Powered by Deep Web Technologies
Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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 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,...

2

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....

3

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...

4

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

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 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,...

7

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...

8

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...

9

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...

10

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

11

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...

12

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...

13

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

14

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

15

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

16

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...

17

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

18

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

19

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

20

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

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

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...

22

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...

23

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

24

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

25

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...

26

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

27

,"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...

28

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...

29

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

30

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

31

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

32

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

33

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.

34

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

35

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

36

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

37

,"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"...

38

,"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"...

39

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...

40

,"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"...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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 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"...

42

,"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"...

43

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...

44

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

45

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

46

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

47

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

48

,"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...

49

,"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...

50

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

51

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

52

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:

53

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

54

Potential hazards of compressed air energy storage in depleted natural gas reservoirs.  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report is a preliminary assessment of the ignition and explosion potential in a depleted hydrocarbon reservoir from air cycling associated with compressed air energy storage (CAES) in geologic media. The study identifies issues associated with this phenomenon as well as possible mitigating measures that should be considered. Compressed air energy storage (CAES) in geologic media has been proposed to help supplement renewable energy sources (e.g., wind and solar) by providing a means to store energy when excess energy is available, and to provide an energy source during non-productive or low productivity renewable energy time periods. Presently, salt caverns represent the only proven underground storage used for CAES. Depleted natural gas reservoirs represent another potential underground storage vessel for CAES because they have demonstrated their container function and may have the requisite porosity and permeability; however reservoirs have yet to be demonstrated as a functional/operational storage media for compressed air. Specifically, air introduced into a depleted natural gas reservoir presents a situation where an ignition and explosion potential may exist. This report presents the results of an initial study identifying issues associated with this phenomena as well as possible mitigating measures that should be considered.

Cooper, Paul W.; Grubelich, Mark Charles; Bauer, Stephen J.

2011-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

55

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

56

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

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

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

57

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

58

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

59

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....

60

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

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

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

62

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

63

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

64

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

65

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

66

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

67

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...

68

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

69

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

70

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

71

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

72

Storage capacity in hot dry rock reservoirs  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

A method is described for extracting thermal energy, in a cyclic manner, from geologic strata which may be termed hot dry rock. A reservoir comprised of hot fractured rock is established and water or other liquid is passed through the reservoir. The water is heated by the hot rock, recovered from the reservoir, cooled by extraction of heat by means of heat exchange apparatus on the surface, and then re-injected into the reservoir to be heated again. Water is added to the reservoir by means of an injection well and recovered from the reservoir by means of a production well. Water is continuously provided to the reservoir and continuously withdrawn from the reservoir at two different flow rates, a base rate and a peak rate. Increasing water flow from the base rate to the peak rate is accomplished by rapidly decreasing backpressure at the outlet of the production well in order to meet periodic needs for amounts of thermal energy greater than a baseload amount, such as to generate additional electric power to meet peak demands. The rate of flow of water provided to the hot dry rock reservoir is maintained at a value effective to prevent depletion of the liquid inventory of the reservoir. 4 figs.

Brown, D.W.

1997-11-11T23:59:59.000Z

73

Storage capacity in hot dry rock reservoirs  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

A method of extracting thermal energy, in a cyclic manner, from geologic strata which may be termed hot dry rock. A reservoir comprised of hot fractured rock is established and water or other liquid is passed through the reservoir. The water is heated by the hot rock, recovered from the reservoir, cooled by extraction of heat by means of heat exchange apparatus on the surface, and then re-injected into the reservoir to be heated again. Water is added to the reservoir by means of an injection well and recovered from the reservoir by means of a production well. Water is continuously provided to the reservoir and continuously withdrawn from the reservoir at two different flow rates, a base rate and a peak rate. Increasing water flow from the base rate to the peak rate is accomplished by rapidly decreasing backpressure at the outlet of the production well in order to meet periodic needs for amounts of thermal energy greater than a baseload amount, such as to generate additional electric power to meet peak demands. The rate of flow of water provided to the hot dry rock reservoir is maintained at a value effective to prevent depletion of the liquid

Brown, Donald W. (Los Alamos, NM)

1997-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

74

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

75

Large releases from CO2 storage reservoirs: analogs, scenarios,and modeling needs  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

While the purpose of geologic storage in deep salineformations is to trap greenhouse gases underground, the potential existsfor CO2 to escape from the target reservoir, migrate upward alongpermeable pathways, and discharge at the land surface. In this paper, weevaluate the potential for such CO2 discharges based on the analysis ofnatural analogs, where large releases of gas have been observed. We areparticularly interested in circumstances that could generate sudden,possibly self-enhancing release events. The probability for such eventsmay be low, but the circumstances under which they occur and thepotential consequences need to be evaluated in order to designappropriate site-selection and risk-management strategies. Numericalmodeling of hypothetical test cases is suggested to determine criticalconditions for large CO2 releases, to evaluate whether such conditionsmaybe possible at designated storage sites, and, if applicable, toevaluate the potential impacts of such events as well as designappropriate mitigation strategies.

Birkholzer, Jens; Pruess, Karsten; Lewicki, Jennifer; Rutqvist,Jonny; Tsang, Chin-Fu; Karimjee, Anhar

2005-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

76

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

77

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

78

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

79

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

80

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

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

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...

82

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...

83

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

84

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

85

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

86

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

87

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

88

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

89

Eastern Consuming Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals  

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 U.S.Wyoming Electricity ProfileUnderMTBE

90

Illinois 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: 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 W ith pricesBureauFeet)Year

91

Illinois 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 W ith

92

Iowa 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: 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 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul

93

Iowa 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 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

94

Kansas 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 Jan Feb

95

Kentucky 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: 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) Year

96

Louisiana 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 Review1,213Separation,Year Jan Feb

97

Lower 48 States Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (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: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia,(Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs Year inBarrels)Barrels) Reserves(MillionCubic

98

Maryland 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 Year2 Macro-IndustrialFeet) Year Jan Feb Mar

99

Michigan 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 Year2 Macro-IndustrialFeet)+YearFeet) Year

100

Minnesota 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: 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 Apr

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

Mississippi 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

102

Missouri 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 ThousandWellhead PriceDecadeYear Jan

103

Montana 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 ThousandWellhead+

104

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: 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 WeekExpectedBarrels)Year

105

New Mexico 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

106

New York 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 1Wellhead(MillionCrudeYearYear

107

Oklahoma 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 WeekReservesYearYear Jan Feb Mar

108

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: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia,(Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing ReservoirsYear-MonthCoalbed Methane ProvedDecadeper ThousandNA

109

Pennsylvania 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-MonthCoalbed Methane ProvedDecadeper

110

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

111

Large releases from CO2 storage reservoirs: Analogs, scenarios, and modeling needs  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

abandoned wells is a major concern for storage of CO 2 in depleted or near-depleted oil and gas reservoirs [

Birkholzer, Jens; Pruess, Karsten; Lewicki, Jennifer; Rutqvist, Jonny; Tsang, Chin-Fu; Karimjee, Anhar

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

112

Large releases from CO2 storage reservoirs: analogs, scenarios, and modeling needs  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

abandoned wells is a major concern for storage of CO 2 in depleted or near-depleted oil and gas reservoirs [

Birkholzer, Jens; Pruess, Karsten; Lewicki, Jennifer; Rutqvist, Jonny; Tsang, Chin-Fu; Karimjee, Anhar

2005-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

113

Large Releases from CO2 Storage Reservoirs: A Discussion of Natural Analogs, FEPS, and Modeling Needs  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

abandoned wells is a major concern for geological storage of CO 2 in depleted or near-depleted oil and gas reservoirs [

Birkholzer, J.; Pruess, K.; Lewicki, J.L.; Rutqvist, J.; Tsang, C-F.; Karimjee, A.

2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

114

Indiana 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: 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 W ithWellheadFeet) Year Jan Feb Mar

115

Indiana 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 W ithWellheadFeet) Year Jan Feb

116

Injections of Natural Gas into Underground 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: 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 W ithWellheadFeet) Year591,60930,24,

117

Kansas 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: 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 Jan Feb MarDecadeThousand3.16

118

Louisiana 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: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia,(Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs Year in Review1,213Separation,Year Jan Feb MarFeet)

119

Maryland 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: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia,(Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs Year2 Macro-IndustrialFeet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr

120

Michigan 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: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia,(Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs Year2 Macro-IndustrialFeet)+YearFeet) Year Jan

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

Mississippi 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: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia,(Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs Year2per Thousand CubicYearFutureCubicYearFeet)

122

Missouri 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: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia,(Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs Year2per ThousandWellhead PriceDecadeYear Jan Feb

123

Montana 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: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia,(Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs Year2per ThousandWellhead+ LeaseFeet)YearYear

124

Nebraska 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: 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 3.98

125

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: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia,(Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing ReservoirsYear-Month Week 1Wellhead(MillionCrudeYearYear Jan

126

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: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia,(Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing ReservoirsYear-Month WeekReservesYear Jan Feb0 ' uYear Jan FebYear

127

Ohio 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 WeekReservesYear Jan Feb0 ' uYear Jan

128

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: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia,(Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing ReservoirsYear-Month WeekReservesYearYear Jan Feb Mar Apr

129

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: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia,(Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing ReservoirsYear-Month WeekReservesYearYear JanYearYear Jan Feb Mar

130

Oregon 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 WeekReservesYearYear JanYearYear Jan Feb

131

Frequency-dependent processing and interpretation (FDPI) of seismic data for identifying, imaging and monitoring fluid-saturated underground reservoirs  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

A method for identifying, imaging and monitoring dry or fluid-saturated underground reservoirs using seismic waves reflected from target porous or fractured layers is set forth. Seismic imaging the porous or fractured layer occurs by low pass filtering of the windowed reflections from the target porous or fractured layers leaving frequencies below low-most corner (or full width at half maximum) of a recorded frequency spectra. Additionally, the ratio of image amplitudes is shown to be approximately proportional to reservoir permeability, viscosity of fluid, and the fluid saturation of the porous or fractured layers.

Goloshubin, Gennady M.; Korneev, Valeri A.

