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


1

Underground Storage Tank Regulations  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The Underground Storage Tank Regulations is relevant to all energy projects that will require the use and building of pipelines, underground storage of any sorts, and/or electrical equipment. The...

2

Underground Storage Tanks (West Virginia)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This rule governs the construction, installation, upgrading, use, maintenance, testing, and closure of underground storage tanks, including certification requirements for individuals who install,...

3

Underground Storage Tank Program (Vermont)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

These rules are intended to protect public health and the environment by establishing standards for the design, installation, operation, maintenance, monitoring, and closure of underground storage...

4

Underground Storage Tanks (New Jersey)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This chapter constitutes rules for all underground storage tank facilities- including registration, reporting, permitting, certification, financial responsibility and to protect human health and...

5

Underground pumped hydroelectric storage  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Underground pumped hydroelectric energy storage was conceived as a modification of surface pumped storage to eliminate dependence upon fortuitous topography, provide higher hydraulic heads, and reduce environmental concerns. A UPHS plant offers substantial savings in investment cost over coal-fired cycling plants and savings in system production costs over gas turbines. Potential location near load centers lowers transmission costs and line losses. Environmental impact is less than that for a coal-fired cycling plant. The inherent benefits include those of all pumped storage (i.e., rapid load response, emergency capacity, improvement in efficiency as pumps improve, and capacity for voltage regulation). A UPHS plant would be powered by either a coal-fired or nuclear baseload plant. The economic capacity of a UPHS plant would be in the range of 1000 to 3000 MW. This storage level is compatible with the load-leveling requirements of a greater metropolitan area with population of 1 million or more. The technical feasibility of UPHS depends upon excavation of a subterranean powerhouse cavern and reservoir caverns within a competent, impervious rock formation, and upon selection of reliable and efficient turbomachinery - pump-turbines and motor-generators - all remotely operable.

Allen, R.D.; Doherty, T.J.; Kannberg, L.D.

1984-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

6

Underground Storage Tank Act (West Virginia)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

New underground storage tank construction standards must include at least the following requirements: (1) That an underground storage tank will prevent releases of regulated substances stored...

7

Georgia Underground Storage Tank Act (Georgia)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The Georgia Underground Storage Act (GUST) provides a comprehensive program to prevent, detect, and correct releases from underground storage tanks (“USTs”) of “regulated substances” other than...

8

Underground caverns for hydrocarbon storage  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Large, international gas processing projects and growing LPG imports in developing countries are driving the need to store large quantities of hydrocarbon liquids. Even though underground storage is common in the US, many people outside the domestic industry are not familiar with the technology and the benefits underground storage can offer. The latter include lower construction and operating costs than surface storage, added safety, security and greater environmental acceptance.

Barron, T.F. [Exeter Energy Services, Houston, TX (United States)

1998-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

9

Investigating leaking underground storage tanks  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

INVESTIGATING LEAKING UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS A Thesis by DAVID THOMPSON UPTON Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE August 1989... Major Subject: Geology INVESTIGATING LEAKING UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS A Thesis by DAVID THOMPSON UPTON Approved as to sty)e and content by: P. A, Domenico (Chair of Committee) jj K. W. Brown (Member) C. C Mathewson (Member) J. H. S ng Head...

Upton, David Thompson

1989-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

10

,"Underground Natural Gas Storage - Storage Fields Other than Salt Caverns"  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia, Virginia:FAQ < RAPID Jump to:SeadovCooperativeA2.Reformulated, Average Refiner GasolineAll Operators"Storage

11

Underground Storage Tanks: New Fuels and Compatibility  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Breakout Session 1C—Fostering Technology Adoption I: Building the Market for Renewables with High Octane Fuels Underground Storage Tanks: New Fuels and Compatibility Ryan Haerer, Program Analyst, Alternative Fuels, Office of Underground Storage Tanks, Environmental Protection Agency

12

Underground storage of oil and gas  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The environmental and security advantages of underground storage of oil and gas are well documented. In many cases, underground storage methods such as storage in salt domes, abandoned mines, and mined rock caverns have proven to be cost effective when compared to storage in steel tanks constructed for that purpose on the surface. In good rock conditions, underground storage of large quantities of hydrocarbon products is normally less costly--up to 50-70% of the surface alternative. Under fair or weak rock conditions, economic comparisons between surface tanks and underground caverns must be evaluated on a case to case basis. The key to successful underground storage is enactment of a realistic geotechnical approach. In addition to construction cost, storage of petroleum products underground has operational advantages over similar storage above ground. These advantages include lower maintenance costs, less fire hazards, less land requirements, and a more even storage temperature.

Bergman, S.M.

1984-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

13

Pipelines and Underground Gas Storage (Iowa)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

These rules apply to intrastate transport of natural gas and other substances via pipeline, as well as underground gas storage facilities. The construction and operation of such infrastructure...

14

Prince George's County Underground Storage Act (Maryland)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

A gas storage company may invoke eminent domain to acquire property in Prince George's County for underground gas storage purposes. The area acquired must lie not less than 800 feet below the...

15

Carbon Allocation in Underground Storage Organs  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Carbon Allocation in Underground Storage Organs Studies on Accumulation of Starch, Sugars and Oil Cover: Starch granules in cells of fresh potato tuber visualised by iodine staining. #12;Carbon By increasing knowledge of carbon allocation in underground storage organs and using the knowledge to improve

16

Underground storage tank management plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Underground Storage Tank (UST) Management Program at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant was established to locate UST systems in operation at the facility, to ensure that all operating UST systems are free of leaks, and to establish a program for the removal of unnecessary UST systems and upgrade of UST systems that continue to be needed. The program implements an integrated approach to the management of UST systems, with each system evaluated against the same requirements and regulations. A common approach is employed, in accordance with Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) regulations and guidance, when corrective action is mandated. This Management Plan outlines the compliance issues that must be addressed by the UST Management Program, reviews the current UST inventory and compliance approach, and presents the status and planned activities associated with each UST system. The UST Management Plan provides guidance for implementing TDEC regulations and guidelines for petroleum UST systems. (There are no underground radioactive waste UST systems located at Y-12.) The plan is divided into four major sections: (1) regulatory requirements, (2) implementation requirements, (3) Y-12 Plant UST Program inventory sites, and (4) UST waste management practices. These sections describe in detail the applicable regulatory drivers, the UST sites addressed under the Management Program, and the procedures and guidance used for compliance with applicable regulations.

NONE

1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

17

Underground Storage Tank Regulations for the Certification of Persons Who Install, Alter, and Remove Underground Storage Tanks (Mississippi)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The Underground Storage Tank Regulations for the Certification of Persons who Install, Alter, and Remove Underground Storage Tanks applies to any project that will install, alter or remove...

18

Underground Energy Storage Program. 1983 annual summary  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Underground Energy Storage Program approach, structure, history, and milestones are described. Technical activities and progress in the Seasonal Thermal Energy Storage and Compressed Air Energy Storage components of the program are then summarized, documenting the work performed and progress made toward resolving and eliminating technical and economic barriers associated with those technologies. (LEW)

Kannberg, L.D.

1984-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

19

,"Colorado Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"  

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

"Sourcekey","N5030CO2","N5010CO2","N5020CO2","N5070CO2","N5050CO2","N5060CO2" "Date","Colorado Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)","Colorado Natural Gas in Underground...

20

Underground Storage of Natural Gas (Kansas)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Any natural gas public utility may appropriate for its use for the underground storage of natural gas any subsurface stratum or formation in any land which the commission shall have found to be...

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


21

Underground gas storage in New York State: A historical perspective  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

New York State has a long history of underground gas storage activity that began with conversion of the Zoar gas field into a storage reservoir in 1916, the first in the United States. By 1961 another fourteen storage fields were developed and seven more were added between 1970 and 1991. All twenty-two operating storage reservoirs of New York were converted from depleted gas fields and are of low-deliverability, base-load type. Nineteen of these are in sandstone reservoirs of the Lower Silurian Medina Group and the Lower Devonian Oriskany Formation and three in limestone reservoirs are located in the gas producing areas of southwestern New York and are linked to the major interstate transmission lines. Recent developments in underground gas storage in New York involve mainly carbonate-reef and bedded salt-cavern storage facilities, one in Stuben County and the other in Cayuga County, are expected to begin operation by the 1996-1997 heating season.

Friedman, G.M.; Sarwar, G.; Bass, J.P. [Brooklyn College of the City Univ., Troy, NY (United States)] [and others

1995-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

22

A Comparison of Popular Remedial Technologies for Petroleum Contaminated Soils from Leaking Underground Storage Tanks  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Underground Storage Tanks. Chelsea: Lewis Publishers.and Underground Storage Tank Sites. Database on-line.Michigan Underground Storage Tank Rules. Database on-line.

Kujat, Jonathon D.

1999-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

23

Assessing the Effectiveness of California's Underground Storage Tank Annual Inspection Rate Requirements  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Leaks from Underground Storage Tanks by Media Affected Soilfrom Underground Storage Tank Facilities Cities CountiesCities Counties Leaks per Underground Storage Tank Facility

Cutter, W. Bowman

2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

24

Underground Natural Gas Storage Wells in Bedded Salt (Kansas)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

These regulations apply to natural gas underground storage and associated brine ponds, and includes the permit application for each new underground storage tank near surface water bodies and springs.

25

Underground storage of hydrocarbons in Ontario  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The underground storage of natural gas and liquified petroleum products in geological formations is a provincially significant industry in Ontario with economic, environmental, and safety benefits for the companies and residents of Ontario. There are 21 active natural gas storage pools in Ontario, with a total working storage capacity of approximately 203 bcf (5.76 billion cubic metres). Most of these pools utilize former natural gas-producing Guelph Formation pinnacle reefs. In addition there are seventy-one solution-mined salt caverns utilized for storage capacity of 24 million barrels (3.9 million cubic metres). These caverns are constructed within salt strata of the Salina A-2 Unit and the B Unit. The steadily increasing demand for natural gas in Ontario creates a continuing need for additional storage capacity. Most of the known gas-producing pinnacle reefs in Ontario have already been converted to storage. The potential value of storage rights is a major incentive for continued exploration for undiscovered reefs in this mature play. There are numerous depleted or nearly depleted natural gas reservoirs of other types with potential for use as storage pools. There is also potential for use of solution-mined caverns for natural gas storage in Ontario.

Carter, T.R.; Manocha, J. [Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario (Canada)

1995-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

26

100-N Area underground storage tank closures  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report describes the removal/characterization actions concerning underground storage tanks (UST) at the 100-N Area. Included are 105-N-LFT, 182-N-1-DT, 182-N-2-DT, 182-N-3-DT, 100-N-SS-27, and 100-N-SS-28. The text of this report gives a summary of remedial activities. In addition, correspondence relating to UST closures can be found in Appendix B. Appendix C contains copies of Unusual Occurrence Reports, and validated sampling data results comprise Appendix D.

Rowley, C.A.

1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

27

Underground-Energy-Storage Program, 1982 annual report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Two principal underground energy storage technologies are discussed--Seasonal Thermal Energy Storage (STES) and Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES). The Underground Energy Storage Program objectives, approach, structure, and milestones are described, and technical activities and progress in the STES and CAES areas are summarized. STES activities include aquifer thermal energy storage technology studies and STES technology assessment and development. CAES activities include reservoir stability studies and second-generation concepts studies. (LEW)

Kannberg, L.D.

1983-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

28

Permanent Closure of the TAN-664 Underground Storage Tank  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This closure package documents the site assessment and permanent closure of the TAN-664 gasoline underground storage tank in accordance with the regulatory requirements established in 40 CFR 280.71, 'Technical Standards and Corrective Action Requirements for Owners and Operators of Underground Storage Tanks: Out-of-Service UST Systems and Closure.'

Bradley K. Griffith

2011-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

29

ADVANCED UNDERGROUND GAS STORAGE CONCEPTS REFRIGERATED-MINED CAVERN STORAGE  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Limited demand and high cost has prevented the construction of hard rock caverns in this country for a number of years. The storage of natural gas in mined caverns may prove technically feasible if the geology of the targeted market area is suitable; and economically feasible if the cost and convenience of service is competitive with alternative available storage methods for peak supply requirements. It is believed that mined cavern storage can provide the advantages of high delivery rates and multiple fill-withdrawal cycles in areas where salt cavern storage is not possible. In this research project, PB-KBB merged advanced mining technologies and gas refrigeration techniques to develop conceptual designs and cost estimates to demonstrate the commercialization potential of the storage of refrigerated natural gas in hard rock caverns. Five regions of the U.S.A. were studied for underground storage development and PB-KBB reviewed the literature to determine if the geology of these regions was suitable for siting hard rock storage caverns. Area gas market conditions in these regions were also studied to determine the need for such storage. Based on an analysis of many factors, a possible site was determined to be in Howard and Montgomery Counties, Maryland. The area has compatible geology and a gas industry infrastructure for the nearby market populous of Baltimore and Washington D.C.. As Gas temperature is lowered, the compressibility of the gas reaches an optimum value. The compressibility of the gas, and the resultant gas density, is a function of temperature and pressure. This relationship can be used to commercial advantage by reducing the size of a storage cavern for a given working volume of natural gas. This study looks at this relationship and and the potential for commercialization of the process in a storage application. A conceptual process design, and cavern design were developed for various operating conditions. Potential site locations were considered and a typical plant layout was developed. In addition a geomechanical review of the proposed cavern design was performed, evaluating the stability of the mine rooms and shafts, and the effects of the refrigerated gas temperatures on the stability of the cavern. Capital and operating cost estimates were also developed for the various temperature cases considered. The cost estimates developed were used to perform a comparative market analysis of this type of gas storage system to other systems that are commercially used in the region of the study.

NONE

1998-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

30

,"New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...  

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

,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"3292015 10:08:54 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5070NM2"...

31

,"New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...  

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

,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"182015 12:49:32 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5070NY2"...

32

Underground Storage of Natural Gas and Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Nebraska)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This statute declares underground storage of natural gas and liquefied petroleum gas to be in the public interest if it promotes the conservation of natural gas and permits the accumulation of...

33

,"New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"  

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

,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"2262015 9:17:17 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290NY2"...

34

,"New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...  

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

,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"2262015 9:16:28 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5060NY2"...

35

,"New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...  

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

,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"2262015 9:16:27 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5060NY2"...

36

Georgia Underground Gas Storage Act of 1972 (Georgia)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The Georgia Underground Gas Storage Act, which permits the building of reserves for withdrawal in periods of peak demand, was created to promote the economic development of the State of Georgia and...

37

Appendix E: Underground Storage Annual Site Environmental Report  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Appendix E: Underground Storage Tank Data #12;Annual Site Environmental Report Appendix E identification service Contents Status ( ) date to Corrective action Tank Out-of- assessment number date regulatory Installation Capacity Preliminary date (gallons) investigation Environmental agency Petroleum USTs

Pennycook, Steve

38

Viewing Systems for Large Underground Storage Tanks.  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Specialized remote video systems have been successfully developed and deployed in a number of large radiological Underground Storage Tanks (USTs)that tolerate the hostile tank interior, while providing high resolution video to a remotely located operator. The deployment is through 100 mm (4 in) tank openings, while incorporating full video functions of the camera, lights, and zoom lens. The usage of remote video minimizes the potential for personnel exposure to radiological and hazardous conditions, and maximizes the quality of the visual data used to assess the interior conditions of both tank and contents. The robustness of this type of remote system has a direct effect on the potential for radiological exposure that personnel may encounter. The USTs typical of the Savannah River and Hanford Department Of Energy - (DOE) sites are typically 4.5 million liter (1.2 million gal) units under earth. or concrete overburden with limited openings to the surface. The interior is both highly contaminated and radioactive with a wide variety of nuclear processing waste material. Some of the tanks are -flammable rated -to Class 1, Division 1,and personnel presence at or near the openings should be minimized. The interior of these USTs must be assessed periodically as part of the ongoing management of the tanks and as a step towards tank remediation. The systems are unique in their deployment technology, which virtually eliminates the potential for entrapment in a tank, and their ability to withstand flammable environments. A multiplicity of components used within a common packaging allow for cost effective and appropriate levels of technology, with radiation hardened components on some units and lesser requirements on other units. All units are completely self contained for video, zoom lens, lighting, deployment,as well as being self purging, and modular in construction.

Heckendorn, F.M., Robinson, C.W., Anderson, E.K. [Westinghouse Savannah River Co., Aiken, SC (United States)], Pardini, A.F. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

39

Underground Gas Storage Reservoirs (West Virginia)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Lays out guidelines for the conditions under which coal mining operations must notify state authorities of intentions to mine where underground gas is stored as well as map and data requirements,...

40

,"New Mexico Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...  

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

"Sourcekey","N5030NM2","N5010NM2","N5020NM2","N5070NM2","N5050NM2","N5060NM2" "Date","New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)","New Mexico Natural Gas in...

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


41

,"New York Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"  

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

"Sourcekey","N5030NY2","N5010NY2","N5020NY2","N5070NY2","N5050NY2","N5060NY2" "Date","New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)","New York Natural Gas in...

42

Appendix C: Underground Storage Annual Site Environmental Report  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Appendix C: Underground Storage Tank Data #12;#12;Annual Site Environmental Report Appendix C identification service Contents Status ( ) date to Corrective action Tank Out-of- assessment number date regulatory Installation Capacity Preliminary date (gallons) investigation Environmental agency Petroleum USTs

Pennycook, Steve

43

Underground storage tank 511-D1U1 closure plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document contains the closure plan for diesel fuel underground storage tank 511-D1U1 and appendices containing supplemental information such as staff training certification and task summaries. Precision tank test data, a site health and safety plan, and material safety data sheets are also included.

Mancieri, S.; Giuntoli, N.

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

44

Numerical Simulations of Leakage from Underground LPG Storage Caverns  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

To secure a stable supply of petroleum gas, underground storage caverns for liquified petroleum gas (LPG) are commonly used in many countries worldwide. Storing LPG in underground caverns requires that the surrounding rock mass remain saturated with groundwater and that the water pressure be higher than the liquid pressure inside the cavern. In previous studies, gas containment criteria for underground gas storage based on hydraulic gradient and pressure have been discussed, but these studies do not consider the physicochemical characteristics and behavior of LPG such as vaporization and dissolution in groundwater. Therefore, while these studies are very useful for designing storage caverns, they do not provide better understanding of the either the environmental effects of gas contamination or the behavior of vaporized LPG. In this study, we have performed three-phase fluid flow simulations of gas leakage from underground LPG storage caverns, using the multiphase multicomponent nonisothermal simulator TMVOC (Pruess and Battistelli, 2002), which is capable of solving the three-phase nonisothermal flow of water, gas, and a multicomponent mixture of volatile organic chemicals (VOCs) in multidimensional heterogeneous porous media. A two-dimensional cross-sectional model resembling an actual underground LPG facility in Japan was developed, and gas leakage phenomena were simulated for three different permeability models: (1) a homogeneous model, (2) a single-fault model, and (3) a heterogeneous model. In addition, the behavior of stored LPG was studied for the special case of a water curtain suddenly losing its function because of operational problems, or because of long-term effects such as clogging of boreholes. The results of the study indicate the following: (1) The water curtain system is a very powerful means for preventing gas leakage from underground storage facilities. By operating with appropriate pressure and layout, gas containment can be ensured. (2) However , in highly heterogeneous media such as fractured rock and fault zones, local flow paths within which the gas containment criterion is not satisfied could be formed. To eliminate such zones, treatments such as pre/post grouting or an additional installment of water-curtain boreholes are essential. (3) Along highly conductive features such as faults, even partially saturated zones possess certain effects that can retard or prevent gas leakage, while a fully unsaturated fault connected to the storage cavern can quickly cause a gas blowout. This possibility strongly suggests that ensuring water saturation of the rock surrounding the cavern is a very important requirement. (4) Even if an accident should suddenly impair the water curtain, the gas plume does not quickly penetrate the ground surface. In these simulations, the plume takes several months to reach the ground surface.

Yamamoto, Hajime; Pruess, Karsten

2004-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

45

Closure report for underground storage tank 161-R1U1 and its associated underground piping  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Underground storage tank (UST) 161-31 R at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) was registered with the State Water Resources Control Board on June 27, 1984. UST 161-31R was subsequently renamed UST 161-R1U1 (Fig. A-1, Appendix A). UST 161-R1U1 was installed in 1976, and had a capacity of 383 gallons. This tank system consisted of a fiberglass reinforced plastic tank, approximately 320 feet of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) underground piping from Building 161, and approximately 40 feet of PVC underground piping from Building 160. The underground piping connected laboratory drains and sinks inside Buildings 160 and 161 to UST 161-R1U1. The wastewater collected in UST 161-R1U1, contained organic solvents, metals, inorganic acids, and radionuclides, most of which was produced within Building 161. On June 28, 1989, the UST 161-R1U1 piping system.around the perimeter of Building 161 failed a precision test performed by Gary Peters Enterprises (Appendix B). The 161-R1U1 tank system was removed from service after the precision test. In July 1989, additional hydrostatic tests and helium leak detection tests were performed (Appendix B) to determine the locations of the piping failures in the Building 161 piping system. The locations of the piping system failures are shown in Figure A-2 (Appendix A). On July 11, 1989, LLNL submitted an Unauthorized Release Report to Alameda County Department of Environmental Health (ACDEH), Appendix C.

Mallon, B.J.; Blake, R.G.

1994-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

46

Relevance of underground natural gas storage to geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Underground Storage of Natural Gas in the United States andEnergy Information Agency (2002). U.S. Natural Gas Storage.www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/natural_gas/info_glance/storage.html

Lippmann, Marcelo J.; Benson, Sally M.

2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

47

Underground storage of natural gas, liquid hydrocarbons, and carbon dioxide (Louisiana)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality regulates the underground storage of natural gas or liquid hydrocarbons and carbon dioxide. Prior to the use of any underground reservoir for the...

