Sample records for underground storage reservoir

  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)

    Ortiz, I.; Anthony, R.V.

    1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  5. Underground pumped hydroelectric storage

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1984-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  6. Saving an Underground Reservoir 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Wythe, Kathy

    2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    significant part of the region?s agricultural economy. Though the area has few rivers and lakes, underneath it lies a supply of water that has provided groundwater for developing this economy. This underground water, the Ogallala Aquifer, is a finite... resource. The amount of water seeping back into the aquifer is much less than the water taken out, especially in the southern half of the aquifer, which spreads out from western Kansas to the High Plains of Texas. ?Water levels are declining 2 to 4...

  7. 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,...

  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. 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...

  10. Underground-Energy-Storage Program, 1982 annual report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kannberg, L.D.

    1983-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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)

  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)

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

    1998-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  14. Underground gas storage in New York State: A historical perspective

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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.

  15. 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...

  16. 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

  17. Underground storage of hydrocarbons in Ontario

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1995-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  18. Underground storage of oil and gas

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bergman, S.M.

    1984-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  19. ,"Tennessee Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  20. ,"Missouri Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  1. ,"Montana Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  2. ,"Iowa Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  3. ,"Pennsylvania Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  4. ,"Oregon Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  5. ,"Colorado Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  6. ,"Indiana Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  7. ,"Wyoming Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  8. ,"Kansas Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  9. ,"Maryland Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  10. ,"Alaska Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  11. ,"Nebraska Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  12. ,"Mississippi Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  13. ,"Utah Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  14. ,"Illinois Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  15. ,"Oklahoma Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  16. ,"Arkansas Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  17. ,"Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  18. ,"California Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  19. ,"Texas Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  20. ,"Kentucky Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  1. ,"Ohio Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  2. ,"Michigan Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  3. ,"Minnesota Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  4. ,"Washington Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  5. ,"Alabama Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  6. ,"Louisiana Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  7. 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...

  8. 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...

  9. 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

  10. Underground storage tank management plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  11. 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...

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Pruess, Karsten

    2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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

  13. Underground pumped storage scheme in the Bukit Timah granite of Singapore

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1996-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  14. 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...

  15. 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.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Paris-Sud XI, Université de

    Carbon storage: the economic efficiency of storing CO2 in leaky reservoirs Minh Ha-Duong David W carbon underground), we derive analytic expressions for the value of leaky CO2 storage compared to perfect storage when storage is a marginal component of the energy system. If the annual leak rate is 1

  17. Appendix E: Underground Storage Annual Site Environmental Report

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Pennycook, Steve

    Appendix E: Underground Storage Tank Data #12;Annual Site Environmental Report Appendix E: Underground Storage Tank Data E-3 Table E.1. Underground storage tanks (USTs) at the Y-12 Plant Location/95) NA Closure approval 3/95 (6/96) 9714 2334-U 1987 In use 6,000 Gasoline Full Site check NA NA

  18. Appendix C: Underground Storage Annual Site Environmental Report

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Pennycook, Steve

    Appendix C: Underground Storage Tank Data #12;#12;Annual Site Environmental Report Appendix C: Underground Storage Tank Data C-3 Table C.1. Underground storage tanks (USTs) at the Y-12 Plant Location/95) NA Closure approval 3/95 (6/96) 9714 2334-U 1987 In use 6,000 Gasoline Full Site check NA Case closed

  19. Appendix C: Underground Storage Annual Site Environmental Report

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Pennycook, Steve

    Appendix C: Underground Storage Tank Data #12;#12;Annual Site Environmental Report Appendix C: Underground Storage Tank Data C-3 Table C.1. Underground storage tanks (USTs) at the Y-12 Complex Location/95) NA Closure approval 3/95 (6/96) 9714 2334-U 1987 In use 6,000 Gasoline Full Site check NA Case closed

  20. Alabama Underground Storage Tank And Wellhead Protection Act...

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

    commission, is authorized to promulgate rules and regulations governing underground storage tanks and is authorized to seek the approval of the United States Environmental...

  1. ,"Lower 48 States Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  2. ,"AGA Producing Region Underground Natural Gas Storage - All...

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  3. ,"AGA Western Consuming Region Underground Natural Gas Storage...

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  4. ,"West Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  5. ,"AGA Eastern Consuming Region Underground Natural Gas Storage...

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  8. 100-N Area underground storage tank closures

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rowley, C.A.