2006-11-14T23:59:59.000Z

132

Frequency-dependent processing and interpretation (FDPI) of seismic data for identifying, imaging and monitoring fluid-saturated underground reservoirs  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

A method for identifying, imaging and monitoring dry or fluid-saturated underground reservoirs using seismic waves reflected from target porous or fractured layers is set forth. Seismic imaging the porous or fractured layer occurs by low pass filtering of the windowed reflections from the target porous or fractured layers leaving frequencies below low-most corner (or full width at half maximum) of a recorded frequency spectra. Additionally, the ratio of image amplitudes is shown to be approximately proportional to reservoir permeability, viscosity of fluid, and the fluid saturation of the porous or fractured layers.

Goloshubin, Gennady M. (Sugar Land, TX); Korneev, Valeri A. (Lafayette, CA)

2005-09-06T23:59:59.000Z

133

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

134

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

135

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

136

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

137

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

138

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)

139

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

140

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

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

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

142

Evaluating Potential for Large Releases from CO2 StorageReservoirs: Analogs, Scenarios, and Modeling Needs  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

While the purpose of geologic storage of CO{sub 2} in deep saline formations is to trap greenhouse gases underground, the potential exists for CO{sub 2} to escape from the target reservoir, migrate upward along permeable pathways, and discharge at the land surface. Such discharge is not necessarily a serious concern, as CO{sub 2} is a naturally abundant and relatively benign gas in low concentrations. However, there is a potential risk to health, safety and environment (HSE) in the event that large localized fluxes of CO{sub 2} were to occur at the land surface, especially where CO{sub 2} could accumulate. In this paper, we develop possible scenarios for large CO{sub 2} fluxes based on the analysis of natural analogues, where large releases of gas have been observed. We are particularly interested in scenarios which could generate sudden, possibly self-enhancing, or even eruptive release events. The probability for such events may be low, but the circumstances under which they might occur and potential consequences need to be evaluated in order to design appropriate site selection and risk management strategies. Numerical modeling of hypothetical test cases is needed to determine critical conditions for such events, to evaluate whether such conditions may be possible at designated storage sites, and, if applicable, to evaluate the potential HSE impacts of such events and design appropriate mitigation strategies.

Birkholzer, Jens; Pruess, Karsten; Lewicki, Jennifer; Tsang,Chin-Fu; Karimjee, Anhar

2005-09-19T23:59:59.000Z

143

Wave propagation and thermodynamic losses in packed-bed thermal reservoirs for energy storage  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

 .     The  reservoirs  of  interest  here  typically  comprise  a  cylindrical  pressure  vessel  containing  the  solid  storage  medium  in  the  form  of  a  packed  bed  of  pebbles  or  gravel,  or  a  uniform... WAVE  PROPAGATION  AND  THERMODYNAMIC  LOSSES  IN  PACKED-­?BED  THERMAL  RESERVOIRS  FOR  ENERGY  STORAGE       Alexander  White1,  Joshua  McTigue1,  Christos  Markides2   1  Cambridge  University...

White, Alexander; McTigue, Joshua; Markides, Christos

2014-03-26T23:59:59.000Z

144

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

145

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

146

CO2 Saline Storage Demonstration in Colorado Sedimentary Basins: Applied Studies in Reservoir Assessment and Dynamic Processes Affecting Industrial Operations  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This multitask research project was conducted in anticipation of a possible future increase in industrial efforts at CO2 storage in Colorado sedimentary basins. Colorado is already the home to the oldest Rocky Mountain CO2 storage site, the Rangely Oil Field, where CO2-EOR has been underway since the 1980s. The Colorado Geological Survey has evaluated storage options statewide, and as part of the SW Carbon Sequestration Partnership the Survey, is deeply engaged in and committed to suitable underground CO2 storage. As a more sustainable energy industry is becoming a global priority, it is imperative to explore the range of technical options available to reduce emissions from fossil fuels. One such option is to store at least some emitted CO2 underground. In this NETL-sponsored CO2 sequestration project, the Colorado School of Mines and our partners at the University of Colorado have focused on a set of the major fundamental science and engineering issues surrounding geomechanics, mineralogy, geochemistry and reservoir architecture of possible CO2 storage sites (not limited to Colorado). Those are the central themes of this final report and reported below in Tasks 2, 3, 4, and 6. Closely related to these reservoir geoscience issues are also legal, environmental and public acceptance concerns about pore space accessibility—as a precondition for CO2 storage. These are addressed in Tasks 1, 5 and 7. Some debates about the future course of the energy industry can become acrimonius. It is true that the physics of combustion of hydrocarbons makes it impossible for fossil energy to attain a carbon footprint anywhere nearly as low as that of renewables. However, there are many offsetting benefits, not the least that fossil energy is still plentiful, it has a global and highly advanced distribution system in place, and the footprint that the fossil energy infrastructure occupies is orders of magnitude smaller than renewable energy facilities with equivalent energy capacity. Finally, inexpensive natural gas here in North America is pushing coal for electricity generation off the market, thus reducing US CO2 emissions faster than any other large industrialized nation. These two big factors argue for renewed efforts to find technology solutions to reduce the carbon footprint (carbon dioxide as well as methane and trace gases) of conventional and unconventional oil and gas. One major such technology component is likely to be carbon capture, utilization and storage.

Nummedal, Dag; Sitchler, Alexis; McCray, John; Mouzakis, Katherine; Glossner, Andy; Mandernack, Kevin; Gutierrez, Marte; Doran, Kevin; Pranter, Matthew; Rybowiak, Chris

2012-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

147

,"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

148

,"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 -

149

,"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

150

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:

151

Evaluation of Storage Reallocation and Related Strategies for Optimizing Reservoir System Operations  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

TR-145 1988 Evaluation of Storage Reallocation and Related Strategies for Optimizing Reservoir System Operations R.A. Wurbs P.E. Carriere Texas Water Resources Institute Texas A&M University ...

Wurbs, Ralph A.; Carriere, Patrick E.

152

Modeling Reallocation of Reservoir Storage Capacity Between Flood Control and Conservation Purposes  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

modifications in reservoir storage allocations and related system operations. The research consisted of the following tasks: ? The Brazos River Basin WRAP input dataset from the Texas WAM System (Brazos WAM) has a 1940-1997 hydrologic period...

Kim, Tae Jin

2010-07-14T23:59:59.000Z

153

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

154

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

155

Remediation of CO2 Leakage from Deep Saline Aquifer Storage Based on Reservoir and Pollution  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the geological storage of carbon dioxide IEA-GHG, 2007. Remediation of Leakage from CO2 Storage Reservoirs. IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme, 2007/11, September 2007. Le Guenan T : review and modelling., in CO2NET 2009 Annual Seminar Agenda - Trondheim - Norway - 18-19 June 2009. Xu T

Paris-Sud XI, Université de

156

Integrated Geothermal-CO2 Storage Reservoirs: FY1 Final Report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of phase 1 is to determine the feasibility of integrating geologic CO2 storage (GCS) with geothermal energy production. Phase 1 includes reservoir analyses to determine injector/producer well schemes that balance the generation of economically useful flow rates at the producers with the need to manage reservoir overpressure to reduce the risks associated with overpressure, such as induced seismicity and CO2 leakage to overlying aquifers. This submittal contains input and output files of the reservoir model analyses. A reservoir-model "index-html" file was sent in a previous submittal to organize the reservoir-model input and output files according to sections of the FY1 Final Report to which they pertain. The recipient should save the file: Reservoir-models-inputs-outputs-index.html in the same directory that the files: Section2.1.*.tar.gz files are saved in.

Buscheck, Thomas A.

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

157

Active Management of Integrated Geothermal-CO2 Storage Reservoirs in Sedimentary Formations  

DOE Data Explorer [Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)]

The purpose of phase 1 is to determine the feasibility of integrating geologic CO2 storage (GCS) with geothermal energy production. Phase 1 includes reservoir analyses to determine injector/producer well schemes that balance the generation of economically useful flow rates at the producers with the need to manage reservoir overpressure to reduce the risks associated with overpressure, such as induced seismicity and CO2 leakage to overlying aquifers. This submittal contains input and output files of the reservoir model analyses. A reservoir-model "index-html" file was sent in a previous submittal to organize the reservoir-model input and output files according to sections of the FY1 Final Report to which they pertain. The recipient should save the file: Reservoir-models-inputs-outputs-index.html in the same directory that the files: Section2.1.*.tar.gz files are saved in.

Buscheck, Thomas A.

158

Integrated Geothermal-CO2 Storage Reservoirs: FY1 Final Report  

DOE Data Explorer [Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)]

The purpose of phase 1 is to determine the feasibility of integrating geologic CO2 storage (GCS) with geothermal energy production. Phase 1 includes reservoir analyses to determine injector/producer well schemes that balance the generation of economically useful flow rates at the producers with the need to manage reservoir overpressure to reduce the risks associated with overpressure, such as induced seismicity and CO2 leakage to overlying aquifers. This submittal contains input and output files of the reservoir model analyses. A reservoir-model "index-html" file was sent in a previous submittal to organize the reservoir-model input and output files according to sections of the FY1 Final Report to which they pertain. The recipient should save the file: Reservoir-models-inputs-outputs-index.html in the same directory that the files: Section2.1.*.tar.gz files are saved in.

Buscheck, Thomas A.

159

Flood control reservoir operations for conditions of limited storage capacity  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

). Therefore, if the entire flood control capacity of a reservoir is available, only an extremely severe flood event would require the implementation of the EOS for most reservoir projects, and thus the bulk of the research has been focused on how to manage... operations objectives. In other words, the REOS provide a set of rules that reflect the risk of flooding upstream as well as downstream of the dams. The USACE and other reservoir management agencies may use the methodology proposed in this study...

Rivera Ramirez, Hector David

2005-02-17T23:59:59.000Z

160

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

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

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

162

,"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

163

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

164

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

165

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

166

Active Management of Integrated Geothermal-CO2 Storage Reservoirs in Sedimentary Formations  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Active Management of Integrated Geothermal–CO2 Storage Reservoirs in Sedimentary Formations: An Approach to Improve Energy Recovery and Mitigate Risk : FY1 Final Report The purpose of phase 1 is to determine the feasibility of integrating geologic CO2 storage (GCS) with geothermal energy production. Phase 1 includes reservoir analyses to determine injector/producer well schemes that balance the generation of economically useful flow rates at the producers with the need to manage reservoir overpressure to reduce the risks associated with overpressure, such as induced seismicity and CO2 leakage to overlying aquifers. This submittal contains input and output files of the reservoir model analyses. A reservoir-model "index-html" file was sent in a previous submittal to organize the reservoir-model input and output files according to sections of the FY1 Final Report to which they pertain. The recipient should save the file: Reservoir-models-inputs-outputs-index.html in the same directory that the files: Section2.1.*.tar.gz files are saved in.