48

Characterizing excavation damaged zone and stability of pressurized lined rock caverns for underground compressed air energy storage  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

for Underground Compressed Air Energy Storage Hyung-Mok Kimperformance of compressed air energy storage (CAES) in linedcavern (LRC); Compressed air energy storage (CAES); TOUGH-

Kim, H.M.

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

49

Advanced Underground Gas Storage Concepts: Refrigerated-Mined Cavern Storage, Final Report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Over the past 40 years, cavern storage of LPG's, petrochemicals, such as ethylene and propylene, and other petroleum products has increased dramatically. In 1991, the Gas Processors Association (GPA) lists the total U.S. underground storage capacity for LPG's and related products of approximately 519 million barrels (82.5 million cubic meters) in 1,122 separate caverns. Of this total, 70 are hard rock caverns and the remaining 1,052 are caverns in salt deposits. However, along the eastern seaboard of the U.S. and the Pacific northwest, salt deposits are not available and therefore, storage in hard rocks is required. Limited demand and high cost has prevented the construction of hard rock caverns in this country for a number of years. The storage of natural gas in mined caverns may prove technically feasible if the geology of the targeted market area is suitable; and economically feasible if the cost and convenience of service is competitive with alternative available storage methods for peak supply requirements. Competing methods include LNG facilities and remote underground storage combined with pipeline transportation to the area. It is believed that mined cavern storage can provide the advantages of high delivery rates and multiple fill withdrawal cycles in areas where salt cavern storage is not possible. In this research project, PB-KBB merged advanced mining technologies and gas refrigeration techniques to develop conceptual designs and cost estimates to demonstrate the commercialization potential of the storage of refrigerated natural gas in hard rock caverns. DOE has identified five regions, that have not had favorable geological conditions for underground storage development: New England, Mid-Atlantic (NY/NJ), South Atlantic (DL/MD/VA), South Atlantic (NC/SC/GA), and the Pacific Northwest (WA/OR). PB-KBB reviewed published literature and in-house databases of the geology of these regions to determine suitability of hard rock formations for siting storage caverns, and gas market area storage needs of these regions.

none

1998-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

50

Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteam Coal Import CostsLiquidsYear JanYearVentedYearUnderground Storage

51

Rules and Regulations for Underground Storage Facilities Used for Petroleum Products and Hazardous Materials (Rhode Island)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

These regulations apply to underground storage facilities for petroleum and hazardous waste, and seek to protect water resources from contamination. The regulations establish procedures for the...

52

Closure report for underground storage tank 141-R3U1 and its associated underground piping  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Underground storage tank UST 141-R3U1 at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), was registered with the State Water Resources Control Board on June 27, 1984. This tank system consisted of a concrete tank, lined with polyvinyl chloride, and approximately 100 feet of PVC underground piping. UST 141-R3U1 had a capacity of 450 gallons. The underground piping connected three floor drains and one sink inside Building 141 to UST 141-R3U1. The wastewater collected in UST 141-R3U1 contained organic solvents, metals, and inorganic acids. On November 30, 1987, the 141-R3U1 tank system failed a precision tank test. The 141-R3U1 tank system was subsequently emptied and removed from service pending further precision tests to determine the location of the leak within the tank system. A precision tank test on February 5, 1988, was performed to confirm the November 30, 1987 test. Four additional precision tests were performed on this tank system between February 25, 1988, and March 6, 1988. The leak was located where the inlet piping from Building 141 penetrates the concrete side of UST 141-R3U1. The volume of wastewater that entered the backfill and soil around and/or beneath UST 141-R3U1 is unknown. On December 13, 1989, the LLNL Environmental Restoration Division submitted a plan to close UST 141-R3U1 and its associated piping to the Alameda County Department of Environmental Health. UST 141-R3U1 was closed as an UST, and shall be used instead as additional secondary containment for two aboveground storage tanks.

Mallon, B.J.; Blake, R.G.

1994-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

53

Underground Storage Tank Integrated Demonstration (UST-ID). Technology summary  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The DOE complex currently has 332 underground storage tanks (USTs) that have been used to process and store radioactive and chemical mixed waste generated from weapon materials production. Very little of the over 100 million gallons of high-level and low-level radioactive liquid waste has been treated and disposed of in final form. Two waste storage tank design types are prevalent across the DOE complex: single-shell wall and double-shell wall designs. They are made of stainless steel, concrete, and concrete with carbon steel liners, and their capacities vary from 5000 gallons (19 m{sup 3}) to 10{sup 6} gallons (3785 m{sup 3}). The tanks have an overburden layer of soil ranging from a few feet to tens of feet. Responding to the need for remediation of tank waste, driven by Federal Facility Compliance Agreements (FFCAs) at all participating sites, the Underground Storage Tank Integrated Demonstration (UST-ID) Program was created by the US DOE Office of Technology Development in February 1991. Its mission is to focus the development, testing, and evaluation of remediation technologies within a system architecture to characterize, retrieve, treat to concentrate, and dispose of radioactive waste stored in USTs at DOE facilities. The ultimate goal is to provide safe and cost-effective solutions that are acceptable to the public and the regulators. The UST-ID has focused on five DOE locations: the Hanford Site, which is the host site, in Richland, Washington; the Fernald Site in Fernald, Ohio; the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory near Idaho Falls, Idaho; the Oak Ridge Reservation in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and the Savannah River Site in Savannah River, South Carolina.

Not Available

1994-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

54

A study of the feasibility of construction of underground storage structures in soft soil  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

construction procedures was presented. A sitewpecific cost- benefit analysis is recommended as the determinant for usage of underground storage structures. Collection of cost and construction information for existing underground projects into a consolidated...A STUDY OF THE FEASIBILITY OF CONSTRUCTION OF UNDERGROUND STORAGE STRUCTURES IN SOFT SOIL A Thesis by STEPHEN ANTHONY ROSNER Submitted to the Graduate College of Texas AdcM University in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree...

Rosner, Stephen Anthony

2012-06-07T23:59:59.000Z

55

Permanent Closure of MFC Biodiesel Underground Storage Tank 99ANL00013  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This closure package documents the site assessment and permanent closure of the Materials and Fuels Complex biodiesel underground storage tank 99ANL00013 in accordance with the regulatory requirements established in 40 CFR 280.71, “Technical Standards and Corrective Action Requirements for Owners and Operators of Underground Storage Tanks: Out-of-Service UST Systems and Closure.”

Kerry L. Nisson

2012-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

56

An analysis of weep holes as a product detection device for underground compensated LPG storage systems  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Weep holes have been used widely to detect the presence of Liquefied Petroleum Gases (LPG) in brine for underground compensated storage systems. When the brine level drops below the weep hole, LPG product enters the brine production system causing an increase in both tubing head pressure and flow rate. To prevent cavern overfill, a cavern shutdown is initiated upon detection of LPG in the surface brine system by pressure or flow instruments at the tubing head. In this study, we have investigated the multiphase flow characteristics of weep hole LPG detection systems to correctly estimate the operating limits. A simple and easy to use model has been developed to predict the tubing head pressure and flow rate increases. The model can be used to implement safer and more efficient operation procedures for underground compensated LPG storage systems. The model predictions for a typical field case are presented. An analysis of weep holes as product detection devices for LPG storage reservoirs has been carried out. It was found that the increases in pressure and flow rates at the tubing head change as a function of injection flow rate of the product. Therefore, a thorough consideration of cavern operating parameters is necessary to evaluate the use constant pressure and flow rate values to initiate emergency shut down of the cavern.

Sarica, C.; Demir, H.M.; Brill, J.P.

1996-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

57

Regulation for Underground Storage of CO2 Passed by U.S. States  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

generation. Its use, therefore, is necessary in order to achieve the CO2 emission reduction targetRegulation for Underground Storage of CO2 Passed by U.S. States Holly Javedan Massachusetts................................................................................................... 8 2.4 CO2 Ownership

58

Estimating Residual Solids Volume In Underground Storage Tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Savannah River Site liquid waste system consists of multiple facilities to safely receive and store legacy radioactive waste, treat, and permanently dispose waste. The large underground storage tanks and associated equipment, known as the 'tank farms', include a complex interconnected transfer system which includes underground transfer pipelines and ancillary equipment to direct the flow of waste. The waste in the tanks is present in three forms: supernatant, sludge, and salt. The supernatant is a multi-component aqueous mixture, while sludge is a gel-like substance which consists of insoluble solids and entrapped supernatant. The waste from these tanks is retrieved and treated as sludge or salt. The high level (radioactive) fraction of the waste is vitrified into a glass waste form, while the low-level waste is immobilized in a cementitious grout waste form called saltstone. Once the waste is retrieved and processed, the tanks are closed via removing the bulk of the waste, chemical cleaning, heel removal, stabilizing remaining residuals with tailored grout formulations and severing/sealing external penetrations. The comprehensive liquid waste disposition system, currently managed by Savannah River Remediation, consists of 1) safe storage and retrieval of the waste as it is prepared for permanent disposition; (2) definition of the waste processing techniques utilized to separate the high-level waste fraction/low-level waste fraction; (3) disposition of LLW in saltstone; (4) disposition of the HLW in glass; and (5) closure state of the facilities, including tanks. This paper focuses on determining the effectiveness of waste removal campaigns through monitoring the volume of residual solids in the waste tanks. Volume estimates of the residual solids are performed by creating a map of the residual solids on the waste tank bottom using video and still digital images. The map is then used to calculate the volume of solids remaining in the waste tank. The ability to accurately determine a volume is a function of the quantity and quality of the waste tank images. Currently, mapping is performed remotely with closed circuit video cameras and still photograph cameras due to the hazardous environment. There are two methods that can be used to create a solids volume map. These methods are: liquid transfer mapping / post transfer mapping and final residual solids mapping. The task is performed during a transfer because the liquid level (which is a known value determined by a level measurement device) is used as a landmark to indicate solids accumulation heights. The post transfer method is primarily utilized after the majority of waste has been removed. This method relies on video and still digital images of the waste tank after the liquid transfer is complete to obtain the relative height of solids across a waste tank in relation to known and usable landmarks within the waste tank (cooling coils, column base plates, etc.). In order to accurately monitor solids over time across various cleaning campaigns, and provide a technical basis to support final waste tank closure, a consistent methodology for volume determination has been developed and implemented at SRS.

Clark, Jason L.; Worthy, S. Jason; Martin, Bruce A.; Tihey, John R.

2014-01-08T23:59:59.000Z

59

Structural analysis of underground gunite storage tanks. Environmental Restoration Program  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report documents the structural analysis of the 50-ft diameter underground gunite storage tanks constructed in 1943 and located in the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) South Tank Farm, known as Facility 3507 in the 3500-3999 area. The six gunite tanks (W-5 through W-10) are spaced in a 2 {times} 3 matrix at 60 ft on centers with 6 ft of soil cover. Each tank (Figures 1, 2, and 3) has an inside diameter of 50 ft, a 12-ft vertical sidewall having a thickness of 6 in. (there is an additional 1.5-in. inner liner for much of the height), and a spherical domed roof (nominal thickness is 10 in.) rising another 6 ft, 3 in. at the center of the tank. The thickness of both the sidewall and the domed roof increases to 30 in. near their juncture. The tank floor is nominally 3-in. thick, except at the juncture with the wall where the thickness increases to 9 in. The tanks are constructed of gunite (a mixture of Portland cement, sand, and water in the form of a mortar) sprayed from the nozzle of a cement gun against a form or a solid surface. The floor and the dome are reinforced with one layer of welded wire mesh and reinforcing rods placed in the radial direction. The sidewall is reinforced with three layers of welded wire mesh, vertical {1/2}-in. rods, and 21 horizontal rebar hoops (attached to the vertical rods) post-tensioned to 35,000 psi stress. The haunch at the sidewall/roof junction is reinforced with 17 horizontal rebar hoops post-tensioned with 35,000 to 40,000 psi stress. The yield strength of the post-tensioning steel rods is specified to be 60,000 psi, and all other steel is 40,000 psi steel. The specified 28-day design strength of the gunite is 5,000 psi.

NONE

1995-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

60

Process for safe underground storage of materials and apparatus for storage of such materials  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A method is disclosed for the formation of a safe storage area to hold materials, where the storage area is in the form of an underground storage cavern in a preferably rock formation maintained at a different temperature from the natural temperature of the environs surrounding the walls, floor, and the ceiling of said storage cavern. The inside of the storage cavern is with or without insulation and an inner first circulation system surrounds the cavern. The circulation system has a plurality of channels regularly distributed around the cavern and near its surface parallel to the axis of the storage space. The system of tunnels formed of the channels together encloses and surrounds the cavern. Further away from the cavern and on the outside of and in working relation to the first inner circulation system is a second outer circulation system, consisting of a plurality of regularly distributed channels formed either from the said inner tunnel system or between a second outer system of surrounding tunnels parallel to the axis of the storage space and together with said last mentioned channels enclosing the cavern and the inner circulation system. A circulating drying heat exchange medium for exchanging heat between the circulating medium and the surroundings around the first inner circulation system is introduced into the first inner circulation system and a circulating heat exchange drying medium for exchanging heat between the circulating medium and the surroundings around the second outer circulation system is also employed by maintaining heat exchange with the surroundings of first inner circulation system keeping its walls, floor, and ceiling of the cavern at a predetermined temperature above a temperature of the stored materials when storing hot materials below the temperature of the hot materials to form a temperature barrier envelope about said cavern.

Grennard, A.H.

1980-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

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


61

Numerical Simulations of Leakage from Underground LPG Storage Caverns  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

model contains three propane storage caverns, 10 m wide and3.2.9. The loss of propane from storage is not significant,liquefied propane) was placed in the storage caverns, and

Yamamoto, Hajime; Pruess, Karsten

2004-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

62

ERS 14.3 Underground and Above Ground Diesel Fuel Storage Tanks FPS 12.1, 1/9/01  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The objective of this surveillance is to verify underground and above ground diesel storage tanks are maintained, monitored, configured and marked as required.  These surveillance activities...

63

ERS 14.3 Underground and Above Ground Diesel Fuel Storage Tanks FPS 12.1, 1/9/01  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

 The objective of this surveillance is to verify underground and above ground diesel storage tanks are maintained, monitored, configured and marked as required.  These surveillance activities...

64

Underground pumped storage scheme in the Bukit Timah granite of Singapore  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Pumped storage is an energy storage method that involves the pumping of water from a lower reservoir to an upper reservoir during off-peak period using low cost power and releasing of the water from the upper reservoir to produce electricity during peak load period. Because of the very small and relatively flat land area of Singapore, a conventional surface pumped storage plant is not feasible. A pumped storage plant can be constructed here by siting the upper reservoir in one of the many abandoned granite quarries and by placing the lower reservoir and the powerhouse underground in the Bukit Timah granite, which is sound, massive and impervious. The capital costs for a pumped storage plant could be the same as those of an oil-fired plant of a comparable size. When the very high cost of land in Singapore is taken into account, an underground pumped storage scheme for peaking purposes becomes attractive. 7 refs., 4 figs., 3 tabs.

Wong, I.H. [Nanyang Technological Univ. (Singapore)] [Nanyang Technological Univ. (Singapore)

1996-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

65

Underground Energy Storage Program: 1981 annual report. Volume I. Progress summary  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This is the 1981 annual report for the Underground Energy Storage Program administered by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory for the US Department of Energy. The two-volume document describes all of the major research funded under this program during the period March 1981 to March 1982. Volume I summarizes the activities and notable progress toward program objectives in both Seasonal Thermal Energy Storage (STES) and Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES). Major changes in program emphasis and structure are also documented.

Kannberg, L.D.

1982-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

66

Kentucky Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia,(Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs Year in Review WYear JanFeet) YearUnderground

67

Borehole Miner - Extendible Nozzle Development for Radioactive Waste Dislodging and Retrieval from Underground Storage Tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report summarizes development of borehole-miner extendible-nozzle water-jetting technology for dislodging and retrieving salt cake, sludge} and supernate to remediate underground storage tanks full of radioactive waste. The extendible-nozzle development was based on commercial borehole-miner technology.

CW Enderlin; DG Alberts; JA Bamberger; M White

1998-09-25T23:59:59.000Z

68

Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYearFeet) Year Jan Feb% ofYear3.99Underground

69

West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYearFeet)per Thousand CubicUnderground

70

Utah Underground Storage Tank Installation Permit | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia, Virginia:FAQ < RAPID Jump to:Seadov PtyInformation UC 19-6-401UpsonUtah State Historic PreservationUnderground

71

Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia,(Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs Year2per Thousand CubicYear Jan Feb Mar AprUnderground

72

Nebraska Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia,(Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing ReservoirsYear-Month Week 1 Week 2 WeekCrude2.97 3.98Underground

73

Georgia Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 1 0 058.5 57.1Cubic Feet) Underground

74

Enabling Utility-Scale Electrical Energy Storage through Underground Hydrogen-Natural Gas Co-Storage.  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

??Energy storage technology is needed for the storage of surplus baseload generation and the storage of intermittent wind power, because it can increase the flexibility… (more)

Peng, Dan

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

75

Underground storage tank 431-D1U1, Closure Plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document contains information about the decommissioning of Tank 431-D1U1. This tank was installed in 1965 for diesel fuel storage. This tank will remain in active usage until closure procedures begin. Soils and ground water around the tank will be sampled to check for leakage. Appendices include; proof of proper training for workers, health and safety briefing record, task hazard analysis summary, and emergency plans.

Mancieri, S.

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

76

AGA Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas Total Underground Storage Capacity  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)WyomingSquareEnd-UseStorage (Million Cubic(Million

77

AGA Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)WyomingSquareEnd-UseStorage (Million

78

AGA Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas Working Underground Storage  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)WyomingSquareEnd-UseStorage (MillionCapacity

79

AGA Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)WyomingSquareEnd-UseStorageGas) (Million Cubic

80

AGA Eastern Consuming Region Underground Natural Gas Storage - All  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)WyomingSquareEnd-UseStorageGas)

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


81

AGA Producing Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)WyomingSquareEnd-UseStorageGas)(Million Cubic

82

AGA Producing Region Natural Gas Total Underground Storage Capacity  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)WyomingSquareEnd-UseStorageGas)(Million

83

AGA Producing Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)WyomingSquareEnd-UseStorageGas)(MillionCubic

84

Polymers for subterranean containment barriers for underground storage tanks (USTs). Letter report on FY 1992 activities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The US Department of Energy (DOE) set up the Underground Storage Tank Integrated Demonstration Program (USTID) to demonstrate technologies for the retrieval and treatment of tank waste, and closure of underground storage tanks (USTs). There are more than 250 underground storage tanks throughout the DOE complex. These tanks contain a wide variety of wastes including high level, low level, transuranic, mixed and hazardous wastes. Many of the tanks have performed beyond the designed lifetime resulting in leakage and contamination of the local geologic media and groundwater. To mitigate this problem it has been proposed that an interim subterranean containment barrier be placed around the tanks. This would minimize or prevent future contamination of soil and groundwater in the event that further tank leakages occur before or during remediation. Use of interim subterranean barriers can also provide sufficient time to evaluate and select appropriate remediation alternatives. The DOE Hanford site was chosen as the demonstration site for containment barrier technologies. A panel of experts for the USTID was convened in February, 1992, to identify technologies for placement of subterranean barriers. The selection was based on the ability of candidate grouts to withstand high radiation doses, high temperatures and aggressive tank waste leachates. The group identified and ranked nine grouting technologies that have potential to place vertical barriers and five for horizontal barriers around the tank. The panel also endorsed placement technologies that require minimal excavation of soil surrounding the tanks.

Heiser, J.H.; Colombo, P.; Clinton, J.

1992-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

85

Design and Field Testing of an Autonomous Underground Tramming System  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

, the repetitive "load-haul-dump" cycle is well suited to automation. In this case, a vehicle called a load underground mining vehicle. Described is the development of a fast, re- liable, and robust "autotramming in underground mining operations by robotiz- ing some of the functions of underground vehicles. For example

Paris-Sud XI, Université de

86

Relevance of underground natural gas storage to geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The practice of underground natural gas storage (UNGS), which started in the USA in 1916, provides useful insight into the geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide--the dominant anthropogenic greenhouse gas released into the atmosphere. In many ways, UNGS is directly relevant to geologic CO{sub 2} storage because, like CO{sub 2}, natural gas (essentially methane) is less dense than water. Consequently, it will tend to rise to the top of any subsurface storage structure located below the groundwater table. By the end of 2001 in the USA, about 142 million metric tons of natural gas were stored underground in depleted oil and gas reservoirs and brine aquifers. Based on their performance, UNGS projects have shown that there is a safe and effective way of storing large volumes of gases in the subsurface. In the small number of cases where failures did occur (i.e., leakage of the stored gas into neighboring permeable layers), they were mainly related to improper well design, construction, maintenance, and/or incorrect project operation. In spite of differences in the chemical and physical properties of the gases, the risk-assessment, risk-management, and risk-mitigation issues relevant to UNGS projects are also pertinent to geologic CO{sub 2} sequestration.

Lippmann, Marcelo J.; Benson, Sally M.

2002-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

87

,"U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale ProvedTexas"BruneiReserves in NonproducingU.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage - All

88

,"U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale ProvedTexas"BruneiReserves in NonproducingU.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage -

89

,"U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale ProvedTexas"BruneiReserves in NonproducingU.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage

90

UC 19-6-401 et seq. - Utah Underground Storage Tank Act | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia, Virginia:FAQ < RAPID Jump to:Seadov PtyInformation UC 19-6-401 et seq. - Utah Underground Storage Tank Act Jump to:

91

Underground Energy Storage Program: 1981 annual report. Volume II. Technical summaries  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This is the 1981 annual report for the Underground Energy Storage Program administered by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory for the US Department of Energy. The two-volume document describes all of the major research funded under this program during the period March 1981 to March 1982. Volume II presents the amplified technical summaries of individual tasks and projects conducted during this reporting period. The activities of the authors reporting herein were actually broader in scope than may be reflected by the mini-reports. Readers wishing additional information on specific topics are invited to contact individual authors. The work described here represents one segment of a continuing effort to encourage development and implementation of advanced energy storage technology. The results and progress reported here rely on earlier studies and will, in turn, provide a basis for continued efforts to develop the STES and CAES technologies.

