan presents a conceptual model for TQM in the form of a hot air balloon. In this model, there are numerous factors which can individually and collectively impede the progress of TQM within the division and the Laboratory. When these factors are addressed and corrected, the benefits of TQM become more visible. As this occurs, it is hoped that workers and management alike will grasp the ``total quality`` concept as an acceptable agent for change and continual improvement. TQM can then rise to the occasion and take its rightful place as an integral and valid step in the Laboratory`s formula for survival.

  14. Section L Attachment G - Management Team Cost Sheet.xlsx

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    G Management Team Cost Sheet Definitions of items to be included in the worksheet Name Title Reimbursable* Annual Base Salary Reimbursable* Incentive Pay and bonuses Reimbursable* Deferred compensation Reimbursable* Employer contributions to Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs) Reimbursable* Employer Contributions to Defined Contribution Pension Plans Total Reimbursable* Annual Compensation Current Annual Base Salary Current Total Annual Compensation Benchmark job title/level Median Annual

  15. DOE Publishes CALiPER Report on Cost-Effectiveness of Linear...

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

    life-cycle cost simulations that compared a two-lamp troffer using LED lamps (38W total power draw) or fluorescent lamps (51W total power draw) over a 10-year study period. The LED...

  16. A Total Cost of Ownership Model for Low Temperature PEM Fuel...

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

    considers low temperature proton exchange membrane systems for use in combined heat and power applications from 1 to 250 kWe and backup power applications from 1 to 50 kWe. ...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2015-04-15

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

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

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

    none,

    2015-04-15

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

  19. Project Profile: Transformational Approach to Reducing the Total System Costs of Building-Integrated Photovoltaics

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Dow Chemical Company, under the BOS-X funding opportunity, has launched a transformational product in the building-integrated photovoltaics (BIPV) industry: the Dow POWERHOUSE Solar Shingle.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2015-04-15

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

  1. Monitored Geologic Repository Life Cycle Cost Estimate Assumptions Document

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    R. Sweeney

    2000-03-08

    The purpose of this assumptions document is to provide general scope, strategy, technical basis, schedule and cost assumptions for the Monitored Geologic Repository (MGR) life cycle cost estimate and schedule update incorporating information from the Viability Assessment (VA), License Application Design Selection (LADS), 1999 Update to the Total System Life Cycle Cost (TSLCC) estimate and from other related and updated information. This document is intended to generally follow the assumptions outlined in the previous MGR cost estimates and as further prescribed by DOE guidance.

  2. MONITORED GEOLOGIC REPOSITORY LIFE CYCLE COST ESTIMATE ASSUMPTIONS DOCUMENT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    R.E. Sweeney

    2001-02-08

    The purpose of this assumptions document is to provide general scope, strategy, technical basis, schedule and cost assumptions for the Monitored Geologic Repository (MGR) life cycle cost (LCC) estimate and schedule update incorporating information from the Viability Assessment (VA) , License Application Design Selection (LADS), 1999 Update to the Total System Life Cycle Cost (TSLCC) estimate and from other related and updated information. This document is intended to generally follow the assumptions outlined in the previous MGR cost estimates and as further prescribed by DOE guidance.

  3. Total-derivative supersymmetry breaking

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Haba, Naoyuki; Uekusa, Nobuhiro

    2010-05-15

    On an interval compactification in supersymmetric theory, boundary conditions for bulk fields must be treated carefully. If they are taken arbitrarily following the requirement that a theory is supersymmetric, the conditions could give redundant constraints on the theory. We construct a supersymmetric action integral on an interval by introducing brane interactions with which total-derivative terms under the supersymmetry transformation become zero due to a cancellation. The variational principle leads equations of motion and also boundary conditions for bulk fields, which determine boundary values of bulk fields. By estimating mass spectrum, spontaneous supersymmetry breaking in this simple setup can be realized in a new framework. This supersymmetry breaking does not induce a massless R axion, which is favorable for phenomenology. It is worth noting that fermions in hyper-multiplet, gauge bosons, and the fifth-dimensional component of gauge bosons can have zero-modes (while the other components are all massive as Kaluza-Klein modes), which fits the gauge-Higgs unification scenarios.