Buscheck, Thomas A.

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

167

Large Releases from CO2 Storage Reservoirs: A Discussion ofNatural Analogs, FEPS, and Modeling Needs  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

While the purpose of geologic storage in deep saline formations is to trap greenhouse gases underground, the potential exists for CO{sub 2} to escape from the target reservoir, migrate upward along permeable pathways, and discharge at the land surface. In this paper, we evaluate the potential for such CO{sub 2} discharges based on the analysis of natural analogs, where large releases of gas have been observed. We are particularly interested in circumstances that could generate sudden, possibly self-enhancing release events. The probability for such events may be low, but the circumstances under which they occur and the potential consequences need to be evaluated in order to design appropriate site-selection and risk-management strategies. Numerical modeling of hypothetical test cases is suggested to determine critical conditions for large CO{sub 2} releases, to evaluate whether such conditions may be possible at designated storage sites, and, if applicable, to evaluate the potential impacts of such events as well as design appropriate mitigation strategies.

Birkholzer, J.; Pruess, K.; Lewicki, J.L.; Rutqvist, J.; Tsang,C-F.; Karimjee, A.

2005-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

168

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

169

Determination of the Effect of Geological Reservoir Variability on Carbon Dioxide Storage  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Determination of the Effect of Geological Reservoir Variability on Carbon Dioxide Storage Using'expériences -- Dans le contexte de l'étude du stockage géologique du dioxyde de carbone dans les réservoirs al. (2007) Energy Convers. Manage. 48, 1782-1797; Gunter et al. (1999) Appl. Geochem. 4, 1

Paris-Sud XI, Université de

170

The Economics of CO2 Transport by Pipeline and Storage in Saline Aquifers and Oil Reservoirs  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

The Economics of CO2 Transport by Pipeline and Storage in Saline Aquifers and Oil Reservoirs Sean T Description Date 0 Original document 1/29/2008 1 Estimate for carbon content of crude oil was incorrect (see p an invaluable summer at the Bureau of Economic Geology at the University of Texas at Austin working with Sue

171

Natural and industrial analogues for leakage of CO2 from storage reservoirs: identification of features, events, and processes and lessons learned  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

abandoned wells at storage sites to transport CO 2 to the surface, particularly in depleted oil or gas reservoir

Lewicki, Jennifer L.; Birkholzer, Jens; Tsang, Chin-Fu

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

172

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

173

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

174

CHARACTERIZATION OF CONDITIONS OF NATURAL GAS STORAGE RESERVOIRS AND DESIGN AND DEMONSTRATION OF REMEDIAL TECHNIQUES FOR DAMAGE MECHANISMS FOUND THEREIN  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The underground gas storage (UGS) industry uses over 400 reservoirs and 17,000 wells to store and withdrawal gas. As such, it is a significant contributor to gas supply in the United States. It has been demonstrated that many UGS wells show a loss of deliverability each year due to numerous damage mechanisms. Previous studies estimate that up to one hundred million dollars are spent each year to recover or replace a deliverability loss of approximately 3.2 Bscf/D per year in the storage industry. Clearly, there is a great potential for developing technology to prevent, mitigate, or eliminate the damage causing deliverability losses in UGS wells. Prior studies have also identified the presence of several potential damage mechanisms in storage wells, developed damage diagnostic procedures, and discussed, in general terms, the possible reactions that need to occur to create the damage. However, few studies address how to prevent or mitigate specific damage types, and/or how to eliminate the damage from occurring in the future. This study seeks to increase our understanding of two specific damage mechanisms, inorganic precipitates (specifically siderite), and non-darcy damage, and thus serves to expand prior efforts as well as complement ongoing gas storage projects. Specifically, this study has resulted in: (1) An effective lab protocol designed to assess the extent of damage due to inorganic precipitates; (2) An increased understanding of how inorganic precipitates (specifically siderite) develop; (3) Identification of potential sources of chemical components necessary for siderite formation; (4) A remediation technique that has successfully restored deliverability to storage wells damaged by the inorganic precipitate siderite (one well had nearly a tenfold increase in deliverability); (5) Identification of the types of treatments that have historically been successful at reducing the amount of non-darcy pressure drop in a well, and (6) Development of a tool that can be used by operators to guide treatment selection in wells with significant non-darcy damage component. In addition, the effectiveness of the remediation treatment designed to reduce damage caused by the inorganic precipitate siderite was measured, and the benefits of this work are extrapolated to the entire U.S. storage industry. Similarly the potential benefits realized from more effective identification and treatment of wells with significant nondarcy damage component are also presented, and these benefits are also extrapolated to the entire U.S. storage industry.

J.H. Frantz Jr; K.G. Brown; W.K. Sawyer; P.A. Zyglowicz; P.M. Halleck; J.P. Spivey

2004-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

175

EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Depleted Reservoir Storage  

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 U.S. Department of EnergyD e s c r iQ1Configuration

176

EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Salt Cavern Storage Reservoir  

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 U.S. Department of EnergyD e sNetworkConfiguration

177

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

178

Loss analysis of thermal reservoirs for electrical energy storage schemes  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

phase. HX1 and HX2 are heat exchangers used to reject heat at near-ambient conditions. The compressor, C, and expander, E, may be turbomachines as in Ref. [5] or reciprocating devices, as in Ref. [4] 33 2 Schematic view of heat transfer within... are heat exchangers used to reject heat at near-ambient conditions. The compressor, C, and expander, E, may be turboma- chines as in Ref. [5] or reciprocating devices, as in Ref. [4] 33 T2 x hot 1 T ? T ? T x gas front storage m edia Tg + Tg sT Q . ? Tg...

White, Alexander

2011-05-14T23:59:59.000Z

179

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

180

Assessing Reservoir Depositional Environments to Develop and Quantify Improvements in CO2 Storage Efficiency: A Reservoir Simulation Approach  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The storage potential and fluid movement within formations are dependent on the unique hydraulic characteristics of their respective depositional environments. Storage efficiency (E) quantifies the potential for storage in a geologic depositional environment and is used to assess basinal or regional CO2 storage resources. Current estimates of storage resources are calculated using common E ranges by lithology and not by depositional environment. The objectives of this project are to quantify E ranges and identify E enhancement strategies for different depositional environments via reservoir simulation studies. The depositional environments considered include deltaic, shelf clastic, shelf carbonate, fluvial deltaic, strandplain, reef, fluvial and alluvial, and turbidite. Strategies considered for enhancing E include CO2 injection via vertical, horizontal, and deviated wells, selective completions, water production, and multi-well injection. Conceptual geologic and geocellular models of the depositional environments were developed based on data from Illinois Basin oil fields and gas storage sites. The geologic and geocellular models were generalized for use in other US sedimentary basins. An important aspect of this work is the development of conceptual geologic and geocellular models that reflect the uniqueness of each depositional environment. Different injection well completions methods were simulated to investigate methods of enhancing E in the presence of geologic heterogeneity specific to a depositional environment. Modeling scenarios included horizontal wells (length, orientation, and inclination), selective and dynamic completions, water production, and multiwell injection. A Geologic Storage Efficiency Calculator (GSECalc) was developed to calculate E from reservoir simulation output. Estimated E values were normalized to diminish their dependency on fluid relative permeability. Classifying depositional environments according to normalized baseline E ranges ranks fluvial deltaic and turbidite highest and shelf carbonate lowest. The estimated average normalized baseline E of turbidite, and shelf carbonate depositional environments are 42.5% and 13.1%, with corresponding standard deviations of 11.3%, and 3.10%, respectively. Simulations of different plume management techniques suggest that the horizontal well, multi-well injection with brine production from blanket vertical producers are the most efficient E enhancement strategies in seven of eight depositional environments; for the fluvial deltaic depositional environment, vertical well with blanket completions is the most efficient. This study estimates normalized baseline E ranges for eight depositional environments, which can be used to assess the CO2 storage resource of candidate formations. This study also improves the general understanding of depositional environment’s influence on E. The lessons learned and results obtained from this study can be extrapolated to formations in other US basins with formations of similar depositional environments, which should be used to further refine regional and national storage resource estimates in future editions of the Carbon Utilization and Storage Atlas of the United States. Further study could consider the economic feasibility of the E enhancement strategies identified here.

Okwen, Roland; Frailey, Scott; Leetaru, Hannes; Moulton, Sandy

2014-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

Active Management of Integrated Geothermal-CO2 Storage Reservoirs in Sedimentary Formations  

DOE Data Explorer [Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)]

The purpose of phase 1 is to determine the feasibility of integrating geologic CO2 storage (GCS) with geothermal energy production. Phase 1 includes reservoir analyses to determine injector/producer well schemes that balance the generation of economically useful flow rates at the producers with the need to manage reservoir overpressure to reduce the risks associated with overpressure, such as induced seismicity and CO2 leakage to overlying aquifers. Based on a range of well schemes, techno-economic analyses of the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) are conducted to determine the economic benefits of integrating GCS with geothermal energy production. In addition to considering CO2 injection, reservoir analyses are conducted for nitrogen (N2) injection to investigate the potential benefits of incorporating N2 injection with integrated geothermal-GCS, as well as the use of N2 injection as a potential pressure-support and working-fluid option. Phase 1 includes preliminary environmental risk assessments of integrated geothermal-GCS, with the focus on managing reservoir overpressure. Phase 1 also includes an economic survey of pipeline costs, which will be applied in Phase 2 to the analysis of CO2 conveyance costs for techno-economics analyses of integrated geothermal-GCS reservoir sites. Phase 1 also includes a geospatial GIS survey of potential integrated geothermal-GCS reservoir sites, which will be used in Phase 2 to conduct sweet-spot analyses that determine where promising geothermal resources are co-located in sedimentary settings conducive to safe CO2 storage, as well as being in adequate proximity to large stationary CO2 sources.

Buscheck, Thomas A.