Kannberg, L.D.

1982-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

92

DOE underground storage tank waste remediation chemical processing hazards. Part I: Technology dictionary  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document has been prepared to aid in the development of Regulating guidelines for the Privatization of Hanford underground storage tank waste remediation. The document has been prepared it two parts to facilitate their preparation. Part II is the primary focus of this effort in that it describes the technical basis for established and potential chemical processing hazards associated with Underground Storage Tank (UST) nuclear waste remediation across the DOE complex. The established hazards involve those at Sites for which Safety Analysis Reviews (SARs) have already been prepared. Potential hazards are those involving technologies currently being developed for future applications. Part I of this document outlines the scope of Part II by briefly describing the established and potential technologies. In addition to providing the scope, Part I can be used as a technical introduction and bibliography for Regulatory personnel new to the UST waste remediation, and in particular Privatization effort. Part II of this document is not intended to provide examples of a SAR Hazards Analysis, but rather provide an intelligence gathering source for Regulatory personnel who must eventually evaluate the Privatization SAR Hazards Analysis.

DeMuth, S.F.

1996-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

93

Pricetown I underground coal gasification field test: operations report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

An Underground Coal Gasification (UCG) field test in bituminous coal was successfully completed near Pricetown, West Virginia. The primary objective of this field test was to determine the viability of the linked vertical well (LVV) technology to recover the 900 foot deep, 6 foot thick coal seam. A methane rich product gas with an average heating value of approximately 250 Btu/SCF was produced at low air injection flow rates during the reverse combustion linkage phase. Heating value of the gas produced during the linkage enhancement phase was 221 Btu/SCF with air injection. The high methane formation has been attributed to the thermal and hydrocracking of tars and oils along with hydropyrolysis and hydrogasification of coal char. The high heating value of the gas was the combined effect of residence time, flow pattern, injection flow rate, injection pressure, and back pressure. During the gasification phase, a gas with an average heating value of 125 Btu/SCF was produced with only air injection, which resulted in an average energy production of 362 MMBtu/day.

Agarwal, A.K.; Seabaugh, P.W.; Zielinski, R.E.

1981-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

94

Review of sensors for the in situ chemical characterization of the Hanford underground storage tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), in the Technical Task Plan (TTP) SF-2112-03 subtask 2, is responsible for the conceptual design of a Raman probe for inclusion in the in-tank cone penetrometer. As part of this task, LLNL is assigned the further responsibility of generating a report describing a review of sensor technologies other than Raman that can be incorporated in the in-tank cone penetrometer for the chemical analysis of the tank environment. These sensors would complement the capabilities of the Raman probe, and would give information on gaseous, liquid, and solid state species that are insensitive to Raman interrogation. This work is part of a joint effort involving several DOE laboratories for the design and development of in-tank cone penetrometer deployable systems for direct UST waste characterization at Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC) under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Underground Storage Tank Integrated Demonstration (UST-ID).

Kyle, K.R.; Mayes, E.L.

1994-07-29T23:59:59.000Z

95

Assessment of concentration mechanisms for organic wastes in underground storage tanks at Hanford  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) has conducted an initial conservative evaluation of physical and chemical processes that could lead to significant localized concentrations of organic waste constituents in the Hanford underground storage tanks (USTs). This evaluation was part of ongoing studies at Hanford to assess potential safety risks associated with USTs containing organics. Organics in the tanks could pose a potential problem if localized concentrations are high enough to propagate combustion and are in sufficient quantity to produce a large heat and/or gas release if in contact with a suitable oxidant. The major sources of oxidants are oxygen in the overhead gas space of the tanks and sodium nitrate and nitrite either as salt cake solids or dissolved in the supernatant and interstitial liquids.

Gerber, M.A.; Burger, L.L.; Nelson, D.A.; Ryan, J.L. [Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA (United States); Zollars, R.L. [Washington State Univ., Pullman, WA (United States)

1992-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

96

Evaluating the effects of the number of caverns on the performance of underground oil storage facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Three dimensional finite element calculations were performed to investigate the effect field size, in terms of the number of caverns, on the performance of SPR oil storage caverns leached in domal salt (interms of surface subsidence, storage losses, and cavern integrity). The calculations were performed for cavern fields containing 1, 7, 19, and an infinite number of caverns. The magnitude and volume of subsidence was significantly affected by increasing the number of caverns (nearly an order of magnitude increase was predicted for each increase in field size), while the extent of subsidence (approximately 2000 m fromthe center of the field) and storage loss were not. Furthermore, the percentage of storage loss volume manifested as surface subsidence increased as the cavern field was enlarged. This was attributed to elasticvolumetric dilatation of overlying strata. The multiple cavern calculations demonstrate that storage losses are greater for caverns farther from the center of the caverns field. Based on an accumulated strain stability criteria, the larger cavern fields are predicted to have a shorter life. This criteria also indicates that caverns on the periphery of a field may show signs of instability before the inner caverns. The West Hackberry site (containing 22 caverns) subsidence data closely agrees with the 19 cavern model subsidence predictions, providing confidence in the calculations. Even a 19 cavern field, substantially large by SPR standards, does not approach the behavior predicted by infinite cavern models (which are frequently used because they are economical). This demonstrates that 3D modeling is required to accurately investigate the performance of a multi-cavern array. Although based on a typical SPR cavern design, the results of this study describe mechanics common to all multi-cavern fields and should, in general, be useful tocavern engineers and architects.

Hoffman, E.L.; Ehgartner, B.L.

1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

97

Report on technical feasibility of underground pumped hydroelectric storage in a marble quarry site in the Northeast United States  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The technical and economic aspects of constructing a very high head underground hydroelectric pumped storage were examined at a prefeasibility level. Excavation of existing caverns in the West Rutland Vermont marble quarry would be used to construct the underground space. A plant capacity of 1200 MW and 12 h of continuous capacity were chosen as plant operating conditions. The site geology, plant design, and electrical and mechanical equipment required were considered. The study concluded that the cost of the 1200 MW underground pumped storage hydro electric project at this site even with the proposed savings from marketable material amounts to between $581 and $595 per kilowatt of installed capacity on a January 1982 pricing level. System studies performed by the planning group of the New England Power System indicate that the system could economically justify up to about $442 per kilowatt on an energy basis with no credit for capacity. To accommodate the plant with the least expensive pumping energy, a coal and nuclear generation mix of approximately 65% would have to be available before the project becomes feasible. It is not expected that this condition can be met before the year 2000 or beyond. It is therefore concluded that the West Rutland underground pumped storage facility is uneconomic at this time. Several variables however could have marked influence on future planning and should be examined on periodic basis.

Chas. T. Main, Inc.

1982-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

98

Stress evaluation of the primary tank of a double-shell underground storage tank facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A facility called the Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility (MWTF) is being designed at the Department of Energy`s Hanford site. The MWTF is expected to be completed in 1998 and will consist of six underground double-shell waste storage tanks and associated systems. These tanks will provide safe and environmentally acceptable storage capacity to handle waste generated during single-shell and double-shell tank safety mitigation and remediation activities. This paper summarizes the analysis and qualification of the primary tank structure of the MWTF, as performed by ICF Kaiser Hanford during the latter phase of Title 1 (Preliminary) design. Both computer finite element analysis (FEA) and hand calculations methods based on the so-called Tank Seismic Experts Panel (TSEP) Guidelines were used to perform the analysis and evaluation. Based on the evaluations summarized in this paper, it is concluded that the primary tank structure of the MWTF satisfies the project design requirements. In addition, the hand calculations performed using the methodologies provided in the TSEP Guidelines demonstrate that, except for slosh height, the capacities exceed the demand. The design accounts for the adverse effect of the excessive slosh height demand, i.e., inadequate freeboard, by increasing the hydrodynamic wall and roof pressures appropriately, and designing the tank for such increased pressures.

Atalay, M.B. [ICF Kaiser Engineers, Inc., Oakland, CA (United States); Stine, M.D. [ICF Kaiser Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States); Farnworth, S.K. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

1994-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

99

Cryograb: A Novel Approach to the Retrieval of Waste from Underground Storage Tanks - 13501  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The UK's National Nuclear Laboratory (NNL) is investigating the use of cryogenic technology for the recovery of nuclear waste. Cryograb, freezing the waste on a 'cryo-head' and then retrieves it as a single mass which can then be treated or stabilized as necessary. The technology has a number of benefits over other retrieval approaches in that it minimizes sludge disturbance thereby reducing effluent arising and it can be used to de-water, and thereby reduce the volume of waste. The technology has been successfully deployed for a variety of nuclear and non-nuclear waste recovery operations. The application of Cryograb for the recovery of waste from US underground storage tanks is being explored through a US DOE International Technology Transfer and Demonstration programme. A sample deployment being considered involves the recovery of residual mounds of sludge material from waste storage tanks at Savannah River. Operational constraints and success criteria were agreed prior to the completion of a process down selection exercise which specified the preferred configuration of the cryo-head and supporting plant. Subsequent process modeling identified retrieval rates and temperature gradients through the waste and tank infrastructure. The work, which has been delivered in partnership with US DOE, SRNL, NuVision Engineering and Frigeo AB has demonstrated the technical feasibility of the approach (to TRL 2) and has resulted in the allocation of additional funding from DOE to take the programme to bench and cold pilot-scale trials. (authors)

O'Brien, Luke; Baker, Stephen; Bowen, Bob [UK National Nuclear Laboratory, Chadwick House, Warrington (United Kingdom)] [UK National Nuclear Laboratory, Chadwick House, Warrington (United Kingdom); Mallick, Pramod; Smith, Gary [US Department of Energy (United States)] [US Department of Energy (United States); King, Bill [Savannah River National Laboratory (United States)] [Savannah River National Laboratory (United States); Judd, Laurie [NuVision Engineering (United States)] [NuVision Engineering (United States)

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

100

RCRA/UST, superfund, and EPCRA hotline training module. Introduction to: RCRA subtitle I. Underground storage tanks (40 cfr part 280). Updated as of July 1996  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This module explains the Underground Storage Tank Regulatory Program established in 1988, that includes technical requirements to prevent, protect, and clean up releases from Underground Storage Tanks (USTs), as well as financial responsibility requirements to guarantee that UST owners and operators have enough money set aside to clean up releases and compensate third parties. Describes the Universe of USTs and the technical and financial requirements that apply to them. Defines underground storage tank and provides criteria for determining which USTs are subject to regulation. Discusses deadlines for upgrading tanks and the closure and corrective action requirements.

NONE

1996-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


101

Steam tracer experiment at the Hoe Creek No. 3 underground coal gasification field test  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Water plays an important role in in-situ coal gasification. To better understand this role, we conducted a steam tracer test during the later stages of the Hoe Creek No. 3 underground coal gasification field test. Deuterium oxide was used as the tracer. This report describes the tracer test and the analysis of the data obtained. The analysis indicates that at Hoe Creek the injected steam interacts with a large volume of water as it passes through the underground system. We hypothesize that this water is undergoing continual reflux in the underground system, resulting in a tracer response typical of a well-stirred tank.

Thorsness, C.B.

1980-11-26T23:59:59.000Z

102

Underground natural gas storage reservoir management: Phase 2. Final report, June 1, 1995--March 30, 1996  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Gas storage operators are facing increased and more complex responsibilities for managing storage operations under Order 636 which requires unbundling of storage from other pipeline services. Low cost methods that improve the accuracy of inventory verification are needed to optimally manage this stored natural gas. Migration of injected gas out of the storage reservoir has not been well documented by industry. The first portion of this study addressed the scope of unaccounted for gas which may have been due to migration. The volume range was estimated from available databases and reported on an aggregate basis. Information on working gas, base gas, operating capacity, injection and withdrawal volumes, current and non-current revenues, gas losses, storage field demographics and reservoir types is contained among the FERC Form 2, EIA Form 191, AGA and FERC Jurisdictional databases. The key elements of this study show that gas migration can result if reservoir limits have not been properly identified, gas migration can occur in formation with extremely low permeability (0.001 md), horizontal wellbores can reduce gas migration losses and over-pressuring (unintentionally) storage reservoirs by reinjecting working gas over a shorter time period may increase gas migration effects.

Ortiz, I.; Anthony, R.V.

1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

103

Steam reforming as a method to treat Hanford underground storage tank (UST) wastes  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report summarizes a Sandia program that included partnerships with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Synthetica Technologies, Inc. to design and test a steam reforming system for treating Hanford underground storage tank (UST) wastes. The benefits of steam reforming the wastes include the resolution of tank safety issues and improved radionuclide separations. Steam reforming destroys organic materials by first gasifying, then reacting them with high temperature steam. Tests indicate that up to 99% of the organics could be removed from the UST wastes by steam exposure. In addition, it was shown that nitrates in the wastes could be destroyed by steam exposure if they were first distributed as a thin layer on a surface. High purity alumina and nickel alloys were shown to be good candidates for materials to be used in the severe environment associated with steam reforming the highly alkaline, high nitrate content wastes. Work was performed on designing, building, and demonstrating components of a 0.5 gallon per minute (gpm) system suitable for radioactive waste treatment. Scale-up of the unit to 20 gpm was also considered and is feasible. Finally, process demonstrations conducted on non-radioactive waste surrogates were carried out, including a successful demonstration of the technology at the 0.1 gpm scale.

Miller, J.E.; Kuehne, P.B. [eds.] [and others

1995-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

104

Underground storage tank management plan, Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Underground Storage Tank (UST) Program at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant was established to locate UST systems at the facility and to ensure that all operating UST systems are free of leaks. UST systems have been removed or upgraded in accordance with Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) regulations and guidance. With the closure of a significant portion of the USTs, the continuing mission of the UST Management Program is to manage the remaining active UST systems and continue corrective actions in a safe regulatory compliant manner. This Program outlines the compliance issues that must be addressed, reviews the current UST inventory and compliance approach, and presents the status and planned activities associated with each UST system. The UST Program provides guidance for implementing TDEC regulations and guidelines for petroleum UST systems. The plan is divided into three major sections: (1) regulatory requirements, (2) active UST sites, and (3) out-of-service UST sites. These sections describe in detail the applicable regulatory drivers, the UST sites addressed under the Program, and the procedures and guidance for compliance.

NONE

1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

105

Total Number of Existing Underground Natural Gas Storage Fields  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand Cubic4,630.2perSep-14Base22,667The BasicsTop 100

106

ADMINISTRATIVE AND ENGINEERING CONTROLS FOR THE OPERATION OF VENTILATION SYSTEMS FOR UNDERGROUND RADIOACTIVE WASTE STORAGE TANKS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Liquid radioactive wastes from the Savannah River Site are stored in large underground carbon steel tanks. The majority of the waste is confined in double shell tanks, which have a primary shell, where the waste is stored, and a secondary shell, which creates an annular region between the two shells, that provides secondary containment and leak detection capabilities should leakage from the primary shell occur. Each of the DST is equipped with a purge ventilation system for the interior of the primary shell and annulus ventilation system for the secondary containment. Administrative flammability controls require continuous ventilation to remove hydrogen gas and other vapors from the waste tanks while preventing the release of radionuclides to the atmosphere. Should a leak from the primary to the annulus occur, the annulus ventilation would also serve this purpose. The functionality of the annulus ventilation is necessary to preserve the structural integrity of the primary shell and the secondary. An administrative corrosion control program is in place to ensure integrity of the tank. Given the critical functions of the purge and annulus ventilation systems, engineering controls are also necessary to ensure that the systems remain robust. The system consists of components that are constructed of metal (e.g., steel, stainless steel, aluminum, copper, etc.) and/or polymeric (polypropylene, polyethylene, silicone, polyurethane, etc.) materials. The performance of these materials in anticipated service environments (e.g., normal waste storage, waste removal, etc.) was evaluated. The most aggressive vapor space environment occurs during chemical cleaning of the residual heels by utilizing oxalic acid. The presence of NO{sub x} and mercury in the vapors generated from the process could potentially accelerate the degradation of aluminum, carbon steel, and copper. Once identified, the most susceptible materials were either replaced and/or plans for discontinuing operations are executed.

Wiersma, B.; Hansen, A.

2013-11-13T23:59:59.000Z

107

Work plan and health and safety plan for Building 3019B underground storage tank at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

As part of the Underground Storage Tank Program at the Department of Energy`s Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, this Health and Safety Plan has been developed for removal of the 110-gal leaded fuel underground storage tank (UST) located in the Building 3019B area at ORNL This Health and Safety Plan was developed by the Measurement Applications and Development Group of the Health and Safety Research Division at ORNL The major components of the plan follow: (1) A project description that gives the scope and objectives of the 110-gal tank removal project and assigns responsibilities, in addition to providing emergency information for situations occurring during field operations; (2) a health and safety plan in Sect. 15 for the Building 3019B UST activities, which describes general site hazards and particular hazards associated with specific tasks, personnel protection requirements and mandatory safety procedures; and (3) discussion of the proper form completion and reporting requirements during removal of the UST. This document addresses Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements in 29 CFR 1910.120 with respect to all aspects of health and safety involved in a UST removal. In addition, the plan follows the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) QAMS 005/80 (1980) format with the inclusion of the health and safety section (Sect. 15).

Burman, S.N.; Brown, K.S.; Landguth, D.C.

1992-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

108

Work plan and health and safety plan for Building 3019B underground storage tank at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

As part of the Underground Storage Tank Program at the Department of Energy's Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, this Health and Safety Plan has been developed for removal of the 110-gal leaded fuel underground storage tank (UST) located in the Building 3019B area at ORNL This Health and Safety Plan was developed by the Measurement Applications and Development Group of the Health and Safety Research Division at ORNL The major components of the plan follow: (1) A project description that gives the scope and objectives of the 110-gal tank removal project and assigns responsibilities, in addition to providing emergency information for situations occurring during field operations; (2) a health and safety plan in Sect. 15 for the Building 3019B UST activities, which describes general site hazards and particular hazards associated with specific tasks, personnel protection requirements and mandatory safety procedures; and (3) discussion of the proper form completion and reporting requirements during removal of the UST. This document addresses Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements in 29 CFR 1910.120 with respect to all aspects of health and safety involved in a UST removal. In addition, the plan follows the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) QAMS 005/80 (1980) format with the inclusion of the health and safety section (Sect. 15).

Burman, S.N.; Brown, K.S.; Landguth, D.C.

1992-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

109

Review of underground coal gasification field experiments at Hoe Creek  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

LLNL has conducted three underground coal gasification experiments at the Hoe Creek site near Gillette, WY. Three different linking methods were used: explosive fracturing, reverse burning and directional drilling. Air was injected on all three experiments and a steam/oxygen mixture during 2 days of the second and most of the third experiment. Comparison of results show that the linking method didn't influence gas quality. The heat of combustion of the product gas was higher with steam/oxygen injection, mainly because of reduced inert diluent. Gas quality was generally independent of other operating parameters, but declined from its initial value over a period of time. This was due to heat loss to the wet overburden and extensive roof collapse in the second and third experiments.

Thorsness, C.B.; Creighton, J.R.

1983-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

110

Review of underground coal gasification field experiments at Hoe Creek  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In three underground coal gasification experiments at the Hoe Creek site near Gillette, WY, LLNL applied three different linking methods: explosive fracture, reverse burning, and directional drilling. Air was injected in all three experiments; a steam/oxygen mixture, during 2 days of the second and most of the third experiment. Comparison of results show that the type of linking method did not influence gas quality. The heat of combustion of the product gas was higher with steam/oxygen injection, mainly because of reduced inert diluent. Gas quality was generally independent of other operating parameters but declined from its initial value over a period of time because of heat loss to the wet overburden and extensive roof collapse in the second and third experiments.

Thorsness, C.B.; Creighton, J.R.

1983-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

111

A geochemical assessment of petroleum from underground oil storage caverns in relation to petroleum from natural reservoirs offshore Norway.  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

??The aim of this study is to compare oils from known biodegraded fields offshore Norway to waxes and oils from an artificial cavern storage facility,… (more)

Østensen, Marie

2005-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

112

Implementation plan for Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 280 and 281; Final rules for underground storage tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report presents the schedules and methods required to comply with the newly promulgated Underground Storage Tank (UST) Regulations Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 280 and 281. These rules were promulgated by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on September 23, 1988, and became effective December 22, 1988. These regulations are required by Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. Their purpose is to protect the groundwater supplies of the United States in the following ways: Closing old tanks; detecting and remediating tank leaks and spills; establishing stringent standards for new tanks; and upgrade of existing tanks to new-tank standards. 3 refs., 5 tabs.

Stupka, R.C.

1989-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

113

A Cost Benefit Analysis of California's Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

s Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks (LUFTs)”. Submitted to theCalifornia’s Underground Storage Tank Program”. Submitted tos Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks” by Samantha Carrington

Carrington-Crouch, Robert

1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

114

SEARCH FOR UNDERGROUND OPENINGS FOR IN SITU TEST FACILITIES IN CRYSTALLINE ROCK  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Helms Underground Powerhouse - Pumped storage project Figurelayout of underground powerhouse complex—Helms Pumped57. Helms Underground Powerhouse Pumped Storage Project

Wallenberg, H.A.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

115

An Underground Storage Tank Integrated Demonstration report. Volume 1, Waste Characterization Data and Technology Development Needs Assessment  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Waste Characterization Data and Technology Development Needs Assessment provides direct support to the Underground Storage Tank Integrated Demonstration (UST-ID). Key users of the study`s products may also include individuals and programs within the US Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Technology Development (EM-50), the Office of Waste Operations (EM-30), and the Office of Environmental Restoration (EM-40). The goal of this work is to provide the UST-ID with a procedure for allocating funds across competing characterization technologies in a timely and defensible manner. It resulted in three primary products: 1. It organizes and summarizes information on underground storage tank characterization data needs. 2. It describes current technology development activity related to each need and flags areas where technology development may be beneficial. 3. It presents a decision process, with supporting software, for evaluating, prioritizing, and integrating possible technology development funding packages. The data presented in this document can be readily updated as the needs of the Waste Operations and Environmental Restoration programs mature and as new and promising technology development options emerge.