  4. Cost Estimating, Analysis, and Standardization

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    1984-11-02

    To establish policy and responsibilities for: (a) developing and reviewing project cost estimates; (b) preparing independent cost estimates and analysis; (c) standardizing cost estimating procedures; and (d) improving overall cost estimating and analytical techniques, cost data bases, cost and economic escalation models, and cost estimating systems. Cancels DOE O 5700.2B, dated 8-5-1983; DOE O 5700.8, dated 5-27-1981; and HQ 1130.1A, dated 12-30-1981. Canceled by DOE O 5700.2D, dated 6-12-1992

  5. Reported Energy and Cost Savings from the DOE ESPC Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shonder, John A; Slattery, Bob S; Atkin, Erica

    2012-01-01

    The objective of this work was to determine the realization rate of energy and cost savings from the Department of Energy's Savings Performance Contract (ESPC) program based on information reported by the energy services companies (ESCOs) that are carrying out ESPC projects at federal sites. Information was extracted from 134 Measurement and Verification (M&V) reports to determine reported, estimated, and guaranteed cost savings and reported and estimated energy savings for the previous contract year. Because the quality of the reports varied, it was not possible to determine all of these parameters for each project. For 133 of the 134 projects, there was sufficient information to compare estimated, reported, and guaranteed cost savings. For this group, the total estimated cost savings for the reporting periods addressed were $95.7 million, total reported cost savings were $96.8 million, and total guaranteed cost savings were $92.1 million. This means that on average: ESPC contractors guaranteed 96% of the estimated cost savings, projects reported achieving 101% of the estimated cost savings, and projects reported achieving 105% of the guaranteed cost savings. For 129 of the projects examined, there was sufficient information to compare estimated and reported energy savings. On the basis of site energy, estimated savings for those projects for the previous year totaled 5.371 million MMBtu, and reported savings were 5.374 million MMBtu, just over 100% of the estimated energy savings. On the basis of source energy, total estimated energy savings for the 129 projects were 10.400 million MMBtu, and reported saving were 10.405 million MMBtu, again, just over 100.0% of the estimated energy savings.

  6. Hydrogen and Infrastructure Costs

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

    FUEL CELL TECHNOLOGIES PROGRAM Hydrogen and Infrastructure Costs Hydrogen Infrastructure Market Readiness Workshop Washington D.C. February 17, 2011 Fred Joseck U.S. Department of Energy Fuel Cell Technologies Program Fuel Cells: Diverse Fuels and Applications More than $40 million from the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to fund 12 projects to deploy up to 1,000 fuel cells Recovery Act Funding for Fuel Cells COMPANY AWARD APPLICATION Delphi Automotive $2.4 M Auxiliary Power FedEx

  7. Geothermal probabilistic cost study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Orren, L.H.; Ziman, G.M.; Jones, S.C.; Lee, T.K.; Noll, R.; Wilde, L.; Sadanand, V.

    1981-08-01

    A tool is presented to quantify the risks of geothermal projects, the Geothermal Probabilistic Cost Model (GPCM). The GPCM model is used to evaluate a geothermal reservoir for a binary-cycle electric plant at Heber, California. Three institutional aspects of the geothermal risk which can shift the risk among different agents are analyzed. The leasing of geothermal land, contracting between the producer and the user of the geothermal heat, and insurance against faulty performance are examined. (MHR)

  8. Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook-

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

    Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey: Energy End-Use Consumption Tables Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing Other Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing...

  9. Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook-

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Released: September, 2008 Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing Other Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing Other All Buildings* ... 1,870 1,276...

  10. Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook-

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Energy Consumption Survey: Energy End-Use Consumption Tables Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing Other Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing Other All...