182

Analytical Estimation of CO2 Storage Capacity in Depleted Oil and Gas Reservoirs Based on Thermodynamic State Functions  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Numerical simulation has been used, as common practice, to estimate the CO2 storage capacity of depleted reservoirs. However, this method is time consuming, expensive and requires detailed input data. This investigation proposes an analytical method...

Valbuena Olivares, Ernesto

2012-02-14T23:59:59.000Z

183

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

184

Monitoring aquifer storage and recovery using multiple geophysical methods , Kristofer Davis  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

-gravity methods to monitor an aquifer storage recovery (ASR) project. An abandoned coal mine has been developed into an underground water reservoir in Leyden, Colorado. Excess water from surface sources is injected into the reservoir during winter and then retrieved for use in the summer. Understanding the storage-recovery process

185

Intercomparison of simulation models for CO2 disposal in underground storage reservoirs  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

oil recovery (EOR) using CO2 requires an understanding ofexperience with using CO2 for EOR projects (SPE, 1999), and

Pruess, Karsten; Tsang, Chin-Fu; Law, David; Oldenburg, Curt

2001-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

186

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

187

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

188

Saving an Underground Reservoir  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

and climato- logical data into a GIS format and corrected errors. ? Developed Web interfaces to distribute hydrologic and climatological data. ? Used GIS data to show and understand water flow in crops and soils. TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER EDUCATION... rotations increases net profitability by $45 per acre. ? Identified forage sorghums that have similar digestibility and yield as corn silage, but require 40 percent less irrigation water. HYDROLOGY / CLIMATOLOGY ? Compiled existing relevant hydrologic...

Wythe, Kathy

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

189

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

190

Time-lapse gravity monitoring: A systematic 4D approach with application to aquifer storage and recovery  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

. An abandoned underground coal mine has been developed into a subsurface water reservoir. Water from surface reservoirs use valuable land needed for develop- ment or the preservation of open space and can have of such reservoirs can reach tens of millions of dollars. The aquifer storage recovery ASR process Pyne, 1995 pro

191

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

192

Reservoir Engineering Optimization Strategies for Subsurface CO{sub 2} Storage  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this report is to outline a methodology for calculating the optimum number of injection wells for geologic CCS. The methodology is intended primarily for reservoir pressure management, and factors in cost as well. Efficiency may come in many forms depending on project goals; therefore, various results are presented simultaneously. The developed methodology is illustrated via application in a case study of the Rocky Mountain Carbon Capture and Storage (RMCCS) project, including a CCS candidate site near Craig, Colorado, USA. The forecasting method provided reasonable estimates of cost and injection volume when compared to simulated results.

Mclntire, Blayde; McPherson, Brian

2013-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

193

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

194

Air ejector augmented compressed air energy storage system  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

Energy is stored in slack demand periods by charging a plurality of underground reservoirs with air to the same peak storage pressure, during peak demand periods throttling the air from one storage reservoir into a gas turbine system at a constant inlet pressure until the air pressure in the reservoir falls to said constant inlet pressure, thereupon permitting air in a second reservoir to flow into said gas turbine system while drawing air from the first reservoir through a variable geometry air ejector and adjusting said variable geometry air ejector, said air flow being essentially at the constant inlet pressure of the gas turbine system.

Ahrens, Frederick W. (Naperville, IL); Kartsounes, George T. (Naperville, IL)

1980-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

195

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

196

,"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

197

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

198

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

199

,"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)"

200

Lower 48 States 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 inBarrels)Barrels)

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

Pipeline transportation and underground storage are vital and complementary components of the U  

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-MonthCoalbedPricethe1.PDF7.PDFTABLE8.PDFPipeline

202

,"U.S. Total Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (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 Nonproducing Reservoirs (MillionNatural Gas

203

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

204

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

205

CO2-Driven Enhanced Gas Recovery and Storage in Depleted Shale Reservoir-A Numerical Simulation Study  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

injection into saline aquifer, CO2-EOR, CO2-ECBM, and so forth, have been studied to minimize the CO22-EOR, CO2-ECBM, and so forth, have been studied to minimize the CO2 release into the atmosphere1 CO2-Driven Enhanced Gas Recovery and Storage in Depleted Shale Reservoir- A Numerical Simulation

Mohaghegh, Shahab

206

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

207

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF GEOLOGIC STORAGE OF CO2 Jason J. Heinrich, Howard J. Herzog, David M. Reiner  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

analogs: acid gas injection (AGI), enhanced oil recovery (EOR), natural gas storage, and CO2 transportENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF GEOLOGIC STORAGE OF CO2 * Jason J. Heinrich, Howard J. Herzog, David M of reducing CO2 emissions. The storage of CO2 in underground geologic reservoirs is one such idea that employs

208

,"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

209

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

210

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

211

Time-lapse gravity monitoring of an aquifer storage recovery project in Leyden, Colorado Kristofer Davis*  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

on using time-lapse micro-gravity surveying to monitor an aquifer storage recovery project. An abandoned coal mine is being developed into an underground water reservoir in Leyden, Colorado. Excess water from surface sources is poured into the reservoir during winter and then retrieved for use in the summer

212

,"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

213

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

214

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

215

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

216

,"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

217

,"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

218

,"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

219

,"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

220

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

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

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

222

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

223

Natural and industrial analogues for release of CO2 from storage reservoirs: Identification of features, events, and processes and lessons learned  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

abandoned wells at storage sites, particularly at sites with depleted oil or gas reservoirsabandoned wells at storage sites to transport CO 2 to the surface, particularly in depleted oil or gas reservoirabandoned wells at storage sites to transport CO 2 to the surface, particularly at sites with depleted oil or gas reservoirs

Lewicki, Jennifer L.; Birkholzer, Jens; Tsang, Chin-Fu

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

224

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

225

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

226

Geochemical Impacts of Leaking CO2 from Subsurface Storage Reservoirs to Unconfined and Confined Aquifers  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Experimental research work has been conducted and is undergoing at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) to address a variety of scientific issues related with the potential leaks of the carbon dioxide (CO2) gas from deep storage reservoirs. The main objectives of this work are as follows: • Develop a systematic understanding of how CO2 leakage is likely to influence pertinent geochemical processes (e.g., dissolution/precipitation, sorption/desorption and redox reactions) in the aquifer sediments. • Identify prevailing environmental conditions that would dictate one geochemical outcome over another. • Gather useful information to support site selection, risk assessment, policy-making, and public education efforts associated with geological carbon sequestration. In this report, we present results from experiments conducted at PNNL to address research issues related to the main objectives of this effort. A series of batch and column experiments and solid phase characterization studies (quantitative x-ray diffraction and wet chemical extractions with a concentrated acid) were conducted with representative rocks and sediments from an unconfined, oxidizing carbonate aquifer, i.e., Edwards aquifer in Texas, and a confined aquifer, i.e., the High Plains aquifer in Kansas. These materials were exposed to a CO2 gas stream simulating CO2 gas leaking scenarios, and changes in aqueous phase pH and chemical composition were measured in liquid and effluent samples collected at pre-determined experimental times. Additional research to be conducted during the current fiscal year will further validate these results and will address other important remaining issues. Results from these experimental efforts will provide valuable insights for the development of site-specific, generation III reduced order models. In addition, results will initially serve as input parameters during model calibration runs and, ultimately, will be used to test model predictive capability and competency. The results from these investigations will provide useful information to support site selection, risk assessment, and public education efforts associated with geological, deep subsurface CO2 storage and sequestration.

Qafoku, Nikolla; Brown, Christopher F.; Wang, Guohui; Sullivan, E. C.; Lawter, Amanda R.; Harvey, Omar R.; Bowden, Mark

2013-04-15T23:59:59.000Z

227

Carbon sequestration in natural gas reservoirs: Enhanced gas recovery and natural gas storage  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

gas reservoirs for carbon sequestration and enhanced gasproduction and carbon sequestration, Society of Petroleumfeasibiilty of carbon sequestration with enhanced gas

Oldenburg, Curtis M.

2003-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

228

Preliminary formation analysis for compressed air energy storage in depleted natural gas reservoirs : a study for the DOE Energy Storage Systems Program.  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this study is to develop an engineering and operational understanding of CAES performance for a depleted natural gas reservoir by evaluation of relative permeability effects of air, water and natural gas in depleted natural gas reservoirs as a reservoir is initially depleted, an air bubble is created, and as air is initially cycled. The composition of produced gases will be evaluated as the three phase flow of methane, nitrogen and brine are modeled. The effects of a methane gas phase on the relative permeability of air in a formation are investigated and the composition of the produced fluid, which consists primarily of the amount of natural gas in the produced air are determined. Simulations of compressed air energy storage (CAES) in depleted natural gas reservoirs were carried out to assess the effect of formation permeability on the design of a simple CAES system. The injection of N2 (as a proxy to air), and the extraction of the resulting gas mixture in a depleted natural gas reservoir were modeled using the TOUGH2 reservoir simulator with the EOS7c equation of state. The optimal borehole spacing was determined as a function of the formation scale intrinsic permeability. Natural gas reservoir results are similar to those for an aquifer. Borehole spacing is dependent upon the intrinsic permeability of the formation. Higher permeability allows increased injection and extraction rates which is equivalent to more power per borehole for a given screen length. The number of boreholes per 100 MW for a given intrinsic permeability in a depleted natural gas reservoir is essentially identical to that determined for a simple aquifer of identical properties. During bubble formation methane is displaced and a sharp N2methane boundary is formed with an almost pure N2 gas phase in the bubble near the borehole. During cycling mixing of methane and air occurs along the boundary as the air bubble boundary moves. The extracted gas mixture changes as a function of time and proximity of the bubble boundary to the well. For all simulations reported here, with a formation radius above 50 m the maximum methane composition in the produced gas phase was less than 0.5%. This report provides an initial investigation of CAES in a depleted natural gas reservoir, and the results will provide useful guidance in CAES system investigation and design in the future.

Gardner, William Payton

2013-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

229

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

230

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

231

Carbon storage: the economic efficiency of storing CO2 in leaky reservoirs  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

industry routinely injects CO2 underground to enhance oil recovery (CO2-EOR). A bit more than two thousand kilometers of CO2 pipelines have been laid in Texas to provide for CO2- EOR. In these operations the goal must pay for the CO2. Yet at the end of an EOR operation a major fraction of CO2 purchased remains

Paris-Sud XI, Université de

232

E-Print Network 3.0 - ageologic storage reservoir Sample Search...  