Quadrel, M.J.; Hunter, V.L.; Young, J.K. [Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA (United States); Lini, D.C.; Goldberg, C. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

1993-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

116

Request for closure, underground storage tank 2130-U: Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Facility ID {number_sign}0-010117  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document presents a summary of the activities and analytical data related to the removal of underground storage tank (UST) 2130-U, previously located at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant. Removal of this tank was conducted in accordance with Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) regulation 1200-1-15 (1992). A completed copy of the State of Tennessee, Division of Underground Storage Tanks, Permanent Closure Report Form is included as Appendix A of this document Based on the information and data presented herein, the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant requests permanent closure for the tank 2130-U site.

Not Available

1993-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

117

The value of underground storage in today`s natural gas industry  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The report consists of three chapters and four appendices. Chapter 1 provides basic information on the role of storage in today`s marketplace where natural gas is treated as a commodity. Chapter 2 provides statistical analyses of the relationship between storage and spot prices on both a monthly and daily basis. For the daily analysis, temperature data were used a proxy for storage withdrawals, providing a new means of examining the short-term relationship between storage and spot prices. Chapter 3 analyzes recent trends in storage management and use, as well as plans for additions to storage capacity. It also reviews the status of the new uses of storage resulting from Order 636, that is, market-based rates and capacity release. Appendix A serves as a stand-along primer on storage operations, and Appendix B provides further data on plans for the expansion of storage capacity. Appendix C explains recent revisions made to working gas and base gas capacity on the part of several storage operators in 1991 through 1993. The revisions were significant, and this appendix provides a consistent historical data series that reflects these changes. Finally, Appendix D presents more information on the regression analysis presented in Chapter 2. 19 refs., 21 figs., 5 tabs.

NONE

1995-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

118

Notification for Underground Storage Tanks (EPA Form 7530-1) | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia, Virginia: Energy ResourcesLoading map...(Utility Company)References ↑Information Notification for Underground

119

,"Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale ProvedTexas"BruneiReserves in NonproducingU.S. Underground

120

Analysis of Underground Storage Tanks System Materials to Increased Leak Potential Associated with E15 Fuel  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 was enacted by Congress to move the nation toward increased energy independence by increasing the production of renewable fuels to meet its transportation energy needs. The law establishes a new renewable fuel standard (RFS) that requires the nation to use 36 billion gallons annually (2.3 million barrels per day) of renewable fuel in its vehicles by 2022. Ethanol is the most widely used renewable fuel in the US, and its production has grown dramatically over the past decade. According to EISA and RFS, ethanol (produced from corn as well as cellulosic feedstocks) will make up the vast majority of the new renewable fuel requirements. However, ethanol use limited to E10 and E85 (in the case of flex fuel vehicles or FFVs) will not meet this target. Even if all of the E0 gasoline dispensers in the country were converted to E10, such sales would represent only about 15 billion gallons per year. If 15% ethanol, rather than 10% were used, the potential would be up to 22 billion gallons. The vast majority of ethanol used in the United States is blended with gasoline to create E10, that is, gasoline with up to 10% ethanol. The remaining ethanol is sold in the form of E85, a gasoline blend with as much as 85% ethanol that can only be used in FFVs. Although DOE remains committed to expanding the E85 infrastructure, that market will not be able to absorb projected volumes of ethanol in the near term. Given this reality, DOE and others have begun assessing the viability of using intermediate ethanol blends as one way to transition to higher volumes of ethanol. In October of 2010, the EPA granted a partial waiver to the Clean Air Act allowing the use of fuel that contains up to 15% ethanol for the model year 2007 and newer light-duty motor vehicles. This waiver represents the first of a number of actions that are needed to move toward the commercialization of E15 gasoline blends. On January 2011, this waiver was expanded to include model year 2001 light-duty vehicles, but specifically prohibited use in motorcycles and off-road vehicles and equipment. UST stakeholders generally consider fueling infrastructure materials designed for use with E0 to be adequate for use with E10, and there are no known instances of major leaks or failures directly attributable to ethanol use. It is conceivable that many compatibility issues, including accelerated corrosion, do arise and are corrected onsite and, therefore do not lead to a release. However, there is some concern that higher ethanol concentrations, such as E15 or E20, may be incompatible with current materials used in standard gasoline fueling hardware. In the summer of 2008, DOE recognized the need to assess the impact of intermediate blends of ethanol on the fueling infrastructure, specifically located at the fueling station. This includes the dispenser and hanging hardware, the underground storage tank, and associated piping. The DOE program has been co-led and funded by the Office of the Biomass Program and Vehicle Technologies Program with technical expertise from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). The infrastructure material compatibility work has been supported through strong collaborations and testing at Underwriters Laboratories (UL). ORNL performed a compatibility study investigating the compatibility of fuel infrastructure materials to gasoline containing intermediate levels of ethanol. These results can be found in the ORNL report entitled Intermediate Ethanol Blends Infrastructure Materials Compatibility Study: Elastomers, Metals and Sealants (hereafter referred to as the ORNL intermediate blends material compatibility study). These materials included elastomers, plastics, metals and sealants typically found in fuel dispenser infrastructure. The test fuels evaluated in the ORNL study were SAE standard test fuel formulations used to assess material-fuel compatibility within a relatively short timeframe. Initially, these material studies included test fuels of Fuel C,

Kass, Michael D [ORNL; Theiss, Timothy J [ORNL; Janke, Christopher James [ORNL; Pawel, Steven J [ORNL

2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


121

Preliminary studies of tunnel interface response modeling using test data from underground storage facilities.  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In attempting to detect and map out underground facilities, whether they be large-scale hardened deeply-buried targets (HDBT's) or small-scale tunnels for clandestine border or perimeter crossing, seismic imaging using reflections from the tunnel interface has been seen as one of the better ways to both detect and delineate tunnels from the surface. The large seismic impedance contrast at the tunnel/rock boundary should provide a strong, distinguishable seismic response, but in practice, such strong indicators are often lacking. One explanation for the lack of a good seismic reflection at such a strong contrast boundary is that the damage caused by the tunneling itself creates a zone of altered seismic properties that significantly changes the nature of this boundary. This report examines existing geomechanical data that define the extent of an excavation damage zone around underground tunnels, and the potential impact on rock properties such as P-wave and S-wave velocities. The data presented from this report are associated with sites used for the development of underground repositories for the disposal of radioactive waste; these sites have been excavated in volcanic tuff (Yucca Mountain) and granite (HRL in Sweden, URL in Canada). Using the data from Yucca Mountain, a numerical simulation effort was undertaken to evaluate the effects of the damage zone on seismic responses. Calculations were performed using the parallelized version of the time-domain finitedifference seismic wave propagation code developed in the Geophysics Department at Sandia National Laboratories. From these numerical simulations, the damage zone does not have a significant effect upon the tunnel response, either for a purely elastic case or an anelastic case. However, what was discovered is that the largest responses are not true reflections, but rather reradiated Stoneley waves generated as the air/earth interface of the tunnel. Because of this, data processed in the usual way may not correctly image the tunnel. This report represents a preliminary step in the development of a methodology to convert numerical predictions of rock properties to an estimation of the extent of rock damage around an underground facility and its corresponding seismic velocity, and the corresponding application to design a testing methodology for tunnel detection.

Sobolik, Steven Ronald; Bartel, Lewis Clark

2010-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

122

,"Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale ProvedTexas"BruneiReserves in NonproducingU.S. UndergroundVolume (MMcf)"

123

Porous media experience applicable to field evaluation for compressed air energy storage  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A survey is presented of porous media field experience that may aid in the development of a compressed air energy storage field demonstration. Work done at PNL and experience of other groups and related industries is reviewed. An overall view of porous media experience in the underground storage of fluids is presented. CAES experience consists of site evaluation and selection processes used by groups in California, Kansas, and Indiana. Reservoir design and field evaluation of example sites are reported. The studies raised questions about compatibility with depleted oil and gas reservoirs, storage space rights, and compressed air regulations. Related experience embraces technologies of natural gas, thermal energy, and geothermal and hydrogen storage. Natural gas storage technology lends the most toward compressed air storage development, keeping in mind the respective differences between stored fluids, physical conditions, and cycling frequencies. Both fluids are injected under pressure into an aquifer to form a storage bubble confined between a suitable caprock structure and partially displaced ground water. State-of-the-art information is summarized as the necessary foundation material for field planning. Preliminary design criteria are given as recommendations for basic reservoir characteristics. These include geometric dimensions and storage matrix properties such as permeability. Suggested ranges are given for injection air temperature and reservoir pressure. The second step in developmental research is numerical modeling. Results have aided preliminary design by analyzing injection effects upon reservoir pressure, temperature and humidity profiles. Results are reported from laboratory experiments on candidate sandstones and caprocks. Conclusions are drawn, but further verification must be done in the field.

Allen, R.D.; Gutknecht, P.J.

1980-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

124

Modeling of Field Distribution and Energy Storage in Diphasic Dielectrics  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Modeling of Field Distribution and Energy Storage in Diphasic Dielectrics S. K. Patil, M. Y, USA Modeling of electrostatic field distribution and energy storage in diphasic dielectrics containing to the increased energy storage density. For composites with lower volume fractions of high-permittivity inclusions

Koledintseva, Marina Y.

125

PEGASUS, a European research project on the effects of gas in underground storage facilities for radioactive waste  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Whereas the subject of gas generation and possible gas release from radioactive waste repositories has gained in interest on the international scene, the Commission of the European Communities has increased its research efforts on this issue. In particular in the 4th five year R and D program on Management and Storage of Radioactive Waste (1990--1994), a framework has been set up in which research efforts on the subject of gas generation and migration, supported by the CEC, are brought together and coordinated. In this project, called PEGASUS, Project on the Effects of GAS in Underground Storage facilities for radioactive waste, about 20 organizations and research institutes from 7 European countries are involved. The project covers both experimental and theoretical studies of the processes of gas formation and possible gas release from the different waste types, LLW, ILW and HLW, under typical repository conditions in suitable geological formations as clay, salt and granite. In this paper an overview is given of the various studies undertaken in the project as well as some first results presented.

Haijtink, B.; McMenamin, T. [Commission of the European Communities, Brussels (Belgium)

1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

126

,"Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy SourcesWyoming"CoalbedOhio"Associated-Dissolved NaturalPriceLNG Storage

127

,"Underground Natural Gas Storage - Salt Cavern Storage Fields"  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia, Virginia:FAQ < RAPID Jump to:SeadovCooperativeA2.Reformulated, Average Refiner GasolineAll Operators"

128

AQUIFER THERMAL ENERGY STORAGE-A SURVEY  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

High temperature underground thermal energy storage, inProceedings, Thermal Energy Storage in Aquifers Workshop:underground thermal energy storage, in ATES newsletter:

Tsang, Chin Fu

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

129

AQUIFER THERMAL ENERGY STORAGE-A SURVEY  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

1978, High temperature underground thermal energy storage,in Proceedings, Thermal Energy Storage in Aquifers Workshop:High temperature underground thermal energy storage, in ATES

Tsang, Chin Fu

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

130

,"Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy SourcesWyoming"CoalbedOhio"Associated-Dissolved NaturalPriceLNG Storage NetPriceNet

131

AGA Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)WyomingSquareEnd-UseStorage

132

AGA Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage - Change in  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)WyomingSquareEnd-UseStorageGas) (Million

133

AGA Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage - Change in  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)WyomingSquareEnd-UseStorageGas) (MillionWorking

134

,"Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale ProvedTexas"Brunei (Dollars per ThousandPrice Sold to9"3LNG StorageNet

135

,"Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale ProvedTexas"Brunei (Dollars per ThousandPrice Sold to9"3LNG StorageNetVolume

136

,"Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale ProvedTexas"BruneiReserves in NonproducingU.S.Summary"LNG Storage NetPriceNet

137

,"Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale ProvedTexas"BruneiReserves in NonproducingU.S.Summary"LNG Storage

138

Modeling of coupled thermodynamic and geomechanical performance of underground compressed air energy storage (CAES) in lined rock caverns  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

We applied coupled nonisothermal, multiphase fluid flow and geomechanical numerical modeling to study the coupled thermodynamic and geomechanical performance of underground compressed air energy storage (CAES) in concrete-lined rock caverns. The paper focuses on CAES in lined caverns at relatively shallow depth (e.g., 100 m depth) in which a typical CAES operational pressure of 5 to 8 MPa is significantly higher than both ambient fluid pressure and in situ stress. We simulated a storage operation that included cyclic compression and decompression of air in the cavern, and investigated how pressure, temperature and stress evolve over several months of operation. We analyzed two different lining options, both with a 50 cm thick low permeability concrete lining, but in one case with an internal synthetic seal such as steel or rubber. For our simulated CAES system, the thermodynamic analysis showed that 96.7% of the energy injected during compression could be recovered during subsequent decompression, while 3.3% of the energy was lost by heat conduction to the surrounding media. Our geomechanical analysis showed that tensile effective stresses as high as 8 MPa could develop in the lining as a result of the air pressure exerted on the inner surface of the lining, whereas thermal stresses were relatively smaller and compressive. With the option of an internal synthetic seal, the maximum effective tensile stress was reduced from 8 to 5 MPa, but was still in substantial tension. We performed one simulation in which the tensile tangential stresses resulted in radial cracks and air leakage though the lining. This air leakage, however, was minor (about 0.16% of the air mass loss from one daily compression) in terms of CAES operational efficiency, and did not significantly impact the overall energy balance of the system. However, despite being minor in terms of energy balance, the air leakage resulted in a distinct pressure increase in the surrounding rock that could be quickly detected using pressure monitoring outside the concrete lining.

Rutqvist, J.; Kim, H. -M.; Ryu, D. -W.; Synn, J. -H.; Song, W. -K.

2012-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

139

South Tank Farm underground storage tank inspection using the topographical mapping system for radiological and hazardous environments  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

During the winter of 1997 the Topographical Mapping System (TMS) for hazardous and radiological environments and the Interactive Computer-Enhanced Remote-Viewing System (ICERVS) were used to perform wall inspections on underground storage tanks (USTs) W5 and W6 of the South Tank Farm (STF) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). The TMS was designed for deployment in the USTs at the Hanford Site. Because of its modular design, the TMS was also deployable in the USTs at ORNL. The USTs at ORNL were built in the 1940s and have been used to store radioactive waste during the past 50 years. The tanks are constructed with an inner layer of Gunite{trademark} that has been spalling, leaving sections of the inner wall exposed. Attempts to quantify the depths of the spalling with video inspection have proven unsuccessful. The TMS surface-mapping campaign in the STF was initiated to determine the depths of cracks, crevices, and/or holes in the tank walls and to identify possible structural instabilities in the tanks. The development of the TMS and the ICERVS was initiated by DOE for the purpose of characterization and remediation of USTs at DOE sites across the country. DOE required a three-dimensional, topographical mapping system suitable for use in hazardous and radiological environments. The intended application is mapping the interiors of USTs as part of DOE`s waste characterization and remediation efforts, to obtain both baseline data on the content of the storage tank interiors and changes in the tank contents and levels brought about by waste remediation steps. Initially targeted for deployment at the Hanford Site, the TMS has been designed to be a self-contained, compact, and reconfigurable system that is capable of providing rapid variable-resolution mapping information in poorly characterized workspaces with a minimum of operator intervention.

Armstrong, G.A.; Burks, B.L.; Hoesen, S.D. van

1997-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

140

Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 135: Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Corrective Action Investigation Plan (CAIP) has been developed in accordance with the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) that was agreed to by the US Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office (DOE/NV); the State of Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP); and the US Department of Defense (FFACO, 1996). The CAIP is a document that provides or references all of the specific information for investigation activities associated with Corrective Action Units (CAUs) or Corrective Action Sites (CASs). According to the FFACO, CASs are sites potentially requiring corrective action(s) and may include solid waste management units or individual disposal or release sites (FFACO, 1996). Corrective Action Units consist of one or more CASs grouped together based on geography, technical similarity, or agency responsibility for the purpose of determining corrective actions. This CAIP contains the environmental sample collection objectives and the criteria for conducting site investigation activities at CAU 135, Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks (USTs), which is located on the Nevada Test Site (NTS). The NTS is approximately 105 kilometers (km) (65 miles [mi]) northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada.

U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office

1999-05-05T23:59:59.000Z

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


141

Modeling of coupled thermodynamic and geomechanical performance of underground compressed air energy storage (CAES) in lined rock caverns  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Williams, Compressed air energy storage: Theory, resources,study for the compressed air energy storage technology byplant for compressed air energy storage power generation,

Rutqvist, J.

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

142

Modeling of coupled thermodynamic and geomechanical performance of underground compressed air energy storage (CAES) in lined rock caverns  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Williams, Compressed air energy storage: Theory, resources,for the compressed air energy storage technology by thefor compressed air energy storage power generation, Japan

Rutqvist, J.

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

143

Potential method for measurement of CO2 leakage from underground sequestration fields using radioactive tracers  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Reduction of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) release to the environment is a pressing challenge that should be addressed to avert the potential devastating effects of global warming. Within the United States, the most abundant sources of CO2 emissions are those generate from coal- or gas-fired power plants; one method to control CO2 emissions is to sequester it in deep underground geological formations. From integrated assessment models the overall leakage rates from these storage locations must be less than 0.1% of stored volume per year for long-term control. The ability to detect and characterize nascent leaks, in conjunction with subsequent remediation efforts, will significantly decrease the amount of CO2 released back into the environment. Because potential leakage pathways are not necessarily known a priori, onsite monitoring must be performed; the monitoring region in the vicinity of a CO2 injection well may be as large as 100 km2, which represents the estimated size of a supercritical CO2 bubble that would form under typical injection scenarios. By spiking the injected CO2 with a radiological or stable isotope tracer, it will be possible to detect ground leaks from the sequestered CO2 using fewer sampling stations, with greater accuracy than would be possible using simple CO2 sensors. The relative merits of various sorbent materials, radiological and stable isotope tracers, detection methods and potential interferences will be discussed.

Bachelor, Paula P.; McIntyre, Justin I.; Amonette, James E.; Hayes, James C.; Milbrath, Brian D.; Saripalli, Prasad

2008-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

144

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory underground coal gasification data base. [US DOE-supported field tests; data  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Department of Energy has sponsored a number of field projects to determine the feasibility of converting the nation's vast coal reserves into a clean efficient energy source via underground coal gasification (UCG). Due to these tests, a significant data base of process information has developed covering a range of coal seams (flat subbituminous, deep flat bituminous and steeply dipping subbituminous) and processing techniques. A summary of all DOE-sponsored tests to data is shown. The development of UCG on a commercial scale requires involvement from both the public and private sectors. However, without detailed process information, accurate assessments of the commercial viability of UCG cannot be determined. To help overcome this problem the DOE has directed the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) to develop a UCG data base containing raw and reduced process data from all DOE-sponsored field tests. It is our intent to make the data base available upon request to interested parties, to help them assess the true potential of UCG.

Cena, R. J.; Thorsness, C. B.

1981-08-21T23:59:59.000Z

145

EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Salt Cavern Storage Reservoir...  

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

Salt Cavern Underground Natural Gas Storage Reservoir Configuration Salt Cavern Underground Natural Gas Storage Reservoir Configuration Source: PB Energy Storage Services Inc....

146

METHODOLOGY AND CALCULATIONS FOR THE ASSIGNMENT OF WASTE GROUPS FOR THE LARGE UNDERGROUND WASTE STORAGE TANKS AT THE HANFORD SITE  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Hanford Site contains 177 large underground radioactive waste storage tanks (28 double-shell tanks and 149 single-shell tanks). These tanks are categorized into one of three waste groups (A, B, and C) based on their waste and tank characteristics. These waste group assignments reflect a tank's propensity to retain a significant volume of flammable gases and the potential of the waste to release retained gas by a buoyant displacement gas release event. Assignments of waste groups to the 177 double-shell tanks and single-shell tanks, as reported in this document, are based on a Monte Carlo analysis of three criteria. The first criterion is the headspace flammable gas concentration following release of retained gas. This criterion determines whether the tank contains sufficient retained gas such that the well-mixed headspace flammable gas concentration would reach 100% of the lower flammability limit if the entire tank's retained gas were released. If the volume of retained gas is not sufficient to reach 100% of the lower flammability limit, then flammable conditions cannot be reached and the tank is classified as a waste group C tank independent of the method the gas is released. The second criterion is the energy ratio and considers whether there is sufficient supernatant on top of the saturated solids such that gas-bearing solids have the potential energy required to break up the material and release gas. Tanks that are not waste group C tanks and that have an energy ratio < 3.0 do not have sufficient potential energy to break up material and release gas and are assigned to waste group B. These tanks are considered to represent a potential induced flammable gas release hazard, but no spontaneous buoyant displacement flammable gas release hazard. Tanks that are not waste group C tanks and have an energy ratio {ge} 3.0, but that pass the third criterion (buoyancy ratio < 1.0, see below) are also assigned to waste group B. Even though the designation as a waste group B (or A) tank identifies the potential for an induced flammable gas release hazard, the hazard only exists for specific operations that can release the retained gas in the tank at a rate and quantity that results in reaching 100% of the lower flammability limit in the tank headspace. The identification and evaluation of tank farm operations that could cause an induced flammable gas release hazard in a waste group B (or A) tank are included in other documents. The third criterion is the buoyancy ratio. This criterion addresses tanks that are not waste group C double-shell tanks and have an energy ratio {ge} 3.0. For these double-shell tanks, the buoyancy ratio considers whether the saturated solids can retain sufficient gas to exceed neutral buoyancy relative to the supernatant layer and therefore have buoyant displacement gas release events. If the buoyancy ratio is {ge} 1.0, that double-shell tank is assigned to waste group A. These tanks are considered to have a potential spontaneous buoyant displacement flammable gas release hazard in addition to a potential induced flammable gas release hazard. This document categorizes each of the large waste storage tanks into one of several categories based on each tank's waste characteristics. These waste group assignments reflect a tank's propensity to retain a significant volume of flammable gases and the potential of the waste to release retained gas by a buoyant displacement event. Revision 8 is the annual update of the calculations of the flammable gas Waste Groups for DSTs and SSTs.