    1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  9. Legislation pertaining to underground storage tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Goth, W. (Ventura County Environmental Health Division, CA (United States))

    1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Statutory authority in California for cleanup of contaminated soil and groundwater to protect water quality is the Porter Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Water Code 1967). Two state laws regulating underground hazardous material storage tanks, passed in late 1983 and effective on January 1, 1984, were AB-2013 (Cortese) and AB-1362 (Sher). Both require specific actions by the tank owners. AB-2013 requires all tank owners to register them with the state Water Resources Control Board (SWCB) and to pay a registration fee. AB-1362, Health and Safety Code Section 25280 et seq., requires tank owners to obtain a Permit to Operate, pay a fee to the local agency, and to install a leak detection system on all existing tanks. New tanks installation requires a Permit to install and provide provide secondary containment for the tank and piping. For tank closures, a permit must be obtained from the local agency to clean out the tank, remove it from the ground, and collect samples from beneath the tank for evidence of contamination. In 1988, state law AB-853 appropriated state funds to be combined with federal EPA money to allow SWRCB to initiate rapid cleanups of leaks from underground tank sites by contracting with local agencies to oversee assessment and cleanup of underground tank releases. Locally, in Ventura County, there are more than 400 leaking underground tank sites in which petroleum products have entered the groundwater. To date, no public water supplies have been contaminated; however, action in necessary to prevent any future contamination to our water supply. Over 250 leaking tank sites have completed cleanup.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Paris-Sud XI, Université de

    Carbon storage: the economic efficiency of storing CO2 in leaky reservoirs Minh Ha-Duong, David W carbon underground), we derive analytic expressions for the value of leaky CO2 storage compared to perfect storage when storage is a marginal component of the energy system. If the annual leak rate is 1

  11. Permanent Closure of the TAN-664 Underground Storage Tank

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bradley K. Griffith

    2011-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.'

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  13. ADVANCED UNDERGROUND GAS STORAGE CONCEPTS REFRIGERATED-MINED CAVERN STORAGE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1998-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  14. ,"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"...

  15. ,"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"...

  16. ,"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"...

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

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

    ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"2262015 9:16:55 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5070NY2"...

  18. ,"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"...

  19. 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...

  20. 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...

  1. Viewing Systems for Large Underground Storage Tanks.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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.

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  3. Underground storage tank 511-D1U1 closure plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mancieri, S.; Giuntoli, N.

    1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2011-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  5. Numerical Simulations of Leakage from Underground LPG Storage Caverns

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Yamamoto, Hajime; Pruess, Karsten

    2004-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Lippmann, Marcelo J.; Benson, Sally M.

    2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  8. Economic reservoir design and storage conservation by reduced sedimentation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Singh, K.P.; Durgunoglu, A.

    1990-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A mathematical model has been developed for estimating the design storage capacity of a reservoir by using the expected water demand, storage loss due to sedimentation, and physical and hydrological characteristics of the watershed. Suitable mitigative measures can be incorporated in dam design and reservoir operation to substantially reduce sediment entrapment in the reservoir, and to improve dissolved oxygen levels by releasing hypolimnetic waters from the reservoir. These measures may also greatly reduce streambed degradation downstream of the dam and consequent initiation of a new erosion cycle in the tributaries. Economic analyses for different storage-maintenance measures (such as undersluices and flushing pipes) have been investigated in terms of reduction in initial reservoir design storage, cost of installing measures, and cost of any dredging operations. These analyses are performed for a site in Illinois for several water-demand levels and useful lives of the reservoir.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lippmann, Marcelo J.; Benson, Sally M.

    2002-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none

    1998-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  11. 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...

  12. Illinois 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40Coal Stocks at1,066,688ElectricityLess thanThousandUnderground Storage Volume

  13. Delaware Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,128 2,469Decade Year-0Cubic Feet) Underground Storage

  14. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40Coal Stocks at CommercialDecade Year-0 Year-1Year%Underground Storage Volume

  15. Maryland Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade EnergyTennesseeYearUnderground Storage1Feet)Year Jan

  16. Washington 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 onYou are nowTotal" (Percent) Type: Sulfur Content4,367,470 4,364,790 4,363,909 4,363,143 4,363,967 4,363,549 1973-2015 Alaska 14,197 14,197Cubic Feet) Gas,Underground Storage

  17. Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade1(MillionExtensionsThousandUnderground Storage Volume (Million Cubic

  18. Maryland 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade EnergyTennesseeYearUnderground Storage1Feet)Year Jan Feb

  19. Montana Underground Storage Tanks Webpage | 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 onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere I Geothermal Pwer Plant JumpMarysville,Missoula, Montana:Northeast AsiaAir|Underground Storage Tanks Webpage

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  1. Permanent Closure of MFC Biodiesel Underground Storage Tank 99ANL00013

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kerry L. Nisson

    2012-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.”