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

JafarGandomi* and Andrew Curtis, School of GeoSciences, The University of Edinburgh, Kings Summary: of a range of 1D subsurface CO2 reservoir models. Each model consists of a...

233

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

234

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

235

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

236

THE OHIO RIVER VALLEY CO2 STORAGE PROJECT - PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF DEEP SALINE RESERVOIRS AND COAL SEAMS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report describes the geologic setting for the Deep Saline Reservoirs and Coal Seams in the Ohio River Valley CO{sub 2} Storage Project area. The object of the current project is to site and design a CO{sub 2} injection facility. A location near New Haven, WV, has been selected for the project. To assess geologic storage reservoirs at the site, regional and site-specific geology were reviewed. Geologic reports, deep well logs, hydraulic tests, and geologic maps were reviewed for the area. Only one well within 25 miles of the site penetrates the deeper sedimentary rocks, so there is a large amount of uncertainty regarding the deep geology at the site. New Haven is located along the Ohio River on the border of West Virginia and Ohio. Topography in the area is flat in the river valley but rugged away from the Ohio River floodplain. The Ohio River Valley incises 50-100 ft into bedrock in the area. The area of interest lies within the Appalachian Plateau, on the western edge of the Appalachian Mountain chain. Within the Appalachian Basin, sedimentary rocks are 3,000 to 20,000 ft deep and slope toward the southeast. The rock formations consist of alternating layers of shale, limestone, dolomite, and sandstone overlying dense metamorphic continental shield rocks. The Rome Trough is the major structural feature in the area, and there may be some faults associated with the trough in the Ohio-West Virginia Hinge Zone. The area has a low earthquake hazard with few historical earthquakes. Target injection reservoirs include the basal sandstone/Lower Maryville and the Rose Run Sandstone. The basal sandstone is an informal name for sandstones that overlie metamorphic shield rock. Regional geology indicates that the unit is at a depth of approximately 9,100 ft below the surface at the project site and associated with the Maryville Formation. Overall thickness appears to be 50-100 ft. The Rose Run Sandstone is another potential reservoir. The unit is located approximately 1,100 ft above the basal sandstone and is 100-200 ft thick. The storage capacity estimates for a 20-mile radius from the injection well ranged from 39-78 million tons (Mt) for each formation. Several other oil and gas plays have hydraulic properties conducive for injection, but the formations are generally only 5-50 ft thick in the study area. Overlying the injection reservoirs are thick sequences of dense, impermeable dolomite, limestone, and shale. These layers provide containment above the potential injection reservoirs. In general, it appears that the containment layers are much thicker and extensive than the injection intervals. Other physical parameters for the study area appear to be typical for the region. Anticipated pressures at maximum depths are approximately 4,100 psi based on a 0.45 psi/ft pressure gradient. Temperatures are likely to be 150 F. Groundwater flow is slow and complex in deep formations. Regional flow directions appear to be toward the west-northwest at less than 1 ft per year within the basal sandstone. Vertical gradients are downward in the study area. A review of brine geochemistry indicates that formation fluids have high salinity and dissolved solids. Total dissolved solids ranges from 200,000-325,000 mg/L in the deep reservoirs. Brine chemistry is similar throughout the different formations, suggesting extensive mixing in a mature basin. Unconsolidated sediments in the Ohio River Valley are the primary source of drinking water in the study area.

Michael J. Mudd; Howard Johnson; Charles Christopher; T.S. Ramakrishnan, Ph.D.

2003-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

237

Prediction of the effects of compositional mixing in a reservoir on conversion to natural gas storage.  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

??The increased interest in the development of new Gas Storage Fields over the lastseveral decades has created some interesting challenges for the industry. Most existinggas… (more)

Brannon, Alan W.

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

238

Maximizing Storage Rate and Capacity and Insuring the Environmental Integrity of Carbon Dioxide Sequestration in Geological Reservoirs  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Maximizing Storage Rate and Capacity and Insuring the Environmental Integrity of Carbon Dioxide Sequestration in Geological Formations The U.S. and other countries may enter into an agreement that will require a significant reduction in CO2 emissions in the medium to long term. In order to achieve such goals without drastic reductions in fossil fuel usage, CO2 must be removed from the atmosphere and be stored in acceptable reservoirs. The research outlined in this proposal deals with developing a methodology to determine the suitability of a particular geologic formation for the long-term storage of CO2 and technologies for the economical transfer and storage of CO2 in these formations. A novel well-logging technique using nuclear-magnetic resonance (NMR) will be developed to characterize the geologic formation including the integrity and quality of the reservoir seal (cap rock). Well-logging using NMR does not require coring, and hence, can be performed much more quickly and efficiently. The key element in the economical transfer and storage of the CO2 is hydraulic fracturing the formation to achieve greater lateral spreads and higher throughputs of CO2. Transport, compression, and drilling represent the main costs in CO2 sequestration. The combination of well-logging and hydraulic fracturing has the potential of minimizing these costs. It is possible through hydraulic fracturing to reduce the number of injection wells by an order of magnitude. Many issues will be addressed as part of the proposed research to maximize the storage rate and capacity and insure the environmental integrity of CO2 sequestration in geological formations. First, correlations between formation properties and NMR relaxation times will be firmly established. A detailed experimental program will be conducted to determine these correlations. Second, improved hydraulic fracturing models will be developed which are suitable for CO2 sequestration as opposed to enhanced oil recovery (EOR). Although models that simulate the fracturing process exist, they can be significantly improved by extending the models to account for nonsymmetric, nonplanar fractures, coupling the models to more realistic reservoir simulators, and implementing advanced multiphase flow models for the transport of proppant. Third, it may be possible to deviate from current hydraulic fracturing technology by using different proppants (possibly waste materials that need to be disposed of, e.g., asbestos) combined with different hydraulic fracturing carrier fluids (possibly supercritical CO2 itself). Because current technology is mainly aimed at enhanced oil recovery, it may not be ideally suited for the injection and storage of CO2. Finally, advanced concepts such as increasing the injectivity of the fractured geologic formations through acidization with carbonated water will be investigated. Saline formations are located through most of the continental United States. Generally, where saline formations are scarce, oil and gas reservoirs and coal beds abound. By developing the technology outlined here, it will be possible to remove CO2 at the source (power plants, industry) and inject it directly into nearby geological formations, without releasing it into the atmosphere. The goal of the proposed research is to develop a technology capable of sequestering CO2 in geologic formations at a cost of US $10 per ton.

L.A. Davis; A.L. Graham; H.W. Parker; J.R. Abbott; M.S. Ingber; A.A. Mammoli; L.A. Mondy; Quanxin Guo; Ahmed Abou-Sayed

2005-12-07T23:59:59.000Z

239

How secure is CO2 storage? Leakage mechanisms of natural CO2 reservoirs  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

technology available to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from large point sources such as power plants and the burial of organic rich rocks such as coal seams.2 We have compiled the first global dataset on natural CO ­ but not necessarily leaking. Figure 4: Diagram showing the state of CO2 in the studied reservoirs. Supercritical

240

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...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

Genetic Diversity in Microcystis Populations of a French Storage Reservoir Assessed by Sequencing of the 16S-23S rRNA  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Genetic Diversity in Microcystis Populations of a French Storage Reservoir Assessed by Sequencing stations with different depths and at two dif- ferent sampling times (winter and summer) in the French allows this microorganism to growth in a broad range of environmental conditions. These papers

Jacquet, Stéphan

242

Porous media compressed air energy storage (PM-CAES): Theory and simulation of the coupled wellbore-reservoir system  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

of selected compressed air energy storage studes, Pacificaspects of compressed-air energy storage in aquifers, J. ofresources and compressed air energy storage (CAES), Energy,

Oldenburg, C.M.

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

243

PRELIMINARY CHARACTERIZATION OF CO2 SEPARATION AND STORAGE PROPERTIES OF COAL GAS RESERVOIRS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

An attractive alternative of sequestering CO{sub 2} is to inject it into coalbed methane reservoirs, particularly since it has been shown to enhance the production of methane during near depletion stages. The basis for enhanced coalbed methane recovery and simultaneous sequestration of carbon dioxide in deep coals is the preferential sorption property of coal, with its affinity for carbon dioxide being significantly higher than that for methane. Yet, the sorption behavior of coal under competitive sorptive environment is not fully understood. Hence, the original objective of this research study was to carry out a laboratory study to investigate the effect of studying the sorption behavior of coal in the presence of multiple gases, primarily methane, CO{sub 2} and nitrogen, in order to understand the mechanisms involved in displacement of methane and its movement in coal. This had to be modified slightly since the PVT property of gas mixtures is still not well understood, and any laboratory work in the area of sorption of gases requires a definite equation of state to calculate the volumes of different gases in free and adsorbed forms. This research study started with establishing gas adsorption isotherms for pure methane and CO{sub 2}. The standard gas expansion technique based on volumetric analysis was used for the experimental work with the additional feature of incorporating a gas chromatograph for analysis of gas composition. The results were analyzed first using the Langmuir theory. As expected, the Langmuir analysis indicated that CO{sub 2} is more than three times as sorptive as methane. This was followed by carrying out a partial desorption isotherm for methane, and then injecting CO{sub 2} to displace methane. The results indicated that CO{sub 2} injection at low pressure displaced all of the sorbed methane, even when the total pressure continued to be high. However, the displacement appeared to be occurring due to a combination of the preferential sorption property of coal and reduction in the partial pressure of methane. As a final step, the Extended Langmuir (EL) model was used to model the coal-methane-CO{sub 2} binary adsorption system. The EL model was found to be very accurate in predicting adsorption of CO{sub 2}, but not so in predicting desorption of methane. The selectivity of CO{sub 2} over methane was calculated to be 4.3:1. This is, of course, not in very good agreement with the measured values which showed the ratio to be 3.5:1. However, the measured results are in good agreement with the field observation at one of the CO{sub 2} injection sites. Based on the findings of this study, it was concluded that low pressure injection of CO{sub 2} can be fairly effective in displacing methane in coalbed reservoirs although this might be difficult to achieve in field conditions. Furthermore, the displacement of methane appears to be not only due to the preferential sorption of methane, but reduction in partial pressure as well. Hence, using a highly adsorbing gas, such as CO{sub 2}, has the advantages of inert gas stripping and non-mixing since the injected gas does not mix with the recovered methane.