WEBER RA

2009-01-16T23:59:59.000Z

147

METHODOLOGY AND CALCULATIONS FOR THE ASSIGNMENT OF WASTE GROUPS FOR THE LARGE UNDERGROUND WASTE STORAGE TANKS AT THE HANFORD SITE  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document categorizes each of the large waste storage tanks into one of several categories based on each tank's waste characteristics. These waste group assignments reflect a tank's propensity to retain a significant volume of flammable gases and the potential of the waste to release retained gas by a buoyant displacement event. Revision 7 is the annual update of the calculations of the flammable gas Waste Groups for DSTs and SSTs. The Hanford Site contains 177 large underground radioactive waste storage tanks (28 double-shell tanks and 149 single-shell tanks). These tanks are categorized into one of three waste groups (A, B, and C) based on their waste and tank characteristics. These waste group assignments reflect a tank's propensity to retain a significant volume of flammable gases and the potential of the waste to release retained gas by a buoyant displacement gas release event. Assignments of waste groups to the 177 double-shell tanks and single-shell tanks, as reported in this document, are based on a Monte Carlo analysis of three criteria. The first criterion is the headspace flammable gas concentration following release of retained gas. This criterion determines whether the tank contains sufficient retained gas such that the well-mixed headspace flammable gas concentration would reach 100% of the lower flammability limit if the entire tank's retained gas were released. If the volume of retained gas is not sufficient to reach 100% of the lower flammability limit, then flammable conditions cannot be reached and the tank is classified as a waste group C tank independent of the method the gas is released. The second criterion is the energy ratio and considers whether there is sufficient supernatant on top of the saturated solids such that gas-bearing solids have the potential energy required to break up the material and release gas. Tanks that are not waste group C tanks and that have an energy ratio < 3.0 do not have sufficient potential energy to break up material and release gas and are assigned to waste group B. These tanks are considered to represent a potential induced flammable gas release hazard, but no spontaneous buoyant displacement flammable gas release hazard. Tanks that are not waste group C tanks and have an energy ratio {ge} 3.0, but that pass the third criterion (buoyancy ratio < 1.0, see below) are also assigned to waste group B. Even though the designation as a waste group B (or A) tank identifies the potential for an induced flammable gas release hazard, the hazard only exists for specific operations that can release the retained gas in the tank at a rate and quantity that results in reaching 100% of the lower flammability limit in the tank headspace. The identification and evaluation of tank farm operations that could cause an induced flammable gas release hazard in a waste group B (or A) tank are included in other documents. The third criterion is the buoyancy ratio. This criterion addresses tanks that are not waste group C double-shell tanks and have an energy ratio {ge} 3.0. For these double-shell tanks, the buoyancy ratio considers whether the saturated solids can retain sufficient gas to exceed neutral buoyancy relative to the supernatant layer and therefore have buoyant displacement gas release events. If the buoyancy ratio is {ge} 1.0, that double-shell tank is assigned to waste group A. These tanks are considered to have a potential spontaneous buoyant displacement flammable gas release hazard in addition to a potential induced flammable gas release hazard.

FOWLER KD

2007-12-27T23:59:59.000Z

148

Modeling of coupled thermodynamic and geomechanical performance of underground compressed air energy storage (CAES) in lined rock caverns  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Excavated Hard Rock Caverns. Pacific Northwest Laboratory,Lux, K.H. Design of salt caverns for the storage of naturalgas storage in unlined rock caverns. Int J Rock Mech Min Sc

Rutqvist, J.

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

149

Modeling of coupled thermodynamic and geomechanical performance of underground compressed air energy storage (CAES) in lined rock caverns  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

reservoir storage project in Sesta, Italy [1]; as well as two pilot tests in rock caverns associated with abandoned

Rutqvist, J.

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

150

Wells, Borings, and Underground Uses (Minnesota)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This section regulates wells, borings, and underground storage with regards to protecting groundwater resources. The Commissioner of the Department of Health has jurisdiction, and can grant permits...

151

Groundwater restoration field test at the Hoe Creek underground coal gasification site  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Three underground coal gasification burns were conducted at the Hoe Creek Site in the Powder River Basin. Some contaminants were released in the groundwater. The Department of Energy (DOE) analyzed the water from a network of wells. Two million gallons of groundwater were pumped from wells adjacent to the Hoe Creek II underground coal gasification cavity, passed through filters and carbon adsorbers, and reinjected into the cavity. Phenol was the target compound of the water treatment system. The phenol concentration pumped from well WS-10 decreased from 974 parts per billion (ppB) when treatment began on July 2, 1987, to about 200 ppB when treatment ceased on August 29, 1987. Phenol concentrations pumped from well WS-22 fluctuated during the tests, but they decreased to the 150 to 200 ppB range by the time treatment was terminated. The phenol concentration of treated water reinjected into the Hoe Creek II cavity was below detectable limits (less than 20 ppB). Pumping rates were about 18 gallons per minute (gpm) from well WS-10 and 6 to 8 gpm from well WS-22. Hoe Creek is located approximately 20 miles southwest of Gillette, Wyoming. 12 refs., 5 figs., 8 tabs.

Nordin, J.S.; Barrash, W.; Nolan, B.T.

1988-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

152

Field Survey of Cactus Crater Storage Facility (Runit Dome)  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The US Department of Energy, Office of Health and Safety (DOE/HS-10), requested that National Security Technologies, LLC, Environmental Management directorate (NSTec/EM) perform a field survey of the Cactus Crater Storage Facility (Runit Dome), similar to past surveys conducted at their request. This field survey was conducted in conjunction with a Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) mission on Runit Island in the Enewetak Atoll in the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI). The survey was strictly a visual survey, backed up by digital photos and a written description of the current condition.

Douglas Miller, Terence Holland

2008-10-31T23:59:59.000Z

153

U.S. Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYear Jan Feb2009 2010

154

U.S. Natural Gas Number of Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinter 2013-14Deliveries (Number ofof

155

U.S. Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYear Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul AugYearCubic

156

Evaluation of advanced turbomachinery for underground pumped hydroelectric storage. Part 3. Multistage unregulated pump/turbines for operating heads of 1000 to 1500 m  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This is the final report in a series of three on studies of advanced hydraulic turbomachinery for underground pumped hydroelectric storage. All three reports address Francis-type, reversible pump/turbines. The first report covered single-stage regulated units; the second report covered two-stage regulated units; the present report covers multistage unregulated units. Multistage unregulated pump/turbines offer an economically attractive option for heads of 1000 to 1500 m. The feasibility of developing such machines for capacities up to 500 MW and operating heads up to 1500 m has been evaluated. Preliminary designs have been generated for six multistage pump/turbines. The designs are for nominal capacities of 350 and 500 MW and for operating heads of 1000, 1250, and 1500 m. Mechanical, hydraulic, and economic analyses indicate that these machines will behave according to the criteria used to design them and that they can be built at a reasonable cost with no unsolvable problems. Efficiencies of 85.8% and 88.5% in the generating and pumping modes, respectively, can be expected for the 500-MW, 1500-m unit. Performances of the other five machines are at least comparable, and usually better. Over a 1000 to 1500-m head range, specific $/kW costs of the pump/turbines in mid-1978 US dollars vary from 19.0 to 23.1 for the 500-MW machines, and from 21.0 to 24.1 for the 350-MW machines.

Frigo, A.A.; Pistner, C.

1980-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

157

Underground coal gasification: Development of theory, laboratory experimentation, interpretation, and correlation with the Hanna field tests: Final report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The following report is a description of a 7 year effort to develop a theoretical understanding of the underground coal gasification process. The approach used is one of the mathematical model development from known chemical and principles, simplification of the models to isolate important effects, and through validation of models to isolate important effects, and through validation of models with laboratory experiments and field test data. Chapter I contains only introductory material. Chapter II describes the development of two models for reverse combustion: a combustion model and a linearized model for combustion front instability. Both models are required for realistic field predictions. Chapter III contains a discussion of a successful forward gasification model. Chapter IV discusses the spalling-enhanced-drying model is applicable to prediction of cavity growth and subsidence. Chapter VI decribes the correct use of energy and material balances for the analysis of UCG field test data. Chapter VII shows how laboratory experiments were used to validate the models for reverse combustion and forward gasification. It is also shown that laboratory combustion tube experiments can be used to simulate gas compositions expected from field tests. Finally, Chapter VII presents results from a comprehensive economic analysis of UCG involving 1296 separate cases. 37 refs., 49 figs., 12 tabs.

Gunn, R.D.; Krantz, W.B.

1987-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

158

METHODOLOGY & CALCULATIONS FOR THE ASSIGNMENT OF WASTE FOR THE LARGE UNDERGROUND WASTE STORAGE TANKS AT THE HANFORD SITE  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Waste stored within tank farm double-shell tanks (DST) and single-shell tanks (SST) generates flammable gas (principally hydrogen) to varying degrees depending on the type, amount, geometry, and condition of the waste. The waste generates hydrogen through the radiolysis of water and organic compounds, thermolytic decomposition of organic compounds, and corrosion of a tank's carbon steel walls. Radiolysis and thermolytic decomposition also generates ammonia. Nonflammable gases, which act as dilutents (such as nitrous oxide), are also produced. Additional flammable gases (e.g., methane) are generated by chemical reactions between various degradation products of organic chemicals present in the tanks. Volatile and semi-volatile organic chemicals in tanks also produce organic vapors. The generated gases in tank waste are either released continuously to the tank headspace or are retained in the waste matrix. Retained gas may be released in a spontaneous or induced gas release event (GRE) that can significantly increase the flammable gas concentration in the tank headspace as described in RPP-7771, Flammable Gas Safety Isme Resolution. Appendices A through I provide supporting information. The document categorizes each of the large waste storage tanks into one of several categories based on each tank's waste and characteristics. These waste group assignments reflect a tank's propensity to retain a significant volume of flammable gases and the potential of the waste to release retained gas by a buoyant displacement event. Revision 6 is the annual update of the flammable gas Waste Groups for DSTs and SSTs.

TU, T.A.

2007-01-04T23:59:59.000Z

159

METHODOLOGY & CALCULATIONS FOR THE ASSIGNMENT OF WASTE GROUPS FOR THE LARGE UNDERGROUND WASTE STORAGE TANKS AT THE HANFORD SITE  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Waste stored within tank farm double-shell tanks (DST) and single-shell tanks (SST) generates flammable gas (principally hydrogen) to varying degrees depending on the type, amount, geometry, and condition of the waste. The waste generates hydrogen through the radiolysis of water and organic compounds, thermolytic decomposition of organic compounds, and corrosion of a tank's carbon steel walls. Radiolysis and thermolytic decomposition also generates ammonia. Nonflammable gases, which act as dilutents (such as nitrous oxide), are also produced. Additional flammable gases (e.g., methane) are generated by chemical reactions between various degradation products of organic chemicals present in the tanks. Volatile and semi-volatile organic chemicals in tanks also produce organic vapors. The generated gases in tank waste are either released continuously to the tank headspace or are retained in the waste matrix. Retained gas may be released in a spontaneous or induced gas release event (GRE) that can significantly increase the flammable gas concentration in the tank headspace as described in RPP-7771. The document categorizes each of the large waste storage tanks into one of several categories based on each tank's waste characteristics. These waste group assignments reflect a tank's propensity to retain a significant volume of flammable gases and the potential of the waste to release retained gas by a buoyant displacement event. Revision 5 is the annual update of the methodology and calculations of the flammable gas Waste Groups for DSTs and SSTs.

BARKER, S.A.

2006-07-27T23:59:59.000Z

160

Underground Exploration  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Underground Exploration and Testing A Report to Congress and the Secretary of Energy Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board October 1993 Yucca Mountain at #12;Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board Dr. John E and Testing #12;Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v Introduction

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


161

DEMONSTRATION OF ENERGY STORAGE INTEGRATED WITH A SOLAR DISH FIELD IN WHYALLA  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

energy storage into the thermal cycle is a key point of differentiation between solar thermalDEMONSTRATION OF ENERGY STORAGE INTEGRATED WITH A SOLAR DISH FIELD IN WHYALLA Joe Coventry 1-of-a-kind demonstration of an integrated solar dish and molten- salt storage system, using the superheated steam energy

162

Utah Division of Environmental Response and Remediation Underground...  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Division of Environmental Response and Remediation Underground Storage Tank Branch Webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Utah...

163

Modeling of Hydrogen Storage Materials: A Reactive Force Field for NaH  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Modeling of Hydrogen Storage Materials: A Reactive Force Field for NaH Ojwang' J.G.O.*, Rutger van is the fall in potential energy surface during heating. Keywords: hydrogen storage, reactive force field governing hydrogen desorption in NaH. During the abstraction process of surface molecular hydrogen charge

Goddard III, William A.

164

Addendum to the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 452: Historical Underground Storage Tank Release Sites, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Revision 0  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document constitutes an addendum to the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 452: Historical Underground Storage Tank Release Sites, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, April 1998 as described in the document Supplemental Investigation Report for FFACO Use Restrictions, Nevada Test Site, Nevada (SIR) dated November 2008. The SIR document was approved by NDEP on December 5, 2008. The approval of the SIR document constituted approval of each of the recommended UR removals. In conformance with the SIR document, this addendum consists of: • This page that refers the reader to the SIR document for additional information • The cover, title, and signature pages of the SIR document • The NDEP approval letter • The corresponding section of the SIR document This addendum provides the documentation justifying the cancellation of the URs for CASs: • 25-25-09, Spill H940825C (from UST 25-3101-1) • 25-25-14, Spill H940314E (from UST 25-3102-3) • 25-25-15, Spill H941020E (from UST 25-3152-1) These URs were established as part of Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) corrective actions and were based on the presence of contaminants at concentrations greater than the action levels established at the time of the initial investigation (FFACO, 1996). Since these URs were established, practices and procedures relating to the implementation of risk-based corrective actions (RBCA) have changed. Therefore, these URs were re-evaluated against the current RBCA criteria as defined in the Industrial Sites Project Establishment of Final Action Levels (NNSA/NSO, 2006). This re-evaluation consisted of comparing the original data (used to define the need for the URs) to risk-based final action levels (FALs) developed using the current Industrial Sites RBCA process. The re-evaluation resulted in a recommendation to remove these URs because contamination is not present at these sites above the risk-based FALs. Requirements for inspecting and maintaining these URs will be canceled, and the postings and signage at each site will be removed. Fencing and posting may be present at these sites that are unrelated to the FFACO URs such as for radiological control purposes as required by the NV/YMP Radiological Control Manual (NNSA/NSO, 2004). This modification will not affect or modify any non-FFACO requirements for fencing, posting, or monitoring at these sites.

Grant Evenson

2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

165

Addendum 2 to the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 454: Historical Underground Storage Tank Release Sites, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Revision 0  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document constitutes an addendum to the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 454: Historical Underground Storage Tank Release Sites, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, April 1998 as described in the document Supplemental Investigation Report for FFACO Use Restrictions, Nevada Test Site, Nevada (SIR) dated November 2008. The SIR document was approved by NDEP on December 5, 2008. The approval of the SIR document constituted approval of each of the recommended UR removals. In conformance with the SIR document, this addendum consists of: • This page that refers the reader to the SIR document for additional information • The cover, title, and signature pages of the SIR document • The NDEP approval letter • The corresponding section of the SIR document This addendum provides the documentation justifying the cancellation of the URs for CASs: • 12-25-08, Spill H950524F (from UST 12-B-1) • 12-25-10, Spill H950919A (from UST 12-COMM-1) These URs were established as part of Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) corrective actions and were based on the presence of contaminants at concentrations greater than the action levels established at the time of the initial investigation (FFACO, 1996). Since these URs were established, practices and procedures relating to the implementation of risk-based corrective actions (RBCA) have changed. Therefore, these URs were re-evaluated against the current RBCA criteria as defined in the Industrial Sites Project Establishment of Final Action Levels (NNSA/NSO, 2006). This re-evaluation consisted of comparing the original data (used to define the need for the URs) to risk-based final action levels (FALs) developed using the current Industrial Sites RBCA process. The re-evaluation resulted in a recommendation to remove these URs because contamination is not present at these sites above the risk-based FALs. Requirements for inspecting and maintaining these URs will be canceled, and the postings and signage at each site will be removed. Fencing and posting may be present at these sites that are unrelated to the FFACO URs such as for radiological control purposes as required by the NV/YMP Radiological Control Manual (NNSA/NSO, 2004). This modification will not affect or modify any non-FFACO requirements for fencing, posting, or monitoring at these sites.

Grant Evenson

2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

166

ENERGY STORAGE IN AQUIFERS - - A SURVEY OF RECENT THEORETICAL STUDIES  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

temperature underground thermal energy storage. In Proc. Th~al modeling of thermal energy storage in aquifers. In ~~-Mathematical modeling; thermal energy storage; aquifers;

Tsang, Chin Fu

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

167

Multinational underground nuclear parks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Newcomer countries expected to develop new nuclear power programs by 2030 are being encouraged by the International Atomic Energy Agency to explore the use of shared facilities for spent fuel storage and geologic disposal. Multinational underground nuclear parks (M-UNPs) are an option for sharing such facilities. Newcomer countries with suitable bedrock conditions could volunteer to host M-UNPs. M-UNPs would include back-end fuel cycle facilities, in open or closed fuel cycle configurations, with sufficient capacity to enable M-UNP host countries to provide for-fee waste management services to partner countries, and to manage waste from the M-UNP power reactors. M-UNP potential advantages include: the option for decades of spent fuel storage; fuel-cycle policy flexibility; increased proliferation resistance; high margin of physical security against attack; and high margin of containment capability in the event of beyond-design-basis accidents, thereby reducing the risk of Fukushima-like radiological contamination of surface lands. A hypothetical M-UNP in crystalline rock with facilities for small modular reactors, spent fuel storage, reprocessing, and geologic disposal is described using a room-and-pillar reference-design cavern. Underground construction cost is judged tractable through use of modern excavation technology and careful site selection. (authors)

Myers, C.W. [Nuclear Engineering and Nonproliferation Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, MS F650, Los Alamos, NM 87544 (United States); Giraud, K.M. [Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation, 1550 Oxen Lane NE, P.O. Box 411, Burlington, KS 66839-0411 (United States)

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

168

Underground Natural Gas Storage by Storage Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"Click worksheet9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,,781Title: Telephone:short version) Themonthly4 Oil demandU.S.Sep-14

169

Underground Natural Gas Storage by Storage Type  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand28 198 18BiomassThree-Dimensional SeismicUranium2009

170

Potential underground risks associated with CAES.  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

CAES in geologic media has been proposed to help 'firm' renewable energy sources (wind and solar) by providing a means to store energy when excess energy was available, and to provide an energy source during non-productive renewable energy time periods. Such a storage media may experience hourly (perhaps small) pressure swings. Salt caverns represent the only proven underground storage used for CAES, but not in a mode where renewable energy sources are supported. Reservoirs, both depleted natural gas and aquifers represent other potential underground storage vessels for CAES, however, neither has yet to be demonstrated as a functional/operational storage media for CAES.

Kirk, Matthew F.; Webb, Stephen Walter; Broome, Scott Thomas; Pfeifle, Thomas W.; Grubelich, Mark Charles; Bauer, Stephen J.

2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

171

Panel 2, Geologic Storage of Hydrogen  

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

Geologic Storage - Types Types of Underground Storage Aquifers Aquifers are similar in geology to depleted reservoirs, but have not been proven to trap gas and must be developed....

172

Fiber optic cone penetrometer raman probe for in situ chemical characterization of the Hanford underground waste tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A field hardened fiber optic Raman probe has been developed for cone penetrometer deployment in the Hanford underground chemical waste storage tanks. The corrosive chemical environment of the tanks, as well as Hanford specific deployment parameters, provide unique challenges for the design of an optical probe.

Kyle, K.R.; Brown, S.B.

1997-03-03T23:59:59.000Z

173

E-Print Network 3.0 - abandons gas storage Sample Search Results  

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

Storage L... - Million tonnes of oil equivalent 12;Hughes: Alton Underground Natural Gas Storage Facility 2 storage... : Is there a sufficient supply of ... Source: Hughes,...

174

DOE Underground-Coal-Conversion-Program field-test activities for 1979 and 1980. [Pricetown 1, Hoe Creek 3, Hanna IV, and SDB 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Under the US Department of Energy's Underground-Coal-Conversion program, four field tests were completed in 1979 and preparations were begun in 1980 for two additional field tests to be operated in 1981. The Laramie Energy Technology Center (LETC) and Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) completed Hanna IV, an air gasification test in Wyoming subbituminous coal. The Morgantown Energy Technology Center (METC) completed Pricetown 1, an air gasification test in West Virginia bituminous coal. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) completed Hoe Creek 3, a steam-oxygen gasification test in Wyoming subbituminous coal. Gulf Research and Development Co. completed Steeply Dipping Beds (SDB) Test 1, primarily an air gasification test in Wyoming subbituminous coal and the first SDB test in the US. In 1980, Gulf R and D Co. began preparation of SDB Test 2, scheduled for operation in the fall of 1981. The DOE project teams at LETC, METC, LLNL, and SNL, in association with the Washington Irrigation and Development Co. (WIDCo), Washington Water Power (WWP), and the State of Washington, are preparing a field test site in the Centralia-Chehalis coal district of Washington. A series of large coal block tests will be completed prior to the field test, scheduled for operation in 1982 or 1983. This field test will utilize a directionally drilled link and steam-oxygen gasification system. This paper summarizes the results of the four recently completed field tests and the plans for additional tests.

Bartke, T.C.