  2. Storage capacity in hot dry rock reservoirs

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Brown, D.W.

    1997-11-11T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  3. Storage capacity in hot dry rock reservoirs

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Brown, Donald W. (Los Alamos, NM)

    1997-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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

  4. Network Stochastic Programming for Valuing Reservoir Storage

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    complicates the simultaneous optimization of hydropower for a multi-stage, multi-reservoir system. The expected value of hydropower must be simultaneously optimized over all time steps and scenarios. Previous stochastic programming model of the Tennessee River Basin converged rapidly to an upper bound on hydropower

  5. Estimating Residual Solids Volume In Underground Storage Tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2014-01-08T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  6. Structural analysis of underground gunite storage tanks. Environmental Restoration Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Rutqvist, J.

    2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Regulation for Underground Storage of CO2 Passed by U.S. States Holly Javedan Massachusetts Institute of Technology 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02139 #12;p. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT capture, transportation, injection and storage of CO2. To date nine states have passed regulation

  9. Numerical Simulations of Leakage from Underground LPG Storage Caverns

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Yamamoto, Hajime; Pruess, Karsten

    2004-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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

  10. 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...

  11. 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...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kannberg, L.D.

    1982-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  13. Revision Policy for EIA Weekly Underground Natural Gas Storage...

    Weekly Natural Gas Storage Report (EIA)

    April 26, 2005 This report consists of the following sections: General EIA Weekly Natural Gas Storage Report Revisions Policy - a description of how revisions to the Weekly Natural...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    CW Enderlin; DG Alberts; JA Bamberger; M White

    1998-09-25T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  15. Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 135: Areas 25 Underground Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    D. H. Cox

    2001-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 135, Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks, was closed in accordance with the approved Corrective Action Plan (DOE/NV, 2000). CAU 135 consists of three Corrective Action Sites (CAS). Two of these CAS's were identified in the Corrective Action Investigation Data Quality Objective meeting as being improperly identified as underground storage tanks. CAS 25-02-03 identified as the Deluge Valve Pit was actually an underground electrical vault and CAS 25-02-10 identified as an Underground Storage Tank was actually a former above ground storage tank filled with demineralized water. Both of these CAS's are recommended for a no further action closure. CAS 25-02-01 the Underground Storage Tanks commonly referred to as the Engine Maintenance Assembly and Disassembly Waste Holdup Tanks and Vault was closed by decontaminating the vault structure and conducting a radiological verification survey to document compliance with the Nevada Test Site unrestricted use release criteria. The Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks, (CAS 25-02-01), referred to as the Engine Maintenance, Assembly, and Disassembly (E-MAD) Waste Holdup Tanks and Vault, were used to receive liquid waste from all of the radioactive and cell service area drains at the E-MAD Facility. Based on the results of the Corrective Action Investigation conducted in June 1999, discussed in ''The Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 135: Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada'' (DOE/NV, 199a), one sample from the radiological survey of the concrete vault interior exceeded radionuclide preliminary action levels. The analytes from the sediment samples exceeded the preliminary action levels for polychlorinated biphenyls, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act metals, total petroleum hydrocarbons as diesel-range organics, and radionuclides. The CAU 135 closure activities consisted of scabbling radiological ''hot spots'' from the concrete vault, and the drilling removal of the cement-lined vault sump. Field activities began on November 28, 2000, and ended on December 4, 2000. After verification samples were collected, the vault was repaired with cement. The concrete vault sump, soil excavated beneath the sump, and compactable hot line trash were disposed at the Area 23 Sanitary Landfill. The vault interior was field surveyed following the removal of waste to verify that unrestricted release criteria had been achieved. Since the site is closed by unrestricted release decontamination and verification, post-closure care is not required.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

    2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

    2005-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

    2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  19. 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 onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghurajiConventionalMississippi"site. IfProved Reservesthroughwww.eia.govNThousand CubicUnderground

  20. Colorado 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40Coal Stocks at CommercialDecadeReservesYear21 3.96 1967-2010 PipelineUnderground

  1. Indiana 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40Coal Stocks at1,066,688ElectricityLessApril 2015Year Jan Feb MarDecadeUnderground

  2. Delaware Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,128 2,469Decade Year-0Cubic Feet) Underground

  3. Delaware Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,128 2,469Decade Year-0Cubic Feet) UndergroundWithdrawals