John Kemeny; Satya Harpalani

2004-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

244

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

245

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

246

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

247

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

248

Overview of geologic storage of natural gas with an emphasis on assessing the feasibility of storing hydrogen.  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In many regions across the nation geologic formations are currently being used to store natural gas underground. Storage options are dictated by the regional geology and the operational need. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has an interest in understanding theses various geologic storage options, the advantages and disadvantages, in the hopes of developing an underground facility for the storage of hydrogen as a low cost storage option, as part of the hydrogen delivery infrastructure. Currently, depleted gas/oil reservoirs, aquifers, and salt caverns are the three main types of underground natural gas storage in use today. The other storage options available currently and in the near future, such as abandoned coal mines, lined hard rock caverns, and refrigerated mined caverns, will become more popular as the demand for natural gas storage grows, especially in regions were depleted reservoirs, aquifers, and salt deposits are not available. The storage of hydrogen within the same type of facilities, currently used for natural gas, may add new operational challenges to the existing cavern storage industry, such as the loss of hydrogen through chemical reactions and the occurrence of hydrogen embrittlement. Currently there are only three locations worldwide, two of which are in the United States, which store hydrogen. All three sites store hydrogen within salt caverns.

Lord, Anna Snider

2009-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

249

Regulatory, technical pressures prompt more U. S. salt-cavern gas storage  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Natural-gas storage in US salt caverns is meeting the need for flexible, high delivery and injection storage following implementation Nov. 1, 1993, of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's Order 636. This ruling has opened the US underground natural-gas storage market to more participants and created a demand for a variety of storage previously provided by pipelines as part of their bundled sales services. Many of these new services such as no-notice and supply balancing center on use of high-delivery natural gas storage from salt caverns. Unlike reservoir storage, nothing restricts flow in a cavern. The paper discusses the unique properties of salt that make it ideal for gas storage, choosing a location for the storage facility, cavern depth and shape, cavern size, spacing, pressures, construction, conversion or brine or LPG storage caverns to natural gas, and operation.

Barron, T.F. (PB-KBB Inc., Houston, TX (United States))

1994-09-12T23:59:59.000Z

250

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

251

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...

252

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

253

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

254

Area of Interest 1, CO2 at the Interface: Nature and Dynamics of the Reservoir/Caprock Contact and Implications for Carbon Storage Performance  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

We examined the influence of geologic features present at the reservoir/caprock interface on the transmission of supercritical CO2 into and through caprock. We focused on the case of deformation-band faults in reservoir lithologies that intersect the interface and transition to opening-mode fractures in caprock lithologies. Deformation-band faults are exceeding common in potential CO2 injection units and our fieldwork in Utah indicates that this sort of transition is common. To quantify the impact of these interface features on flow and transport we first described the sedimentology and permeability characteristics of selected sites along the Navajo Sandstone (reservoir lithology) and Carmel Formation (caprock lithology) interface, and along the Slickrock Member (reservoir lithology) and Earthy Member (caprock lithology) of the Entrada Sandstone interface, and used this information to construct conceptual permeability models for numerical analysis. We then examined the impact of these structures on flow using single-phase and multiphase numerical flow models for these study sites. Key findings include: (1) Deformation-band faults strongly compartmentalize the reservoir and largely block cross-fault flow of supercritical CO2. (2) Significant flow of CO2 through the fractures is possible, however, the magnitude is dependent on the small-scale geometry of the contact between the opening-mode fracture and the deformation band fault. (3) Due to the presence of permeable units in the caprock, caprock units are capable of storing significant volumes of CO2, particularly when the fracture network does not extend all the way through the caprock. The large-scale distribution of these deformation-bandfault- to-opening-mode-fractures is related to the curvature of the beds, with greater densities of fractures in high curvature regions. We also examined core and outcrops from the Mount Simon Sandstone and Eau Claire Formation reservoir/caprock interface in order to extend our work to a reservoir/caprock pair this is currently being assessed for long-term carbon storage. These analyses indicate that interface features similar to those observed at the Utah sites 3 were not observed. Although not directly related to our main study topic, one byproduct of our investigation is documentation of exceptionally high degrees of heterogeneity in the pore-size distribution of the Mount Simon Sandstone. This suggests that the unit has a greater-than-normal potential for residual trapping of supercritical CO2.

Mozley, Peter; Evans, James; Dewers, Thomas

2014-10-31T23:59:59.000Z

255

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

256

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

257

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

258

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

259

Carbon storage: the economic efficiency of storing CO2 in leaky reservoirs Minh Ha-Duong, David W. Keith  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

: The upstream oil and gas industry routinely injects CO2 underground to enhance oil recovery (CO2- EOR). A bit more than 2,000 km of CO2 pipelines have been laid in Texas to provide for CO2-EOR. In these operations-used, since operators must pay for the CO2. Yet at the end of an EOR operation a major fraction of CO2

Paris-Sud XI, Université de

260

Two-Stage, Integrated, Geothermal-CO2 Storage Reservoirs: An Approach for Sustainable Energy Production, CO2-Sequestration Security, and Reduced Environmental Risk  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

We introduce a hybrid two-stage energy-recovery approach to sequester CO{sub 2} and produce geothermal energy at low environmental risk and low cost by integrating geothermal production with CO{sub 2} capture and sequestration (CCS) in saline, sedimentary formations. Our approach combines the benefits of the approach proposed by Buscheck et al. (2011b), which uses brine as the working fluid, with those of the approach first suggested by Brown (2000) and analyzed by Pruess (2006), using CO{sub 2} as the working fluid, and then extended to saline-formation CCS by Randolph and Saar (2011a). During stage one of our hybrid approach, formation brine, which is extracted to provide pressure relief for CO{sub 2} injection, is the working fluid for energy recovery. Produced brine is applied to a consumptive beneficial use: feedstock for fresh water production through desalination, saline cooling water, or make-up water to be injected into a neighboring reservoir operation, such as in Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS), where there is often a shortage of a working fluid. For stage one, it is important to find economically feasible disposition options to reduce the volume of brine requiring reinjection in the integrated geothermal-CCS reservoir (Buscheck et al. 2012a). During stage two, which begins as CO{sub 2} reaches the production wells; coproduced brine and CO{sub 2} are the working fluids. We present preliminary reservoir engineering analyses of this approach, using a simple conceptual model of a homogeneous, permeable CO{sub 2} storage formation/geothermal reservoir, bounded by relatively impermeable sealing units. We assess both the CO{sub 2} sequestration capacity and geothermal energy production potential as a function of well spacing between CO{sub 2} injectors and brine/CO{sub 2} producers for various well patterns and for a range of subsurface conditions.

Buscheck, T A; Chen, M; Sun, Y; Hao, Y; Elliot, T R

2012-02-02T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

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

262

Natural and industrial analogues for release of CO2 from storage reservoirs: Identification of features, events, and processes and lessons learned  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

at sites with depleted oil or gas reservoirs where wells areat sites with depleted oil or gas reservoirs where wells areparticularly in depleted oil or gas reservoir systems, where

Lewicki, Jennifer L.; Birkholzer, Jens; Tsang, Chin-Fu

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

263

Sandia National Laboratories: measuring critical underground reservoir  

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 Security Administration the1developmentturbine bladelifetime is the cumulative timemaximizemeasurement

264

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,...

265

Development of high through-put Sr isotope analysis for monitoring reservoir integrity for CO{sub 2} storage.  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Recent innovations in multi-collector ICP-mass spectrometry (MC-ICP-MS) have allowed for rapid and precise measurements of isotope ratios in geological samples. Naturally occurring Sr isotopes has the potential for use in Monitoring, Verification, and Accounting (MVA) associated with geologic CO2 storage. Sr isotopes can be useful for: Sensitive tracking of brine migration; Determining seal rock leakage; Studying fluid/rock reactions. We have optimized separation chemistry procedures that will allow operators to prepare samples for Sr isotope analysis off site using rapid, low cost methods.

Wall, Andy; Jain, Jinesh; Stewart, Brian; Capo, Rosemary; Hakala, Alexandra J.; Hammack, Richard; Guthrie, George

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

266

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

267

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

268

Underground infrastructure damage for a Chicago scenario  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Estimating effects due to an urban IND (improvised nuclear device) on underground structures and underground utilities is a challenging task. Nuclear effects tests performed at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) during the era of nuclear weapons testing provides much information on how underground military structures respond. Transferring this knowledge to answer questions about the urban civilian environment is needed to help plan responses to IND scenarios. Explosions just above the ground surface can only couple a small fraction of the blast energy into an underground shock. The various forms of nuclear radiation have limited penetration into the ground. While the shock transmitted into the ground carries only a small fraction of the blast energy, peak stresses are generally higher and peak ground displacement is lower than in the air blast. While underground military structures are often designed to resist stresses substantially higher than due to the overlying rocks and soils (overburden), civilian structures such as subways and tunnels would generally only need to resist overburden conditions with a suitable safety factor. Just as we expect the buildings themselves to channel and shield air blast above ground, basements and other underground openings as well as changes of geology will channel and shield the underground shock wave. While a weaker shock is expected in an urban environment, small displacements on very close-by faults, and more likely, soils being displaced past building foundations where utility lines enter could readily damaged or disable these services. Immediately near an explosion, the blast can 'liquefy' a saturated soil creating a quicksand-like condition for a period of time. We extrapolate the nuclear effects experience to a Chicago-based scenario. We consider the TARP (Tunnel and Reservoir Project) and subway system and the underground lifeline (electric, gas, water, etc) system and provide guidance for planning this scenario.

Dey, Thomas N [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Bos, Rabdall J [Los Alamos National Laboratory

2011-01-25T23:59:59.000Z

269

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.

270

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...