1983-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

175

Review of underground coal-gasification field experiments at Hoe Creek. [Hoe Creek 1, 2, and 3  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

LLNL has conducted three underground coal gasification experiments at the Hoe Creek site near Gillette, Wyoming. Three different linking methods were used: explosive fracture, reverse burning and directional drilling. Air was injected on all three experiments and a steam/oxygen mixture during 2 days of the second and most of the third experiment. Comparison of results show that the linking method didn't influence gas quality. The heat of combustion of the product gas was higher with steam/oxygen injection, mainly because of reduced inert diluent. Gas quality was generally independent of other operating parameters, but declined from its initial value over a period of time. This was due to heat loss to the wet overburden and extensive roof collapse in the second and third experiments.

Thorsness, C.B.; Creighton, J.R.

1982-05-26T23:59:59.000Z

176

Gas storage and separation by electric field swing adsorption  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

Gases are stored, separated, and/or concentrated. An electric field is applied across a porous dielectric adsorbent material. A gas component from a gas mixture may be selectively separated inside the energized dielectric. Gas is stored in the energized dielectric for as long as the dielectric is energized. The energized dielectric selectively separates, or concentrates, a gas component of the gas mixture. When the potential is removed, gas from inside the dielectric is released.

Currier, Robert P; Obrey, Stephen J; Devlin, David J; Sansinena, Jose Maria

2013-05-28T23:59:59.000Z

177

PLANT RESISTANCE Field and Storage Testing Bt Potatoes for Resistance to Potato  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

PLANT RESISTANCE Field and Storage Testing Bt Potatoes for Resistance to Potato Tuberworm Lansing, MI 48824 J. Econ. Entomol. 97(4): 1425Ð1431 (2004) ABSTRACT Potato tuberworm, Phthorimaea operculella (Zeller), is the most serious insect pest of potatoes worldwide. The introduction of the Bacillus

Douches, David S.

178

Underground Layout Configuration  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this analysis was to develop an underground layout to support the license application (LA) design effort. In addition, the analysis will be used as the technical basis for the underground layout general arrangement drawings.

A. Linden

2003-09-25T23:59:59.000Z

179

Improved understanding of geologic CO{sub 2} storage processes requires risk-driven field experiments  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The need for risk-driven field experiments for CO{sub 2} geologic storage processes to complement ongoing pilot-scale demonstrations is discussed. These risk-driven field experiments would be aimed at understanding the circumstances under which things can go wrong with a CO{sub 2} capture and storage (CCS) project and cause it to fail, as distinguished from accomplishing this end using demonstration and industrial scale sites. Such risk-driven tests would complement risk-assessment efforts that have already been carried out by providing opportunities to validate risk models. In addition to experimenting with high-risk scenarios, these controlled field experiments could help validate monitoring approaches to improve performance assessment and guide development of mitigation strategies.

Oldenburg, C.M.

2011-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

180

FIELD-DEPLOYABLE SAMPLING TOOLS FOR SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL INTERROGATION IN LIQUID STORAGE  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Methodology and field deployable tools (test kits) to analyze the chemical and microbiological condition of aqueous spent fuel storage basins and determine the oxide thickness on the spent fuel basin materials were developed to assess the corrosion potential of a basin. this assessment can then be used to determine the amount of time fuel has spent in a storage basin to ascertain if the operation of the reactor and storage basin is consistent with safeguard declarations or expectations and assist in evaluating general storage basin operations. The test kit was developed based on the identification of key physical, chemical and microbiological parameters identified using a review of the scientific and basin operations literature. The parameters were used to design bench scale test cells for additional corrosion analyses, and then tools were purchased to analyze the key parameters. The tools were used to characterize an active spent fuel basin, the Savannah River Site (SRS) L-Area basin. The sampling kit consisted of a total organic carbon analyzer, an YSI multiprobe, and a thickness probe. The tools were field tested to determine their ease of use, reliability, and determine the quality of data that each tool could provide. Characterization confirmed that the L Area basin is a well operated facility with low corrosion potential.

Berry, T.; Milliken, C.; Martinez-Rodriguez, M.; Hathcock, D.; Heitkamp, M.

2012-09-12T23:59:59.000Z

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


181

Compressed Air Energy Storage Act (Kansas)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This act lays out regulations for the local authorities related to site selection, design, operation and monitoring for underground storage of compressed air.

182

Natural gas storage in bedded salt formations  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In 1990 Western Resources Inc. (WRI) identified the need for additional natural gas storage capacity for its intrastate natural gas system operated in the state of Kansas. Western Resources primary need was identified as peak day deliverability with annual storage balancing a secondary objective. Consequently, an underground bedded salt storage facility, Yaggy Storage Field, was developed and placed in operation in November 1993. The current working capacity of the new field is 2.1 BCF. Seventy individual caverns are in service on the 300 acre site. The caverns vary in size from 310,000 CF to 2,600,000 CF. Additional capacity can be added on the existing acreage by increasing the size of some of the smaller existing caverns by further solution mining and by development of an additional 30 potential well sites on the property.

Macha, G.

1996-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

183

AQUIFER THERMAL ENERGY STORAGE. A NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF AUBURN UNIVERSITY FIELD EXPERIMENTS  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Auburn University Thermal Energy Storage , LBL No. 10194.Mathematical modeling of thermal energy storage in aquifers,of Current Aquifer Thermal Energy Storage Programs (in

Tsang, Chin Fu

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

184

Advanced underground Vehicle Power and Control: The locomotive Research Platform  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Develop a fuelcell mine locomotive with metal-hydride hydrogen storage. Test the locomotive for fundamental limitations preventing successful commercialization of hydride fuelcells in underground mining. During Phase 1 of the DOE-EERE sponsored project, FPI and its partner SNL, completed work on the development of a 14.4 kW fuelcell power plant and metal-hydride energy storage. An existing battery-electric locomotive with similar power requirements, minus the battery module, was used as the base vehicle. In March 2001, Atlas Copco Wagner of Portland, OR, installed the fuelcell power plant into the base vehicle and initiated integration of the system into the vehicle. The entire vehicle returned to Sandia in May 2001 for further development and integration. Initial system power-up took place in December 2001. A revision to the original contract, Phase 2, at the request of DOE Golden Field Office, established Vehicle Projects LLC as the new prime contractor,. Phase 2 allowed industry partners to conduct surface tests, incorporate enhancements to the original design by SNL, perform an extensive risk and safety analysis, and test the fuelcell locomotive underground under representative production mine conditions. During the surface tests one of the fuelcell stacks exhibited reduced power output resulting in having to replace both fuelcell stacks. The new stacks were manufactured with new and improved technology resulting in an increase of the gross power output from 14.4 kW to 17 kW. Further work by CANMET and Hatch Associates, an engineering consulting firm specializing in safety analysis for the mining industry, both under subcontract to Vehicle Projects LLC, established minimum requirements for underground testing. CANMET upgraded the Programmable Logic Control (PLC) software used to monitor and control the fuelcell power plant, taking into account locomotive operator's needs. Battery Electric, a South Africa manufacturer, designed and manufactured (at no cost to the project) a new motor controller capable of operating the higher rpm motor and different power characteristics of the fuelcells. In early August 2002, CANMET, with the technical assistance of Nuvera Fuel Cells and Battery Electric, installed the new PLC software, installed the new motor controller, and installed the new fuelcell stacks. After minor adjustments, the fuelcell locomotive pulled its first fully loaded ore cars on a surface track. The fuelcell-powered locomotive easily matched the battery powered equivalent in its ability to pull tonnage and equaled the battery-powered locomotive in acceleration. The final task of Phase 2, testing the locomotive underground in a production environment, occurred in early October 2002 in a gold mine. All regulatory requirements to allow the locomotive underground were completed and signed off by Hatch Associates prior to going underground. During the production tests, the locomotive performed flawlessly with no failures or downtime. The actual tests occurred during a 2-week period and involved moving both gold ore and waste rock over a 1,000 meter track. Refueling, or recharging, of the metal-hydride storage took place on the surface. After each shift, the metal-hydride storage module was removed from the locomotive, transported to surface, and filled with hydrogen from high-pressure tanks. The beginning of each shift started with taking the fully recharged metal-hydride storage module down into the mine and re-installing it onto the locomotive. Each 8 hour shift consumed approximately one half to two thirds of the onboard hydrogen. This indicates that the fuelcell-powered locomotive can work longer than a similar battery-powered locomotive, which operates about 6 hours, before needing a recharge.

Vehicle Projects LLC

2003-01-28T23:59:59.000Z

185

Underground Injection Control (Louisiana)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The Injection and Mining Division (IMD) has the responsibility of implementing two major federal environmental programs which were statutorily charged to the Office of Conservation: the Underground...

186

ENERGY STORAGE IN AQUIFERS - - A SURVEY OF RECENT THEORETICAL STUDIES  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

underground thermal energy storage. In Proc. Th~rmal1980), 'I'hermal energy storage? in a confined aquifer·--al modeling of thermal energy storage in aquifers. In ~~-

Tsang, Chin Fu

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

187

Sensitivity of storage field performance to geologic and cavern design parameters in salt domes.  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A sensitivity study was performed utilizing a three dimensional finite element model to assess allowable cavern field sizes in strategic petroleum reserve salt domes. A potential exists for tensile fracturing and dilatancy damage to salt that can compromise the integrity of a cavern field in situations where high extraction ratios exist. The effects of salt creep rate, depth of salt dome top, dome size, caprock thickness, elastic moduli of caprock and surrounding rock, lateral stress ratio of surrounding rock, cavern size, depth of cavern, and number of caverns are examined numerically. As a result, a correlation table between the parameters and the impact on the performance of a storage field was established. In general, slower salt creep rates, deeper depth of salt dome top, larger elastic moduli of caprock and surrounding rock, and a smaller radius of cavern are better for structural performance of the salt dome.

Ehgartner, Brian L.; Park, Byoung Yoon; Herrick, Courtney Grant

2010-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

188

Sensitivity of storage field performance to geologic and cavern design parameters in salt domes.  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A sensitivity study was performed utilizing a three dimensional finite element model to assess allowable cavern field sizes for strategic petroleum reserve salt domes. A potential exists for tensile fracturing and dilatancy damage to salt that can compromise the integrity of a cavern field in situations where high extraction ratios exist. The effects of salt creep rate, depth of salt dome top, dome size, caprock thickness, elastic moduli of caprock and surrounding rock, lateral stress ratio of surrounding rock, cavern size, depth of cavern, and number of caverns are examined numerically. As a result, a correlation table between the parameters and the impact on the performance of storage field was established. In general, slower salt creep rates, deeper depth of salt dome top, larger elastic moduli of caprock and surrounding rock, and a smaller radius of cavern are better for structural performance of the salt dome.

Ehgartner, Brian L. (Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM); Park, Byoung Yoon

2009-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

189

Accurate correction of magnetic field instabilities for high-resolution isochronous mass measurements in storage rings  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Isochronous mass spectrometry (IMS) in storage rings is a successful technique for accurate mass measurements of short-lived nuclides with relative precision of about $10^{-5}-10^{-7}$. Instabilities of the magnetic fields in storage rings are one of the major contributions limiting the achievable mass resolving power, which is directly related to the precision of the obtained mass values. A new data analysis method is proposed allowing one to minimise the effect of such instabilities. The masses of the previously measured at the CSRe $^{41}$Ti, $^{43}$V, $^{47}$Mn, $^{49}$Fe, $^{53}$Ni and $^{55}$Cu nuclides were re-determined with this method. An improvement of the mass precision by a factor of $\\sim 1.7$ has been achieved for $^{41}$Ti and $^{43}$V. The method can be applied to any isochronous mass experiment irrespective of the accelerator facility. Furthermore, the method can be used as an on-line tool for checking the isochronous conditions of the storage ring.

P. Shuai; H. S. Xu; Y. H. Zhang; Yu. A. Litvinov; M. Wang; X. L. Tu; K. Blaum; X. H. Zhou; Y. J. Yuan; G. Audi; X. L. Yan; X. C. Chen; X. Xu; W. Zhang; B. H. Sun; T. Yamaguchi; R. J. Chen; C. Y. Fu; Z. Ge; W. J. Huang; D. W. Liu; Y. M. Xing; Q. Zeng

2014-07-13T23:59:59.000Z

190

Underground nuclear energy complexes - technical and economic advantages  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Underground nuclear power plant parks have been projected to be economically feasible compared to above ground instalIations. This paper includes a thorough cost analysis of the savings, compared to above ground facilities, resulting from in-place entombment (decommissioning) of facilities at the end of their life. reduced costs of security for the lifetime of the various facilities in the underground park. reduced transportation costs. and reduced costs in the operation of the waste storage complex (also underground). compared to the fair share of the costs of operating a national waste repository.

Myers, Carl W [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Kunze, Jay F [IDAHO STATE UNIV; Giraud, Kellen M [BABECOCK AND WILCOX; Mahar, James M [IDAHO STATE UNIV

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

191

Base Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Summary)  

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

Power Price Gross Withdrawals Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Oil Wells Gross Withdrawals From Shale Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Coalbed Wells...

192

Oregon Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

1,144 429 -1,786 1,271 463 1,938 1973-2013 Injections 15,088 10,570 8,658 11,976 8,732 12,176 1973-2013 Withdrawals 16,232 10,999 6,871 13,247 9,195 14,114 1989...

193

Maryland Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

927 -1,758 2,292 -1,721 2,383 -811 1967-2013 Injections 16,517 15,088 14,384 15,592 10,582 14,165 1967-2013 Withdrawals 17,445 13,330 16,676 13,871 12,965 13,354...

194

Colorado Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

140 -3,442 1,760 -3,128 -2,570 -3,404 1967-2013 Injections 39,034 45,861 43,250 51,469 59,096 66,935 1967-2013 Withdrawals 36,894 42,419 45,010 48,341 56,525 63,531...

195

West Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008 2009 2010from Sameper

196

Wyoming Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008Sep-14Thousand CubicPropane-Air98,448

197

Wyoming Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008Sep-14Thousand

198

Underground Natural Gas in Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear SecurityTensile Strain Switched Ferromagnetism in Layeredof2014National Nuclear SecuritySalaryandAdministration

199

Ohio Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecadeDecade (MillionThousand Cubic Feet)7 5 1

200

Oklahoma Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecadeDecadeFeet)Decade Year-0313,210 337,260

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


201

Oregon Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996)Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2Feet)Thousand Cubic29,201

202

Pennsylvania Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996)DecadeYear Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun JulThousand Cubic

203

Underground Natural Gas Working Storage Capacity - Methodology  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYear Jan

204

Working Gas in Underground Storage Figure  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYearFeet)perWesternPipeline2

205

Working Gas in Underground Storage Figure  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYearFeet)perWesternPipeline2Gas in

206

Alabama Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet) BaseSep-14 Oct-14per Thousand 2007

207

Alabama Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet) BaseSep-14 Oct-14per Thousand 20076,900

208

Alaska Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet)Year Jan Feb Mar119,0392008 2009 201038,017

209

Alaska Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet)Year Jan Feb Mar119,0392008 2009 201038,017

210

Tennessee Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand Cubic4,630.2per Thousand Cubic340 340 340 340 340 340

211

Tennessee Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand Cubic4,630.2per Thousand Cubic340 340 340 340 340

212

Texas Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand Cubic4,630.2perSep-14Base22,667 28,167 4605,250

213

Texas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand Cubic4,630.2perSep-14Base22,667 28,167

214

The Basics of Underground Natural Gas Storage  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand Cubic4,630.2perSep-14Base22,667The Basics of

215

Indiana Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0 0Year Jan Feb MarYearper0 0 0

216

Indiana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0 0Year Jan Feb MarYearper0 0 0114,937

217

Iowa Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0 0YearDecadeThousand Cubic7 3 2 1 0

218

Iowa Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0 0YearDecadeThousand Cubic7 3 2 1

219

Kansas Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0Month Previous YearThousand1 3 2 4

220

Kansas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0Month Previous YearThousand1 3 2

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


221

Kentucky Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15IndustrialVehicleThousand Cubic20

222

Kentucky Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15IndustrialVehicleThousand Cubic2020,359

223

Louisiana Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14343 342 3289886,084 889,5705,020440 0537,662

224

Louisiana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14343 342 3289886,084 889,5705,020440

225

Maryland Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14343Decade81 170 115 89 116 10761,187 63,105

226

Maryland Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14343Decade81 170 115 89 116 10761,187

227

Michigan Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 04 19 15 15 15 3YearDecade Year-0per9 6

228

Michigan Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 04 19 15 15 15 3YearDecade Year-0per9 61,062,339

229

Minnesota Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 04 19 15 15Thousand CubicYear46 47 12 20 96,591

230

Minnesota Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 04 19 15 15Thousand CubicYear46 47 12 20

231

Mississippi Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 04 19 15Year JanThousand Cubic0 0 0 5,774 0

232

Mississippi Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 04 19 15Year JanThousand Cubic0 0 0 5,774

233

Missouri Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 04 19 15YearThousandDecade(Million Cubic3

234

Missouri Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 04 19 15YearThousandDecade(Million Cubic332,876

235

Montana Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 04 19343 369 384FuelYear125 137 186 192

236

Montana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 04 19343 369 384FuelYear125 137 186 19274,201

237

The Basics of Underground Natural Gas Storage  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--State Offshore Shale Proved Reserves (BillionAnalysis >

238

Weekly Working Gas in Underground Storage  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S. NaturalA. Michael SchaalNovember1. Foreign sales ofLiquidsWater0,

239

Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia,(Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing ReservoirsYear-Month Week 1 Week 2 Week 3Processing: TheTotal

240

Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia,(Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing ReservoirsYear-Month Week 1 Week 2 Week 3Processing:

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


241

Underground Storage Tank Management (District of Columbia)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The  installation, upgrade and operation of any petroleum UST (>110 gallons) or hazardous substance UST System, including heating oil tanks over 1,100 gallons capacity in the District requires a...

242

Colorado Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 633 622 56623 4623 42 180 208 283 6076,258

243

Colorado Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 633 622 56623 4623 42 180 208 283 6076,25895,068

244

Illinois Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0 0 0 1996-2005 Lease9.5 9.2 8.7

245

Illinois Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0 0 0 1996-2005 Lease9.5 9.2

246

Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30 2013 Macroeconomicper8,170 8,310 8,304 8,368 8,307 8,528 1992-2015)

247

Arkansas Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS98,,,1999,0,0,1e+15,1469,6,01179,"WAT","HY"Tables andA 6 J (Million CubicDecadeBaseper1 0 1112,352

248

California Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998 10,643 10,998 10,998 10,64397 272 522 542 627 606 1996-201323 46

249

Utah Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand28 198Separation 321Working40 235 257 258 3683

250

Utah Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand28 198Separation 321Working40 235 257 258

251

Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand28Decreases (BillionSeparation 2,3780 08,530 9,169

252

Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand28Decreases (BillionSeparation 2,3780 08,530

253

Washington Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand28Decreases349,980Additions89 5.87Same1.7 1.8,800

254

Washington Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand28Decreases349,980Additions89 5.87Same1.7

255

Underground CO2 Storage | GE Global Research  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsrucLasDelivered energy consumption by sectorlong version)

256

Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecember 2005 (Thousand9,0,InformationU.S. Crude Oil31 E Annual Download55,035 Salt

257

Oregon Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas,095,3628,527 9,029 8,794 2011-2013Decade Year-0(Million29,415

258

Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas,095,3628,527 9,029 8,794CubicExports of CrudeDegrees API

259

Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas,095,3628,527 9,029 8,794CubicExports of CrudeDegrees

260

Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas,095,3628,527 9,029 8,794CubicExports of CrudeDegreesMethodology

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


261

Pennsylvania Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas,095,3628,527 9,029Cubic(Dollars per Thousand Cubic 0 0

262

Arkansas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 633 622 566 8021 1 2 22008 2009 2010 2011 20122,000

263

California Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 633 622 56623 46 47 62 53 52 1996-2013498,705 513,005

264

Natural Gas In Underground Storage (Summary)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet) Year Jan Feb Marthrough Monthly Download Series History Download

265

Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet) Year Jan Feb Marthrough Monthly2. Average Annual31,941341,2138

266

Nebraska Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet) Year Jan Feb MarthroughYear Jan Feb Mar AprThousand9 0.8

267

Nebraska Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet) Year Jan Feb MarthroughYear Jan Feb Mar AprThousand9 0.84,850

268

New Mexico Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet) Year Jan FebFeet) Decade

269

New York Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet) Year Jan FebFeet)SalesYear Jan Feb Mar0 0 0 0 0 08.1228,613

270

Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) in Kansas (Million15,134,6442,869,960 Annual55,035 Salt

271

Ohio Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet) Year JanProduction 4 125 2006Year Jan Feb MarThousand0572,477

272

Oklahoma Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet) Year JanProduction 4 125Feet)Same

273

Gas storage plays critical role in deregulated U. S. marketplace  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Oil Gas Journal for the first time has compiled a county-by-county list of underground natural-gas storage operating in the US on Sept. 1. Nearly 3.1 tcf of working gas in storage is currently operated. As will be discussed, several projects to add capacity are under way or planned before 2000. To collect the data, OGJ contacted every company reported by the American Gas Association, U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or the US Department of Energy to have operated storage in the past 2 years. The results were combined with other published information to form Table 1 which provides base, working, and total gas capacities for storage fields, types of reservoirs used, and daily design injection and withdrawal rates. The paper also discusses deregulation, what's ahead, and salt cavern storage.

True, W.R.

1994-09-12T23:59:59.000Z

274

DEVELOPMENT OF METHODOLOGY AND FIELD DEPLOYABLE SAMPLING TOOLS FOR SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL INTERROGATION IN LIQUID STORAGE  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This project developed methodology and field deployable tools (test kits) to analyze the chemical and microbiological condition of the fuel storage medium and determine the oxide thickness on the spent fuel basin materials. The overall objective of this project was to determine the amount of time fuel has spent in a storage basin to determine if the operation of the reactor and storage basin is consistent with safeguard declarations or expectations. This project developed and validated forensic tools that can be used to predict the age and condition of spent nuclear fuels stored in liquid basins based on key physical, chemical and microbiological basin characteristics. Key parameters were identified based on a literature review, the parameters were used to design test cells for corrosion analyses, tools were purchased to analyze the key parameters, and these were used to characterize an active spent fuel basin, the Savannah River Site (SRS) L-Area basin. The key parameters identified in the literature review included chloride concentration, conductivity, and total organic carbon level. Focus was also placed on aluminum based cladding because of their application to weapons production. The literature review was helpful in identifying important parameters, but relationships between these parameters and corrosion rates were not available. Bench scale test systems were designed, operated, harvested, and analyzed to determine corrosion relationships between water parameters and water conditions, chemistry and microbiological conditions. The data from the bench scale system indicated that corrosion rates were dependent on total organic carbon levels and chloride concentrations. The highest corrosion rates were observed in test cells amended with sediment, a large microbial inoculum and an organic carbon source. A complete characterization test kit was field tested to characterize the SRS L-Area spent fuel basin. The sampling kit consisted of a TOC analyzer, a YSI multiprobe, and a thickness probe. The tools were field tested to determine their ease of use, reliability, and determine the quality of data that each tool could provide. Characterization was done over a two day period in June 2011, and confirmed that the L Area basin is a well operated facility with low corrosion potential.

Berry, T.; Milliken, C.; Martinez-Rodriguez, M.; Hathcock, D.; Heitkamp, M.

2012-06-04T23:59:59.000Z

275

EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Aquifer Storage Reservoir...  

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

Aquifer Storage Reservoir Configuration About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 20072008 with selected updates Aquifer Underground...

276

THE WIDE-AREA ENERGY STORAGE AND MANAGEMENT SYSTEM PHASE II Final Report - Flywheel Field Tests  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This research was conducted by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) operated for the U.S. department of Energy (DOE) by Battelle Memorial Institute for Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), California Institute for Energy and Environment (CIEE) and California Energy Commission (CEC). A wide-area energy management system (WAEMS) is a centralized control system that operates energy storage devices (ESDs) located in different places to provide energy and ancillary services that can be shared among balancing authorities (BAs). The goal of this research is to conduct flywheel field tests, investigate the technical characteristics and economics of combined hydro-flywheel regulation services that can be shared between Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and California Independent System Operator (CAISO) controlled areas. This report is the second interim technical report for Phase II of the WAEMS project. This report presents: 1) the methodology of sharing regulation service between balancing authorities, 2) the algorithm to allocate the regulation signal between the flywheel and hydro power plant to minimize the wear-and-tear of the hydro power plants, 3) field results of the hydro-flywheel regulation service (conducted by the Beacon Power), and 4) the performance metrics and economic analysis of the combined hydro-flywheel regulation service.

Lu, Ning; Makarov, Yuri V.; Weimar, Mark R.; Rudolph, Frank; Murthy, Shashikala; Arseneaux, Jim; Loutan, Clyde; Chowdhury, S.

2010-08-31T23:59:59.000Z

277

Underground Injection Control (West Virginia)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This rule set forth criteria and standards for the requirements which apply to the State Underground Injection Control Program (U.I.C.). The UIC permit program regulates underground injections by...

278

Long-timescale interaction of CO2 storage with reservoir and seal: Miller and Brae natural analogue fields North Sea  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

power generation by shift of natural methane gas to hydrogen and pre-combustion separation of CO2 Background Depleted oil or gas fields, naturally rich in CO2, provide an immediate opportunity for long1 Long-timescale interaction of CO2 storage with reservoir and seal: Miller and Brae natural

Haszeldine, Stuart

279

Natural gas storage - end user interaction. Task 2. Topical report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

New opportunities have been created for underground gas storage as a result of recent regulatory developments in the energy industry. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Order 636 directly changed the economics of gas storage nationwide. This paper discusses the storage of natural gas, storage facilities, and factors affecting the current, and future situation for natural gas storage.

NONE

1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

280

Feasibility of Aquifer Storage Recovery for the Mustang, Oklahoma Well Field.  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

??The purpose of this study was to determine the economic and geochemical feasibility of utilizing aquifer storage recovery (ASR) technology to store water in the… (more)

Wright, Krishna E.

2007-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


281

Compressed air energy storage technology program. Annual report for 1979  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The objectives of the Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES) program are to establish stability criteria for large underground reservoirs in salt domes, hard rock, and porous rock used for air storage in utility applications, and to develop second-generation CAES technologies that have minimal or no dependence on petroleum fuels. During the year reported reports have been issued on field studies on CAES on aquifers and in salt, stability, and design criteria for CAES and for pumped hydro-storage caverns, laboratory studies of CAES in porous rock reservoris have continued. Research has continued on combined CAES/Thermal Energy Storage, CAES/Solar systems, coal-fired fluidized bed combustors for CAES, and two-reservoir advanced CAES concepts. (LCL)

Loscutoff, W.V.

1980-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

282

Using Big Data and Smart Field Technology for Detecting Leakage in a CO2 Storage Projects  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

and Storage), captures the CO2 from production sources like the power plants (coal or gas fired) and transfers leaking from the reservoir using the real-time data streams demonstrates the power of pattern recognition it to sink or storage site (geologic unit). Hydrocarbon reservoirs, deep saline reservoirs and coal bed

Mohaghegh, Shahab

283

Underground waste barrier structure  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

Disclosed is an underground waste barrier structure that consists of waste material, a first container formed of activated carbonaceous material enclosing the waste material, a second container formed of zeolite enclosing the first container, and clay covering the second container. The underground waste barrier structure is constructed by forming a recessed area within the earth, lining the recessed area with a layer of clay, lining the clay with a layer of zeolite, lining the zeolite with a layer of activated carbonaceous material, placing the waste material within the lined recessed area, forming a ceiling over the waste material of a layer of activated carbonaceous material, a layer of zeolite, and a layer of clay, the layers in the ceiling cojoining with the respective layers forming the walls of the structure, and finally, covering the ceiling with earth.

Saha, Anuj J. (Hamburg, NY); Grant, David C. (Gibsonia, PA)

1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

284

Rainwater Harvesting: Soil Storage and Infiltration System  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

A soil storage and infiltration system collects rainfall runoff from the roofs of buildings and directs it underground where it infiltrates the soil. Such a system conserves water and protects it from surface pollution. This publication describes...

Mechell, Justin; Lesikar, Bruce J.

2008-08-11T23:59:59.000Z

285

AQUIFER THERMAL ENERGY STORAGE. A NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF AUBURN UNIVERSITY FIELD EXPERIMENTS  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

C.F. , 1980, "Aquifer Thermal Energy - Parameter Study" (infrom the Auburn University Thermal Energy Storage , LBL No.studies in aquifer thermal energy , Presented at the ~~~~~~~

Tsang, Chin Fu

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

286

Field Monitoring and Data Validation for Evaluating the Performance of Cool Storage Systems  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

of site #t2 showing the configuration of the chillers, storage tank and campus load, and the locationsof the monitoringpoints. Note that a number of essential control valves are not shown in this diagram. In general, three operating modes are used at site... and ..", cooling from storage carry the campus load during on-peak periods. Instrumentation The instrumentation at this site consisted of sensors and data loggers that had been previously installed, and additional sensors that were added to complete the measurement...

Elleson, J.S; Haberl, J.S.; Reddy, T.A.

287

ULTimateCO2 project: Field experiment in an underground rock laboratory to study the well sealing integrity in the context of CO2 geological storage  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

located at the surface. The long term well sealing integrity is therefore essential for the fluids confinements. The well sealing integrity can be lowered by geochemical reactions occurring between well the cement matrix. Understanding the near well sealing integrity then requires studying the potential

Paris-Sud XI, Université de

288

RADIOACTIVE WASTE STORAGE IN MINED CAVERNS IN CRYSTALLINE ROCK-RESULTS OF FIELD INVESTIGATIONS AT STRIPA, SWEDEN  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Waste Storage in Mined Caverns—Program Summary. LawrenceWASTE STORAGE IN MINED CAVERNS IN CRYSTALLINE ROCK- BESULTS

Witherspoon, P.A.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

289

Underground Injection Control Regulations (Kansas)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This article prohibits injection of hazardous or radioactive wastes into or above an underground source of drinking water, establishes permit conditions and states regulations for design,...

290

Underground Injection Control Rule (Vermont)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This rule regulates injection wells, including wells used by generators of hazardous or radioactive wastes, disposal wells within an underground source of drinking water, recovery of geothermal...

291

Flow characteristics in underground coal gasification  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

During the underground coal gasification field test at the Hoe Creek site No. 2, Wyoming, helium pulses were introduced to develop information to characterize the flow field, and to estimate the coefficients in dispersion models of the flow. Quantitative analysis of the tracer response curves shows an increasing departure from a plug flow regime with time because of the combined effects of the free and forced convection in addition to the complex non-uniformity of the flow field. The Peclet number was a function of temperature, pressure, gas recovery and characteristic velocity, as well as the split of the gas between the parallel streams in the model. 17 refs.

Chang, H.L.; Himmelblau, D.M.; Edgar, T.F.

1982-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

292

Impact of reservoir properties on mixing of inert cushion and natural gas in storage reservoirs.  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

??Underground natural gas storage is a process which effectively balances a variable demand market with a nearly constant supply of energy provided by the pipeline… (more)

Srinivasan, Balaji S.

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

293

Storage Ring Revised March 1994  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

.5.4.3. Ground Plane Epoxy #12; 136 Storage Ring #12; Storage Ring 137 8.5.5. Coil Winding Process #12; 138Chapter 8. Storage Ring Revised March 1994 8.1. Introduction -- 107 -- #12; 108 Storage Ring 8.2. Magnetic Design and Field Calculations 8.2.1. Conceptual Approach #12; Storage Ring 109 #12; 110 Storage

Brookhaven National Laboratory - Experiment 821

294

DOE Targets Rural Indiana Geologic Formation for CO2 Storage Field Test  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

A U.S. Department of Energy team of regional partners has begun injecting 8,000 tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) to evaluate the carbon storage potential and test the enhanced oil recovery (EOR) potential of the Mississippian-aged Clore Formation in Posey County, Ind.

295

Preliminary Notice of Violation, Pacific Underground Construction...  

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

Pacific Underground Construction, Inc. - WEA-2009-02 Preliminary Notice of Violation, Pacific Underground Construction, Inc. - WEA-2009-02 April 7, 2009 Issued to Pacific...

296

Production management techniques for water-drive gas reservoirs. Field No. 4; mid-continent aquifer gas storage reservoir. Volume 1. Topical report, January 1994  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A detailed reservoir characterization and numerical simulation study is presented for a mid-continent aquifer gas storage field. It is demonstrated that rate optimization during both injection and withdrawal cycles can significantly improve the performance of the storage reservoir. Performance improvements are realized in the form of a larger working volume of gas, a reduced cushion volume of gas, and decrease in field water production. By utilizing these reservoir management techniques gas storage operators will be able to minimize their base gas requirements, improve their economics, and determine whether the best use for a particular storage field is base loading or meeting peak day requirements. Volume I of this two-volume set contains a detailed technical discussion.

Hower, T.L.; Obernyer, S.L.

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

297

Underground radio technology saves miners and emergency response personnel  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsrucLasDelivered energy consumption by sectorlong version)Underground Natural Gas Storage by

298

Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan for Corrective Action Unit 124: Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada (Draft), Revision 0  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan addresses closure for Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 124, Areas 8, 15, and 16 Storage Tanks, identified in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order. Corrective Action Unit 124 consists of five Corrective Action Sites (CASs) located in Areas 8, 15, and 16 of the Nevada Test Site as follows: • 08-02-01, Underground Storage Tank • 15-02-01, Irrigation Piping • 16-02-03, Underground Storage Tank • 16-02-04, Fuel Oil Piping • 16-99-04, Fuel Line (Buried) and UST This plan provides the methodology of field activities necessary to gather information to close each CAS. There is sufficient information and process knowledge from historical documentation and investigations of similar sites regarding the expected nature and extent of potential contaminants to recommend closure of CAU 124 using the SAFER process.

Alfred Wickline

2007-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

299

Experiences and prospects of nuclear astrophysics in underground laboratories  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Impressive progress has been made in the course the last decades in understanding astrophysical objects. Increasing precision of nuclear physics data has contributed significantly to this success, but now a better understanding of several important findings is frequently limited by uncertainties related to the available nuclear physics data. Consequently it is desirable to improve significantly the quality of these data. An important step towards higher precision is an excellent signal to background ratio of the data. Placing an accelerator facility inside an underground laboratory reducing the cosmic ray induced background by six orders of magnitude is a powerful method to reach this goal, even though careful reduction of environmental and beam induced background must still be considered. Experience in the field of underground nuclear astrophysics has been gained since 20 years due to the pioneering work of the LUNA Collaboration (Laboratory for Underground Nuclear Astrophysics) operating inside the underground laboratories of the Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso (LNGS) in Italy. Based on the success of this work presently also several other projects for underground laboratories dedicated to nuclear astrophysics are being pursued worldwide. This contribution will give a survey of the past experience in underground nuclear astrophysics as well as an outlook on future developments.

Junker, M. [INFN - Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso, Via Acitelli, 22, 67100 L'Aquila, Località Assergi (Italy)

2014-05-09T23:59:59.000Z

300

Water intrusion in underground structures  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

This thesis presents a study of the permissible groundwater infiltration rates in underground structures, the consequences of this leakage and the effectiveness of mitigation measures. Design guides and codes do not restrict, ...

Nazarchuk, Alex

2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


301

On CO2 Behavior in the Subsurface, Following Leakage from a Geologic Storage Reservoir  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

1 - 16, 1987. Skinner, L. CO2 Blowouts: An Emerging Problem,Assessment for Underground CO2 Storage, paper 234, presentedReservoir Performance Risk in CO2 Storage Projects, paper

Pruess, Karsten

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

302

Compilation and summary of technical and economic assessments in the field of energy storage  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Information is presented which was extracted from various assessments of energy storage technologies conducted during the past four years, primarily under the auspices of the Office of Energy Systems Research and Development (formerly the Division of Energy Storage Systems). A thorough search of the relevant literature was conducted using the DOE/RECON computerized data base and other sources. Only tabular or graphic material was abstracted from the documents. The material has been organized in two ways: by the intended end use, i.e., vehicles, utility load leveling, residential load leveling, industrial, and solar, and within each end use, by technology. The summary tables attempt to compare the results of different studies of the same technology or end use. No attempt is made to summarize the conclusions of each individual study, but rather to point out areas of agreement or disagreement between them. The reader should be aware of the risks in making comparisons between studies conducted by researchers with possibly differing purposes and assumptions. Any conclusions based on the summary sections are more indicative than definitive.

DeVries, J.

1981-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

303

Flow characteristics in underground coal gasification  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

During the Hoe Creek No. 2 (Wyoming) underground-coal-gasification field test, researchers introduced helium pulses to characterize the flow field and to estimate the coefficients in dispersion models of the flow. Flow models such as the axial-dispersion and parallel tanks-in-series models allowed interpretation of the in situ combustion flow field from the residence time distribution of the tracer gas. A quantitative analysis of the Hoe Creek tracer response curves revealed an increasing departure from a plug-flow regime with time, which was due to the combined effects of the free and forced convection in addition to the complex nonuniformity of the flow field. The Peclet number was a function of temperature, pressure, gas recovery, and characteristic velocity, as well as the split of the gas between the parallel streams in the model.

Chang, H.L.; Himmelblau, D.M.; Edgar, T.F.

1982-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

304

Underground Coal Thermal Treatment  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The long-term objective of this work is to develop a transformational energy production technology by insitu thermal treatment of a coal seam for the production of substitute natural gas (SNG) while leaving much of the coalâ??s carbon in the ground. This process converts coal to a high-efficiency, low-GHG emitting gas fuel. It holds the potential of providing environmentally acceptable access to previously unusable coal resources. This topical report discusses the development of experimental capabilities, the collection of available data, and the development of simulation tools to obtain process thermo-chemical and geo-thermal parameters in preparation for the eventual demonstration in a coal seam. It also includes experimental and modeling studies of CO{sub 2} sequestration. Efforts focused on: â?¢ Constructing a suite of three different coal pyrolysis reactors. These reactors offer the ability to gather heat transfer, mass transfer and kinetic data during coal pyrolysis under conditions that mimic in situ conditions (Subtask 6.1). â?¢ Studying the operational parameters for various underground thermal treatment processes for oil shale and coal and completing a design matrix analysis for the underground coal thermal treatment (UCTT). This analysis yielded recommendations for terms of targeted coal rank, well orientation, rubblization, presence of oxygen, temperature, pressure, and heating sources (Subtask 6.2). â?¢ Developing capabilities for simulating UCTT, including modifying the geometry as well as the solution algorithm to achieve long simulation times in a rubblized coal bed by resolving the convective channels occurring in the representative domain (Subtask 6.3). â?¢ Studying the reactive behavior of carbon dioxide (CO{sub 2}) with limestone, sandstone, arkose (a more complex sandstone) and peridotite, including mineralogical changes and brine chemistry for the different initial rock compositions (Subtask 6.4). Arkose exhibited the highest tendency of participating in mineral reactions, which can be attributed to the geochemical complexity of its initial mineral assemblage. In experiments with limestone, continuous dissolution was observed with the release of CO{sub 2} gas, indicated by the increasing pressure in the reactor (formation of a gas chamber). This occurred due to the lack of any source of alkali to buffer the solution. Arkose has the geochemical complexity for permanent sequestration of CO{sub 2} as carbonates and is also relatively abundant. The effect of including NH{sub 3} in the injected gas stream was also investigated in this study. Precipitation of calcite and trace amounts of ammonium zeolites was observed. A batch geochemical model was developed using Geochemists Workbench (GWB). Degassing effect in the experiments was corrected using the sliding fugacity model in GWB. Experimental and simulation results were compared and a reasonable agreement between the two was observed.

P. Smith; M. Deo; E. Eddings; A. Sarofim; K. Gueishen; M. Hradisky; K. Kelly; P. Mandalaparty; H. Zhang

2011-10-30T23:59:59.000Z

305

DOE-Sponsored Field Test Finds Potential for Permanent Storage of CO2 in Lignite Seams  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

A field test sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy has demonstrated that opportunities to permanently store carbon in unmineable seams of lignite may be more widespread than previously documented.

306

DOE Manual Studies 11 Major CO2 Geologic Storage Formations  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

A comprehensive study of 11 geologic formations suitable for permanent underground carbon dioxide (CO2) storage is contained in a new manual issued by the U.S. Department of Energy.

307

NGLW RCRA Storage Study  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC) at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory contains radioactive liquid waste in underground storage tanks at the INTEC Tank Farm Facility (TFF). INTEC is currently treating the waste by evaporation to reduce the liquid volume for continued storage, and by calcination to reduce and convert the liquid to a dry waste form for long-term storage in calcine bins. Both treatment methods and activities in support of those treatment operations result in Newly Generated Liquid Waste (NGLW) being sent to TFF. The storage tanks in the TFF are underground, contained in concrete vaults with instrumentation, piping, transfer jets, and managed sumps in case of any liquid accumulation in the vault. The configuration of these tanks is such that Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations apply. The TFF tanks were assessed several years ago with respect to the RCRA regulations and they were found to be deficient. This study considers the configuration of the current tanks and the RCRA deficiencies identified for each. The study identifies four potential methods and proposes a means of correcting the deficiencies. The cost estimates included in the study account for construction cost; construction methods to minimize work exposure to chemical hazards, radioactive contamination, and ionizing radiation hazards; project logistics; and project schedule. The study also estimates the tank volumes benefit associated with each corrective action to support TFF liquid waste management planning.

R. J. Waters; R. Ochoa; K. D. Fritz; D. W. Craig

2000-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

308

2009 underground/longwall mining buyer's guide  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The guide lists US companies supplying equipment and services to underground mining operations. An index by product category is included.

NONE

2009-06-15T23:59:59.000Z

309

Wiener filtering with a seismic underground array at the Sanford Underground Research Facility  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

A seismic array has been deployed at the Sanford Underground Research Facility in the former Homestake mine, South Dakota, to study the underground seismic environment. This includes exploring the advantages of constructing a third-generation gravitational-wave detector underground. A major noise source for these detectors would be Newtonian noise, which is induced by fluctuations in the local gravitational field. The hope is that a combination of a low-noise seismic environment and coherent noise subtraction using seismometers in the vicinity of the detector could suppress the Newtonian noise to below the projected noise floor for future gravitational-wave detectors. In this paper, we use Wiener filtering techniques to subtract coherent noise in a seismic array in the frequency band 0.05 -- 1\\,Hz. This achieves more than an order of magnitude noise cancellation over a majority of this band. We show how this subtraction would benefit proposed future low-frequency gravitational wave detectors. The variation in the Wiener filter coefficients over the course of the day, including how local activities impact the filter, is analyzed. We also study the variation in coefficients over the course of a month, showing the stability of the filter with time. How varying the filter order affects the subtraction performance is also explored. It is shown that optimizing filter order can significantly improve subtraction of seismic noise, which gives hope for future gravitational-wave detectors to address Newtonian noise.

Michael Coughlin; Jan Harms; Nelson Christensen; Vladimir Dergachev; Riccardo DeSalvo; Shivaraj Kandhasamy; Vuk Mandic

2014-08-19T23:59:59.000Z

310

Hydro-mechanical modelling of geological CO2 storage and the study of possible caprock fracture mechanisms  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Hydro-mechanical modelling of geological CO2 storage and the study of possible caprock fracture element modelling of a hypothetical underground carbon dioxide (CO2) storage operation. The hydro

311

High Temperature Superconducting Underground Cable  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this Project was to design, build, install and demonstrate the technical feasibility of an underground high temperature superconducting (HTS) power cable installed between two utility substations. In the first phase two HTS cables, 320 m and 30 m in length, were constructed using 1st generation BSCCO wire. The two 34.5 kV, 800 Arms, 48 MVA sections were connected together using a superconducting joint in an underground vault. In the second phase the 30 m BSCCO cable was replaced by one constructed with 2nd generation YBCO wire. 2nd generation wire is needed for commercialization because of inherent cost and performance benefits. Primary objectives of the Project were to build and operate an HTS cable system which demonstrates significant progress towards commercial progress and addresses real world utility concerns such as installation, maintenance, reliability and compatibility with the existing grid. Four key technical areas addressed were the HTS cable and terminations (where the cable connects to the grid), cryogenic refrigeration system, underground cable-to-cable joint (needed for replacement of cable sections) and cost-effective 2nd generation HTS wire. This was the world’s first installation and operation of an HTS cable underground, between two utility substations as well as the first to demonstrate a cable-to-cable joint, remote monitoring system and 2nd generation HTS.