271

Mathematical models as tools for probing long-term safety of CO2 storage  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

reservoirs, with large capacity for CO 2 storage (Bradshaw and Dance, 2004; Bachu, 2008). Improperly abandoned

Pruess, Karsten

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

272

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

273

Understanding the use of natural gas storage for generators of electricity  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Underground natural gas storage is aggressively used by a handful of utility electric generators in the United States. While storage facilities are often utilized by the natural gas pipeline industry and the local distribution companies (LDCs), regional electric generators have taken advantgage of abundant storage and pipeline capacity to develop very cost efficient gas fired electric generating capacity, especially for peaking demand. Most types of natural gas storage facilities are located underground, with a few based above-ground. These facilities have served two basic types of natural gas storage service requirements: seasonal baseload and needle peakshaving. Baseload services are typically developed in depleted oil and gas reservoirs and aquifers while mined caverns and LNG facilities (also Propane-air facilities) typically provide needle peakshaving services. Reengineering of the natural gas infrastructure will alter the historical use patterns, and will provide the electric industry with new gas supply management tools. Electric generators, as consumers of natural gas, were among the first open access shippers and, as a result of FERC Order 636, are now attempting to reposition themselves in the {open_quotes}new{close_quotes} gas industry. Stated in terms of historical consumption, the five largest gas burning utilities consume 40% of all the gas burned for electric generation, and the top twenty accounted for approximately 70%. Slightly more than 100 utilities, including municipals, have any gas fired generating capacity, a rather limited number. These five are all active consumers of storage services.

Beckman, K.L. [International Gas Consulting, Inc., Houston, TX (United States)

1995-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

274

Operation of water supply reservoirs for flood mitigation : hydrologic and institutional considerations  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Additional demands are being placed upon reservoirs to meet a variety of diverse needs. These demands require efficient management of the limited storage through reservoir operations. This efficiency is most critical with water supply reservoirs...

Craney, Patrick Wayne

1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

275

Assessing the Effect of Timing of Availability for Carbon Dioxide Storage in the Largest Oil and Gas Pools in the Alberta Basin: Description of Data and Methodology  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Carbon dioxide capture from large stationary sources and storage in geological media is a technologically-feasible mitigation measure for the reduction of anthropogenic emissions of CO2 to the atmosphere in response to climate change. Carbon dioxide (CO2) can be sequestered underground in oil and gas reservoirs, in deep saline aquifers, in uneconomic coal beds and in salt caverns. The Alberta Basin provides a very large capacity for CO2 storage in oil and gas reservoirs, along with significant capacity in deep saline formations and possible unmineable coal beds. Regional assessments of potential geological CO2 storage capacity have largely focused so far on estimating the total capacity that might be available within each type of reservoir. While deep saline formations are effectively able to accept CO2 immediately, the storage potential of other classes of candidate storage reservoirs, primarily oil and gas fields, is not fully available at present time. Capacity estimates to date have largely overlooked rates of depletion in these types of storage reservoirs and typically report the total estimated storage capacity that will be available upon depletion. However, CO2 storage will not (and cannot economically) begin until the recoverable oil and gas have been produced via traditional means. This report describes a reevaluation of the CO2 storage capacity and an assessment of the timing of availability of the oil and gas pools in the Alberta Basin with very large storage capacity (>5 MtCO2 each) that are being looked at as likely targets for early implementation of CO2 storage in the region. Over 36,000 non-commingled (i.e., single) oil and gas pools were examined with effective CO2 storage capacities being individually estimated. For each pool, the life expectancy was estimated based on a combination of production decline analysis constrained by the remaining recoverable reserves and an assessment of economic viability, yielding an estimated depletion date, or year that it will be available for CO2 storage. The modeling framework and assumptions used to assess the impact of the timing of CO2 storage resource availability on the region’s deployment of CCS technologies is also described. The purpose of this report is to describe the data and methodology for examining the carbon dioxide (CO2) storage capacity resource of a major hydrocarbon province incorporating estimated depletion dates for its oil and gas fields with the largest CO2 storage capacity. This allows the development of a projected timeline for CO2 storage availability across the basin and enables a more realistic examination of potential oil and gas field CO2 storage utilization by the region’s large CO2 point sources. The Alberta Basin of western Canada was selected for this initial examination as a representative mature basin, and the development of capacity and depletion date estimates for the 227 largest oil and gas pools (with a total storage capacity of 4.7 GtCO2) is described, along with the impact on source-reservoir pairing and resulting CO2 transport and storage economics. The analysis indicates that timing of storage resource availability has a significant impact on the mix of storage reservoirs selected for utilization at a given time, and further confirms the value that all available reservoir types offer, providing important insights regarding CO2 storage implementation to this and other major oil and gas basins throughout North America and the rest of the world. For CCS technologies to deploy successfully and offer a meaningful contribution to climate change mitigation, CO2 storage reservoirs must be available not only where needed (preferably co-located with or near large concentrations of CO2 sources or emissions centers) but also when needed. The timing of CO2 storage resource availability is therefore an important factor to consider when assessing the real opportunities for CCS deployment in a given region.

Dahowski, Robert T.; Bachu, Stefan

2007-03-05T23:59:59.000Z

276

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

277

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...

278

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...

279

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...

280

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...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

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

282

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

283

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

284

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

285

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

286

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

287

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

288

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

289

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

290

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

291

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

292

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

293

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

294

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

295

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

296

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

297

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

298

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

299

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

300

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

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

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

302

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

303

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

304

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

305

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

306

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

307

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

308

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

309

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

310

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

311

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

312

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

313

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

314

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

315

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

316

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

317

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

318

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

319

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

320

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

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

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

322

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

323

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 >

324

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,

325

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...

326

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

327

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

328

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

329

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

330

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)

331

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

332

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

333

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

334

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

335

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

336

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

337

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

338

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

339

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)

340

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

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

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

342

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

343

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

344

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

345

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

346

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

347

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

348

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

349

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

350

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

351

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

352

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

353

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

354

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

355

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

356

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

357

A life cycle cost analysis framework for geologic storage of hydrogen : a user's tool.  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has an interest in large scale hydrogen geostorage, which could offer substantial buffer capacity to meet possible disruptions in supply or changing seasonal demands. The geostorage site options being considered are salt caverns, depleted oil/gas reservoirs, aquifers and hard rock caverns. The DOE has an interest in assessing the geological, geomechanical and economic viability for these types of geologic hydrogen storage options. This study has developed an economic analysis methodology and subsequent spreadsheet analysis to address costs entailed in developing and operating an underground geologic storage facility. This year the tool was updated specifically to (1) incorporate more site-specific model input assumptions for the wells and storage site modules, (2) develop a version that matches the general format of the HDSAM model developed and maintained by Argonne National Laboratory, and (3) incorporate specific demand scenarios illustrating the model's capability. Four general types of underground storage were analyzed: salt caverns, depleted oil/gas reservoirs, aquifers, and hard rock caverns/other custom sites. Due to the substantial lessons learned from the geological storage of natural gas already employed, these options present a potentially sizable storage option. Understanding and including these various geologic storage types in the analysis physical and economic framework will help identify what geologic option would be best suited for the storage of hydrogen. It is important to note, however, that existing natural gas options may not translate to a hydrogen system where substantial engineering obstacles may be encountered. There are only three locations worldwide that currently store hydrogen underground and they are all in salt caverns. Two locations are in the U.S. (Texas), and are managed by ConocoPhillips and Praxair (Leighty, 2007). The third is in Teeside, U.K., managed by Sabic Petrochemicals (Crotogino et al., 2008; Panfilov et al., 2006). These existing H{sub 2} facilities are quite small by natural gas storage standards. The second stage of the analysis involved providing ANL with estimated geostorage costs of hydrogen within salt caverns for various market penetrations for four representative cities (Houston, Detroit, Pittsburgh and Los Angeles). Using these demand levels, the scale and cost of hydrogen storage necessary to meet 10%, 25% and 100% of vehicle summer demands was calculated.

Kobos, Peter Holmes; Lord, Anna Snider; Borns, David James; Klise, Geoffrey T.

2011-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

358

A life cycle cost analysis framework for geologic storage of hydrogen : a scenario analysis.  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The U.S. Department of Energy has an interest in large scale hydrogen geostorage, which would offer substantial buffer capacity to meet possible disruptions in supply. Geostorage options being considered are salt caverns, depleted oil/gas reservoirs, aquifers and potentially hard rock cavrns. DOE has an interest in assessing the geological, geomechanical and economic viability for these types of hydrogen storage options. This study has developed an ecocomic analysis methodology to address costs entailed in developing and operating an underground geologic storage facility. This year the tool was updated specifically to (1) a version that is fully arrayed such that all four types of geologic storage options can be assessed at the same time, (2) incorporate specific scenarios illustrating the model's capability, and (3) incorporate more accurate model input assumptions for the wells and storage site modules. Drawing from the knowledge gained in the underground large scale geostorage options for natural gas and petroleum in the U.S. and from the potential to store relatively large volumes of CO{sub 2} in geological formations, the hydrogen storage assessment modeling will continue to build on these strengths while maintaining modeling transparency such that other modeling efforts may draw from this project.

Kobos, Peter Holmes; Lord, Anna Snider; Borns, David James

2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

359

Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) detection of water storage changes in the Three Gorges Reservoir of China and comparison with in situ measurements  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

GRACE and a land-atmosphere water balance, Geophys. Res.2008), Analysis of terrestrial water storage changes fromGRACE and GLDAS, Water Resour. Res. , 44, W02433, doi:

Wang, Xianwei; de Linage, Caroline; Famiglietti, James; Zender, Charles S

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

360

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...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

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

362

Reservoir monitoring: 1990 summary of vital signs and use impairment monitoring on Tennessee Valley Reservoirs  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) initiated a Reservoir Monitoring Program on 12 TVA reservoirs (the nine main stream Tennessee river reservoirs -- Kentucky through Fort Loudoun and three major tributary storage reservoirs -- Cherokee, Douglas, and Norris) in autumn 1989. The objective of the Reservoir Monitoring Program is to provide basic information on the ``health`` or integrity of the aquatic ecosystem in each TVA reservoir (``Vital Signs``) and to provide screening level information for describing how well each reservoir meets the swimmable and fishable goals of the Clean Water Act (Use Impairments). This is the first time in the history of the agency that a commitment to a long-term, systematic sampling of major TVA reservoirs has been made. The basis of the Vital Signs Monitoring is examination of appropriate physical, chemical, and biological indicators in three areas of each reservoir. These three areas are the forebay immediately upstream of the dam; the transition zone (the mid-reservoir region where the water changes from free flowing to more quiescent, impounded water); and the inflow or headwater region of the reservoir. The Use Impairments monitoring provides screening level information on the suitability of selected areas within TVA reservoirs for water contact activities (swimmable) and suitability of fish from TVA reservoirs for human consumption (fishable).