Farrell, Roger, A.

2010-02-28T23:59:59.000Z

312

TSUAHXETSUAHXE UndergroUnd tank  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

USer waterheatexchange waterheatexchange general exhaUSt lab exhaUSt warmairexhaUSt radiant panel heat radiant panel heat by night air, then stored underground. cold water travels through floors and ceiling panels to absorb heat rain and snowmelt in toilets saves water and reduces stormwater runoff photovoltaic panels turn solar

Schladow, S. Geoffrey

313

Gas Storage Technology Consortium  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Gas storage is a critical element in the natural gas industry. Producers, transmission & distribution companies, marketers, and end users all benefit directly from the load balancing function of storage. The unbundling process has fundamentally changed the way storage is used and valued. As an unbundled service, the value of storage is being recovered at rates that reflect its value. Moreover, the marketplace has differentiated between various types of storage services, and has increasingly rewarded flexibility, safety, and reliability. The size of the natural gas market has increased and is projected to continue to increase towards 30 trillion cubic feet (TCF) over the next 10 to 15 years. Much of this increase is projected to come from electric generation, particularly peaking units. Gas storage, particularly the flexible services that are most suited to electric loads, is critical in meeting the needs of these new markets. In order to address the gas storage needs of the natural gas industry, an industry-driven consortium was created--the Gas Storage Technology Consortium (GSTC). The objective of the GSTC is to provide a means to accomplish industry-driven research and development designed to enhance operational flexibility and deliverability of the Nation's gas storage system, and provide a cost effective, safe, and reliable supply of natural gas to meet domestic demand. This report addresses the activities for the quarterly period of April 1 to June 30, 2006. Key activities during this time period include: (1) Develop and process subcontract agreements for the eight projects selected for cofunding at the February 2006 GSTC Meeting; (2) Compiling and distributing the three 2004 project final reports to the GSTC Full members; (3) Develop template, compile listserv, and draft first GSTC Insider online newsletter; (4) Continue membership recruitment; (5) Identify projects and finalize agenda for the fall GSTC/AGA Underground Storage Committee Technology Transfer Workshop in San Francisco, CA; and (6) Identify projects and prepare draft agenda for the fall GSTC Technology Transfer Workshop in Pittsburgh, PA.

Joel L. Morrison; Sharon L. Elder

2006-07-06T23:59:59.000Z

314

Geologic Carbon Sequestration: Mitigating Climate Change by Injecting CO2 Underground (LBNL Summer Lecture Series)  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Summer Lecture Series 2009: Climate change provides strong motivation to reduce CO2 emissions from the burning of fossil fuels. Carbon dioxide capture and storage involves the capture, compression, and transport of CO2 to geologically favorable areas, where its injected into porous rock more than one kilometer underground for permanent storage. Oldenburg, who heads Berkeley Labs Geologic Carbon Sequestration Program, will focus on the challenges, opportunities, and research needs of this innovative technology.

Oldenburg, Curtis M. (LBNL Earth Sciences Division) [LBNL Earth Sciences Division

2009-07-21T23:59:59.000Z

315

Geologic Carbon Sequestration: Mitigating Climate Change by Injecting CO2 Underground (LBNL Summer Lecture Series)  

ScienceCinema (OSTI)

Summer Lecture Series 2009: Climate change provides strong motivation to reduce CO2 emissions from the burning of fossil fuels. Carbon dioxide capture and storage involves the capture, compression, and transport of CO2 to geologically favorable areas, where its injected into porous rock more than one kilometer underground for permanent storage. Oldenburg, who heads Berkeley Labs Geologic Carbon Sequestration Program, will focus on the challenges, opportunities, and research needs of this innovative technology.

Oldenburg, Curtis M [LBNL Earth Sciences Division

2011-04-28T23:59:59.000Z

316

Geologic Carbon Sequestration: Mitigating Climate Change by Injecting CO2 Underground  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

July 21, 2009 Berkeley Lab summer lecture: Climate change provides strong motivation to reduce CO2 emissions from the burning of fossil fuels. Carbon dioxide capture and storage involves the capture, compression, and transport of CO2 to geologically favorable areas, where its injected into porous rock more than one kilometer underground for permanent storage. Oldenburg, who heads Berkeley Labs Geologic Carbon Sequestration Program, will focus on the challenges, opportunities, and research needs of this innovative technology.

Oldenburg

2009-07-30T23:59:59.000Z

317

Commercial potential of natural gas storage in lined rock caverns (LRC)  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The geologic conditions in many regions of the United States will not permit the development of economical high-deliverability gas storage in salt caverns. These regions include the entire Eastern Seaboard; several northern states, notably Minnesota and Wisconsin; many of the Rocky Mountain States; and most of the Pacific Northwest. In late 1997, the United States Department of Energy (USDOE) Federal Energy Technology Center engaged Sofregaz US to investigate the commercialization potential of natural gas storage in Lined Rock Caverns (LRC). Sofregaz US teamed with Gaz de France and Sydkraft, who had formed a consortium, called LRC, to perform the study for the USDOE. Underground storage of natural gas is generally achieved in depleted oil and gas fields, aquifers, and solution-mined salt caverns. These storage technologies require specific geologic conditions. Unlined rock caverns have been used for decades to store hydrocarbons - mostly liquids such as crude oil, butane, and propane. The maximum operating pressure in unlined rock caverns is limited, since the host rock is never entirely impervious. The LRC technology allows a significant increase in the maximum operating pressure over the unlined storage cavern concept, since the gas in storage is completely contained with an impervious liner. The LRC technology has been under development in Sweden by Sydkraft since 1987. The development process has included extensive technical studies, laboratory testing, field tests, and most recently includes a storage facility being constructed in southern Sweden (Skallen). The LRC development effort has shown that the concept is technically and economically viable. The Skallen storage facility will have a rock cover of 115 meters (375 feet), a storage volume of 40,000 cubic meters (250,000 petroleum barrels), and a maximum operating pressure of 20 MPa (2,900 psi). There is a potential for commercialization of the LRC technology in the United States. Two regions were studied in some detail - the Northeast and the Southeast. The investment cost for an LRC facility in the Northeast is approximately $182 million and $343 million for a 2.6-billion cubic foot (bcf) working gas facility and a 5.2-bcf working gas storage facility, respectively. The relatively high investment cost is a strong function of the cost of labor in the Northeast. The labor union-related rules and requirements in the Northeast result in much higher underground construction costs than might result in Sweden, for example. The LRC technology gas storage service is compared to other alternative technologies. The LRC technology gas storage service was found to be competitive with other alternative technologies for a variety of market scenarios.

NONE

1999-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

318

New Mexico Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

11,649 -2,967 -2,028 -12,074 9,944 7,015 1967-2014 Injections 21,094 18,643 19,738 22,732 14,077 14,010 1967-2014 Withdrawals 9,445 15,676 17,710 10,658 24,021 21,025...

319

Design of an underground compressed hydrogen gas storage.  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

??Hydrogen has received significant attention throughout the past decade as the United States focuses on diversifying its energy portfolio to include sources of energy beyond… (more)

Powell, Tobin Micah

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

320

Net Withdrawals of Natural Gas from Underground Storage (Summary...  

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

Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Oil Wells Gross Withdrawals From Shale Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Coalbed Wells...

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


321

Natural Gas Withdrawals from Underground Storage (Annual Supply...  

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

Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Oil Wells Gross Withdrawals From Shale Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Coalbed Wells...

322

Natural Gas Withdrawals from Underground Storage (Annual Supply...  

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

Power Price Gross Withdrawals Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Oil Wells Gross Withdrawals From Shale Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Coalbed Wells...

323

Seasonal underground thermal energy storage using smart thermosiphon arrays.  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

??With oil prices high, and energy prices generally increasing, the pursuit of more economical and less polluting methods of climate control has led to the… (more)

Jankovich, Philip Martin

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

324

Numerical Simulation of Underground Solar Thermal Energy Storage.  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

??The United States Department of Energy indicates that 97% of all homes in the US use fossil fuels either directly or indirectly for space heating.… (more)

Sweet, Marshall

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

325

EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Underground Natural Gas Storage  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmospheric Optical Depth7-1D: Vegetation Proposed NewcatalystNeutron scattering characterizesAnalysisPipelines Map

326

EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Underground Natural Gas Storage  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmospheric Optical Depth7-1D: Vegetation Proposed NewcatalystNeutron scattering characterizesAnalysisPipelines MapFacilities

327

EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Underground Natural Gas Storage  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmospheric Optical Depth7-1D: Vegetation Proposed NewcatalystNeutron scattering characterizesAnalysisPipelines

328

West Virginia Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion CubicCubic39,287Sales1 1 1Cubic Feet)

329

West Virginia Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion CubicCubic39,287Sales1 1 1Cubic

330

West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Decade

331

West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008 2009 2010 2011 2012DecadeCubic

332

West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008 2009 2010 2011

333

West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008 2009 2010 2011Feet) Year Jan Feb

334

West Virginia Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working Gas) (Million  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008 2009 2010 2011Feet)YearYearCubic

335

West Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008 2009 2010from Sameper Thousand14

336

West Virginia Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008 2009 2010from SameperCubic Feet)

337

Western Consuming Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008 2009 2010from SameperCubic

338

Wisconsin Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008 2009 2010from2009 201060

339

Wisconsin Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008 2009 2010from2009 201060(Million Cubic

340

Wisconsin Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008 2009 2010from2009 201060(Million

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


341

Withdrawals of Natural Gas from Underground Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008 2009 2010from2009Vehicle2.9

342

Wyoming Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008Sep-14 Oct-14Year Jan Feb

343

Wyoming Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008Sep-14 Oct-14Year Jan FebFeet) Year

344

Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008Sep-14 Oct-14YearYear Jan FebYear Jan

345

Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008Sep-14 Oct-14YearYear Jan FebYear

346

Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008Sep-14 Oct-14YearYear Jan FebYearDecade

347

Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008Sep-14 Oct-14YearYear Jan

348

Wyoming Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working Gas) (Million Cubic  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008Sep-14 Oct-14YearYearYear Jan

349

Wyoming Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30NaturalThousandExtensions (Billion2008Sep-14ThousandFeet) Working Natural

350

U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsrucLasDelivered energy consumption by sector Transportation EnergyGlossary7,148.4NA

351

Underground Natural Gas Working Storage Capacity - Energy Information  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear SecurityTensile Strain Switched Ferromagnetism in Layeredof2014National Nuclear SecuritySalaryandAdministration

352

New Jersey Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) in KansasYear JanDecade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2(Million

353

New Jersey Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) in KansasYear JanDecade Year-0 Year-1

354

New Jersey Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) in KansasYear JanDecade Year-0 Year-1Withdrawals

355

New Mexico Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) in KansasYearDecade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2

356

New Mexico Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) in KansasYearDecade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2Feet) Year

357

New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) in KansasYearDecadeYear Jan Feb Mar Apr May

358

New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) in KansasYearDecadeYear Jan Feb Mar Apr MayYear Jan Feb

359

New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) in KansasYearDecadeYear Jan Feb Mar Apr MayYear Jan

360

New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) in KansasYearDecadeYear Jan Feb Mar Apr MayYear

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


361

New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) in KansasYearDecadeYear Jan Feb Mar Apr MayYearYear Jan

362

New Mexico Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) in KansasYearDecadeYear Jan Feb136 149 180 185

363

New York Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) in KansasYearDecadeYearDecade Year-0 Year-1Feet)

364

New York Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) in KansasYearDecadeYearDecade Year-0

365

New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) in KansasYearDecadeYearDecadeandTotal ConsumptionDecade

366

New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) in KansasYearDecadeYearDecadeandTotal

367

New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) in KansasYearDecadeYearDecadeandTotalFeet) Decade

368

New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) in KansasYearDecadeYearDecadeandTotalFeet)

369

New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) in KansasYearDecadeYearDecadeandTotalFeet)Year Jan

370

New York Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2Thousand Cubic

371

Nonsalt Producing Region Natural Gas Working Underground Storage (Billion  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecade Year-0 Year-18 2.415 - - -Cubic8 2009

372

North Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecade Year-0 Year-18 2.4156.09 5.50 4.60

373

North Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecade Year-0 Year-18 2.4156.09 5.50 4.60Operators

374

North Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecade Year-0 Year-18 2.4156.09 5.50

375

Ohio Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecadeDecade Year-0YearSalesDecade Year-0DecadeDecade

376

Ohio Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecadeDecade Year-0YearSalesDecade

377

Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecadeDecade (Million CubicDecade Year-0

378

Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecadeDecade (Million CubicDecade Year-0Year Jan Feb

379

Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecadeDecade (Million CubicDecade Year-0Year Jan

380

Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecadeDecade (Million CubicDecade Year-0Year

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


381

Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecadeDecade (Million CubicDecade Year-0YearYear Jan

382

Oklahoma Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecadeDecadeFeet) Year Jan Feb MarDecade

383

Oklahoma Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecadeDecadeFeet) Year Jan Feb MarDecadeFeet)

384

Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecadeDecadeFeet) YearTotal Consumption

385

Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecadeDecadeFeet) YearTotal ConsumptionYear Jan

386

Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecadeDecadeFeet) YearTotal ConsumptionYear

387

Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecadeDecadeFeet) YearTotal ConsumptionYearDecade

388

Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecadeDecadeFeet) YearTotal

389

Oklahoma Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working Gas) (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996) inDecadeDecadeFeet) YearTotalDecadeVented

390

Oregon Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996)Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5Decade

391

Oregon Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996)Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4

392

Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996)Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 (MillionDecade Year-0 Year-1

393

Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996)Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 (MillionDecade Year-0

394

Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996)Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 (MillionDecade Year-0Decade

395

Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996)Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 (MillionDecade

396

Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996)Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 (MillionDecadeYear Jan Feb

397

Oregon Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working Gas) (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996)Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2Feet) Working Gas)

398

Pennsylvania Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996)Decade Year-0Sales (BillionDecade Year-0 Year-1Feet)

399

Pennsylvania Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996)Decade Year-0Sales (BillionDecade Year-0

400

Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996)Decade Year-0SalesElements)5.88 4.563,594TotalDecade

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


401

Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996)Decade Year-0SalesElements)5.88

402

Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996)Decade Year-0SalesElements)5.88Feet) Decade

403

Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996)Decade Year-0SalesElements)5.88Feet)

404

Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996)Decade Year-0SalesElements)5.88Feet)Feet)

405

Pennsylvania Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996)DecadeYear Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul AugYear Jan

406

Pennsylvania Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working Gas) (Million  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996)DecadeYear Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul AugYear JanCubic

407

Pennsylvania Natural Gas in Underground Storage - Change in Working Gas  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996)DecadeYear Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul AugYear

408

Pennsylvania Natural Gas in Underground Storage - Change in Working Gas  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 10,998 9,933 10,998 10,643 10,998through 1996)DecadeYear Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul AugYearfrom Same

409

U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYear Jan Feb2009 2010 2011Decade

410

U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYear Jan Feb2009 2010 2011DecadeLower 48 States

411

Underground Base Natural Gas in Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYear Jan Feb2009Two-DimensionalGrossFeet)

412

Underground Working Natural Gas in Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYear Jan Monthly Download Series History Download

413

Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYear Jan MonthlyProduction%ReservesUtahYear

414

Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYear Jan MonthlyProduction%ReservesUtahYearYear

415

Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYear Jan

416

Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYear

417

Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYearFeet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul

418

Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYearFeet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

419

Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYearFeet) Year Jan Feb% ofYear3.99 4.22

420

Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYearFeet) Year Jan Feb% ofYear3.99

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


421

West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYearFeet)per Thousand Cubic Feet)inNA

422

West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYearFeet)per Thousand Cubic

423

Western Consuming Region Natural Gas Working Underground Storage (Billion  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYearFeet)per Thousand(BillionShaleCubic

424

Western Consuming Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYearFeet)per

425

Withdrawals of Natural Gas from Underground Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYearFeet)perWesternPipeline andThousand362

426

Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)Wyoming (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming

427

Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)Wyoming (Million Cubic Feet) WyomingFeet) Year

428

Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)Wyoming (Million Cubic Feet) WyomingFeet)

429

AGA Producing Region Natural Gas Working Underground Storage Capacity  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion Cubic

430

AGA Producing Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working Gas)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet) Base Gas) (Million Cubic Feet) AGA

431

AGA Producing Region Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet) Base Gas) (Million Cubic Feet)

432

AGA Producing Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet) Base Gas) (Million Cubic Feet)(Million Cubic

433

AGA Western Consuming Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet) Base Gas) (Million Cubic

434

AGA Western Consuming Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet) Base Gas) (Million Cubic(Million Cubic

435

AGA Western Consuming Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet) Base Gas) (Million Cubic(MillionGas)

436

AGA Western Consuming Region Underground Natural Gas Storage - All  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet) Base Gas) (MillionOperators 1,095,725

437

AGA WesternConsuming Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet) Base Gas) (MillionOperators

438

Alabama Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet) Base Gas)1,727

439

Alabama Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet) Base Gas)1,727Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr

440

Alabama Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet) BaseSep-14 Oct-14 Nov-14 Dec-14TotalYear Jan

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


441

Alabama Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet) BaseSep-14 Oct-14 Nov-14 Dec-14TotalYear

442

Alabama Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet) BaseSep-14 Oct-14 Nov-14

443

Alabama Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet) BaseSep-14 Oct-14 Nov-14Year Jan Feb Mar Apr

444

Alabama Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working Gas) (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet) BaseSep-14 Oct-14 Nov-14Year Jan

445

Alabama Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet) BaseSep-14 Oct-14per Thousand

446

Alaska Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet)

447

Alaska Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet)Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct

448

Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet)Year Jan Feb Mar Apr

449

Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet)Year Jan Feb Mar AprCubic Feet)

450

Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet)Year Jan Feb Mar AprCubic Feet)Decade

451

Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet)Year Jan Feb Mar AprCubic

452

Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet)Year Jan Feb Mar AprCubicDecade Year-0 Year-1

453

Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet)Year Jan Feb Mar AprCubicDecade Year-0

454

Alaska Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working Gas) (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet)Year Jan Feb Mar AprCubicDecadeBase

455

Alaska Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet)Year Jan Feb Mar119,0392008 2009

456

Arkansas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet)Year Jan(MillionSalesDecade Year-0

457

Arkansas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet)Year Jan(MillionSalesDecade Year-0Feet)

458

Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet)YearIndustrial Consumers2009 2010TotalYear

459

Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet)YearIndustrial Consumers2009

460

Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet)YearIndustrial Consumers2009Decade Year-0

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


461

Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet)YearIndustrial Consumers2009Decade Year-0Year

462

South Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet) YearPriceThousandThousand479,7416.18 5.69 5.07 5.23

463

South Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet) YearPriceThousandThousand479,7416.18 5.69 5.07 5.23Operators

464

South Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet) YearPriceThousandThousand479,7416.18 5.69 5.07

465

Tennessee Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand Cubic4,630.2 10,037.24. U.S.YearYear Jan FebFeet)

466

Tennessee Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand Cubic4,630.2 10,037.24. U.S.YearYear Jan

467

Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand Cubic4,630.2 10,037.24.Total Consumption (MillionYear

468

Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand Cubic4,630.2 10,037.24.Total Consumption

469

Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand Cubic4,630.2 10,037.24.Total ConsumptionDecade Year-0

470

Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand Cubic4,630.2 10,037.24.Total ConsumptionDecade

471

Tennessee Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand Cubic4,630.2 10,037.24.TotalVehicleFeet) Base

472

Tennessee Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working Gas) (Million Cubic  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand Cubic4,630.2 10,037.24.TotalVehicleFeet)

473

Texas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand Cubic4,630.2perSep-14 Oct-14DecadeDecade Year-0

474

Texas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand Cubic4,630.2perSep-14 Oct-14DecadeDecade Year-0Year

475

Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand Cubic4,630.2perSep-14 (MillionSep-14Year Jan Feb Mar

476

Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand Cubic4,630.2perSep-14 (MillionSep-14Year Jan Feb

477

Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand Cubic4,630.2perSep-14 (MillionSep-14Year Jan

478

Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand Cubic4,630.2perSep-14 (MillionSep-14Year JanYear Jan

479

Texas Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved ReservesFeet)per Thousand Cubic4,630.2perSep-14Base22,667 28,167Working Natural

480

Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0 0Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayFeet)

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


481

Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0 0Year Jan Feb Mar Apr

482

Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0 0Year Jan Feb Mar AprYear Jan Feb

483

Indiana Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working Gas) (Million Cubic  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0 0Year Jan Feb MarYear Jan

484

Indiana Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0 0Year Jan Feb MarYearper0 0

485

Injections of Natural Gas into Underground Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0 0Year Jan Feb MarYearper09 2010

486

Iowa Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0 0Year JanDecade Year-0

487

Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0 0YearDecade Year-0 Year-1Year Jan

488

Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0 0YearDecade Year-0 Year-1Year

489

Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0 0YearDecade Year-0 Year-1Year Gas

490

Iowa Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0 0YearDecadeThousand Cubic7 3 2

491

Kansas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0ExtensionsYear Jan Feb

492

Kansas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0ExtensionsYear Jan FebYear Jan Feb

493

Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0ExtensionsYearSep-14Year Jan Feb Mar

494

Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0ExtensionsYearSep-14Year Jan Feb

495

Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0ExtensionsYearSep-14Year Jan

496

Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0 0ExtensionsYearSep-14Year JanYear Jan

497

Kansas Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working Gas) (Million Cubic  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0

498

Kansas Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0Month Previous YearThousand1 3

499

Kentucky Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0MonthIncreasesFeet)

500

Kentucky Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S.30Natural Gas Glossary529 6330 0 14 15 0MonthIncreasesFeet)Feet) Year