Dycus, D.L.; Meinert, D.L.

1991-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

363

Reservoir monitoring: 1990 summary of vital signs and use impairment monitoring on Tennessee Valley Reservoirs  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) initiated a Reservoir Monitoring Program on 12 TVA reservoirs (the nine main stream Tennessee river reservoirs -- Kentucky through Fort Loudoun and three major tributary storage reservoirs -- Cherokee, Douglas, and Norris) in autumn 1989. The objective of the Reservoir Monitoring Program is to provide basic information on the health'' or integrity of the aquatic ecosystem in each TVA reservoir ( Vital Signs'') and to provide screening level information for describing how well each reservoir meets the swimmable and fishable goals of the Clean Water Act (Use Impairments). This is the first time in the history of the agency that a commitment to a long-term, systematic sampling of major TVA reservoirs has been made. The basis of the Vital Signs Monitoring is examination of appropriate physical, chemical, and biological indicators in three areas of each reservoir. These three areas are the forebay immediately upstream of the dam; the transition zone (the mid-reservoir region where the water changes from free flowing to more quiescent, impounded water); and the inflow or headwater region of the reservoir. The Use Impairments monitoring provides screening level information on the suitability of selected areas within TVA reservoirs for water contact activities (swimmable) and suitability of fish from TVA reservoirs for human consumption (fishable).

Dycus, D.L.; Meinert, D.L.

1991-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

364

Type curve analysis for naturally fractured reservoirs (infinite-acting reservoir case): a new approach  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

analysis methods are sometimes inconclusive for pressure transient analysis of wells completed in naturally fractured reservoirs. This is due to wellbore storage effects which mask the early time "straight-line" that is expected on the semilog plot...

Angel Restrepo, Juan Alejandro

2012-06-07T23:59:59.000Z

365

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

366

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

367

A Novel Approach For the Simulation of Multiple Flow Mechanisms and Porosities in Shale Gas Reservoirs  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

The state of the art of modeling fluid flow in shale gas reservoirs is dominated by dual porosity models that divide the reservoirs into matrix blocks that significantly contribute to fluid storage and fracture networks which principally control...

Yan, Bicheng

2013-07-15T23:59:59.000Z

368

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,...

369

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...

370

Compressed air energy storage system  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

An internal combustion reciprocating engine is operable as a compressor during slack demand periods utilizing excess power from a power grid to charge air into an air storage reservoir and as an expander during peak demand periods to feed power into the power grid utilizing air obtained from the air storage reservoir together with combustible fuel. Preferably the internal combustion reciprocating engine is operated at high pressure and a low pressure turbine and compressor are also employed for air compression and power generation.

Ahrens, Frederick W. (Naperville, IL); Kartsounes, George T. (Naperville, IL)

1981-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

371

Underground and under scrutiny  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

turns to groundwater Nearly every aspect of Texas groundwater is complicated. Unlike the clear movement of surface water to rivers and reservoirs following rains, the science of exactly how water moves down into aquifers and then within... their geological features is more multifaceted. Consider that each aquifer in Texas has different geological and hydrological character- istics, and therefore varying recharge rates, water quality and regional needs, and the complexity heightens. From a legal...

Lee, Leslie

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

372

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...

373

Managing the risk of CO2 leakage from deep saline aquifer reservoirs through the creation of a hydraulic barrier  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

- up in the storage reservoir. For some man-made leakages (e.g. abandoned well), and more importantlyGHGT-10 Managing the risk of CO2 leakage from deep saline aquifer reservoirs through the creation emissions. Depleted oil and gas fields or saline aquifers are seen as possible storage reservoirs

Paris-Sud XI, Université de

374

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

375

Application of reservoir models to Cherokee Reservoir  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

As a part of the Cherokee Reservoir Project hydrodynamic-temperature models and water quality models hav

Kim, B.R.; Bruggink, D.J.

1982-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

376

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

377

Flood Operation Rules for a Single Reservoir Licheng Dong  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

, University of California - Davis 2012-12-12 Abstract This paper examines the theoretical behavior ecosystems. 2. Simple Inflow Hydrographs Three main factors affect the reservoir's inflow flood volume and peak outflow (Ergish, 2010): 1) inflow hydrograph volume and shape; 2) controllable reservoir storage

Lund, Jay R.

378

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

379

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.

380

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

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

Identification and quantification of fracture behavior through reservoir simulation  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This study demonstrated the use of reservoir simulation as a tool for quantifying and describing the relative significance of fracture and matrix flow units to overall reservoir storage capacity and transmissibility in a field development example. A high matrix porosity Pennsylvanian age sandstone oil reservoir, that is currently undergoing the early stages of secondary recovery by waterflood, was studied. Unexpected early water breakthrough indicated the presence of a high directional permeability fracture system superimposed on the high porosity matrix system. To further understand the reservoir behavior, improve field performance and to quantify the relative contributions of fracture and matrix units to permeability and storage capacity, a reservoir simulation and characterization project was initiated. Well test, well log, tracer and geologic data were integrated into the simulation project. The integrated study indicated that the fractures exhibited high directional permeability but low storage capacity relative to the matrix portion of the reservoir. Although fractures heavily influenced overall fluid flow behavior, they did not contain large storage capacity. The system had a low calculated fracture intensity index. Reservoir simulation enabled the quantification of the relative importance of the two flow systems which in turn had a large impact on total reserves estimates and production forecasting. Simulation results indicated a need to realign injector and producer patterns which improved production rates and ultimate recovery.

Cline, S. [Univ. of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK (United States)]|[Hefner Corporation, Oklahoma City, OK (United States)

1995-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

382

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

383

A Simple Model for Estimating Water Balance and Salinity of Reservoirs and Outflow  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

on flow and salinity of the stream and the floodplains. The first part deals with water and salt balance in reservoirs. The primary purpose of the model is to predict outflow salinity from the reservoir storage and inflow information in advance... management strategy, yet the method to predict outflow salinity has not been adequately examined. The study reported here examined the water and salt balance in a reservoir using a two-layer model. This model assumes that inflow blends with the storage...

Miyamoto, S; Yuan, F; Anand, Shilpa

2010-08-23T23:59:59.000Z

384

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

385

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

386

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

387

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

388

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

389

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

390

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

391

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

392

Displacement of oil from reservoir rock using high molecular weight polymer solutions  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

underground reservoirs by the injection of water containing chemicals to increase its viscosity. Some laboratory research and field trials have been conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of viscous water in dis- placing oil from reservoir rock.... ia. Twenty-eight experiments were conducted. In twenty-two experiments oil was displaced from un- consolidated sand packs using polymers with viscosity that ranged from 160 cp to 3 cp. In five experiments crude oil was displaced. from...

Barzi, Houshang

1972-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

393

Status of Cherokee Reservoir  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This is the first in a series of reports prepared by Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) for those interested in the conditions of TVA reservoirs. This overviews of Cherokee Reservoir summarizes reservoir and watershed characteristics, reservoir uses and use impairments, water quality and aquatic biological conditions, and activities of reservoir management agencies. This information was extracted from the most current reports, publications, and data available, and interviews with water resource professionals in various Federal, state, and local agencies and in public and private water supply and wastewater treatment facilities. 11 refs., 4 figs., 1 tab.

Not Available

1990-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

394

CO{sub 2} Injectivity, Storage Capacity, Plume Size, and Reservoir and Seal Integrity of the Ordovician St. Peter Sandstone and the Cambrian Potosi Formation in the Illnois Basin  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Cambro-Ordovician strata of the Illinois and Michigan Basins underlie most of the states of Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, and Michigan. This interval also extends through much of the Midwest of the United States and, for some areas, may be the only available target for geological sequestration of CO{sub 2}. We evaluated the Cambro-Ordovician strata above the basal Mt. Simon Sandstone reservoir for sequestration potential. The two targets were the Cambrian carbonate intervals in the Knox and the Ordovician St. Peter Sandstone. The evaluation of these two formations was accomplished using wireline data, core data, pressure data, and seismic data from the USDOE-funded Illinois Basin â?? Decatur Project being conducted by the Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium in Macon County, Illinois. Interpretations were completed using log analysis software, a reservoir flow simulator, and a finite element solver that determines rock stress and strain changes resulting from the pressure increase associated with CO{sub 2} injection. Results of this research suggest that both the St. Peter Sandstone and the Potosi Dolomite (a formation of the Knox) reservoirs may be capable of storing up to 2 million tonnes of CO{sub 2} per year for a 20-year period. Reservoir simulation results for the St. Peter indicate good injectivity and a relatively small CO{sub 2} plume. While a single St. Peter well is not likely to achieve the targeted injection rate of 2 million tonnes/year, results of this study indicate that development with three or four appropriately spaced wells may be sufficient. Reservoir simulation of the Potosi suggest that much of the CO{sub 2} flows into and through relatively thin, high permeability intervals, resulting in a large plume diameter compared with the St. Peter.

Hannes Leetaru; Alan Brown; Donald Lee; Ozgur Senel; Marcia Coueslan

2012-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

395

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

396

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...

397

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

398

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...

399

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...

400

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...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

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

402

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

403

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

404

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

405

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

406

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)

407

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

408

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

409

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

410

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

411

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

412

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

413

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

414

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)

415

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

416

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

417

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

418

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

419

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

420

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

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

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

422

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

423

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

424

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

425

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

426

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

427

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

428

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

429

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

430

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

431

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

432

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

433

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

434

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

435

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

436

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

437

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

438

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

439

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

440

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

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

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)

442

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

443

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

444

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

445

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

446

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)

447

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

448

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

449

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

450

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

451

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

452

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

453

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

454

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

455

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

456

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

457

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

458

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

459

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

460

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

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

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)

462

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

463

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

464

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

465

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

466

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

467

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

468

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

469

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

470

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

471

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

472

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

473

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

474

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

475

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)

476

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)

477

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

478

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

479

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

480

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

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "underground storage reservoir" 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

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)

482

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)

483

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

484

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

485

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

486

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

487

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

488

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

489

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)

490

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

491

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

492

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

493

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

494

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

495

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

496

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

497

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

498

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

499

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

500

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