  4. AGA Producing Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40Coal Stocks at Commercial andSeptember 25,9,1996 N Y625(95)Feet) Underground

  5. Michigan 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade EnergyTennesseeYearUndergroundCubicDecade

  6. Michigan 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade EnergyTennesseeYearUndergroundCubicDecadeFeet) Year Jan Feb Mar

  7. Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade EnergyTennesseeYearUndergroundCubicDecadeFeet) Year Jan Feb

  8. Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade1 Source: Office of Fossil Energy, U.S.Year Jan Feb Mar AprUnderground

  9. Montana Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade1 Source: Office of FossilFoot) Year Jan Feb(MillionYearUnderground

  10. Virginia 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 onYou are nowTotal" (Percent) Type: Sulfur Content4,367,470 4,364,790 4,363,909 4,363,143 4,363,967 4,363,549 1973-2015 Alaska 14,197 14,197 14,197(BillionYearThousandUnderground

  11. Louisiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade EnergyTennesseeYear Jan Next MECSInput SupplementalYear JanUnderground

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

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

    2005-09-06T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Goloshubin, Gennady M.; Korneev, Valeri A.

    2006-11-14T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    White, Alexander; McTigue, Joshua; Markides, Christos

    2014-03-26T23:59:59.000Z

     .     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...

  15. WSDE Underground Storage Tank Program webpage | 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 onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghuraji Agro IndustriesTown ofNationwide Permit webpage Jump to: navigation, searchInformationStorage

  16. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Underground Natural Gas 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade Year-0E (2001)gasoline353/06)Pipeline UtilizationProcess andStorage

  17. ,"AGA Producing Region 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments; Unit:1996..........Region Natural Gas Underground Storage

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1992-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  19. Potential underground risks associated with CAES.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  20. Flood Storage Allocation Rules for Parallel Reservoirs B.S. (Tsinghua University, China) 2011

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Lund, Jay R.

    i Flood Storage Allocation Rules for Parallel Reservoirs By RUI HUI B.S. (Tsinghua University and minimize flood damage. However, for different hydrograph shapes, corresponding flood storage volumes often differ for the same peak flow reductions. Meanwhile, it is often the case that flood storage volume

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Wurbs, Ralph A.; Carriere, Patrick E.

    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 ...

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    How secure is CO2 storage? Leakage mechanisms of natural CO2 reservoirs Johannes Miocic, Stuart. The goal of CCS is to store carbon dioxide (CO2) in the subsurface for a long period of time (>10,000 yr).1 It is important that the stored CO2 does not leak from the reservoir to the surface . 3. Faults as leakage

  4. U.S. Natural Gas Salt - Underground Storage - Base Gas (Million Cubic Feet)

    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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over OurThe Iron Spin Transition in2,EHSSCoalWithdrawalsPoint of- Underground Storage -

  5. ,"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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy SourcesRefinery, Bulk Terminal, and Natural GasU.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage

  6. Lower 48 States Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade EnergyTennesseeYearUnderground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)

  7. The lifetime of carbon capture and storage as a climate-change mitigation technology

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Szulczewski, Michael Lawrence

    In carbon capture and storage (CCS), CO[subscript 2] is captured at power plants and then injected underground into reservoirs like deep saline aquifers for long-term storage. While CCS may be critical for the continued ...

  8. ageologic storage reservoir: Topics by E-print Network

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

    AND SIMULATION OF A MATURE FIELD USING AN INTEGRATED APPROACH University of Kansas - KU ScholarWorks Summary: Reservoir characterization involves various studies...

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Paris-Sud XI, Université de

    Remediation of CO2 Leakage from Deep Saline Aquifer Storage Based on Reservoir and Pollution Hazards and Safety of CO2 Storage" Division, Orléans, FRANCE www.brgm.fr References Audigane, P., Chiaberge, C., Lions, J., Humez, P., 2009. Modeling of CO2 leakage through an abandoned well from a deep

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

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

    Buscheck, Thomas A.

    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.

  11. Integrated Geothermal-CO2 Storage Reservoirs: FY1 Final Report

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

    Buscheck, Thomas A.

    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.

  12. Flood control reservoir operations for conditions of limited storage capacity

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Rivera Ramirez, Hector David

    2005-02-17T23:59:59.000Z

    ). 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...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-07-29T23:59:59.000Z

    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).

  15. 382-1 underground gasoline storage tank soil-gas survey

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jacques, I.D.

    1993-08-27T23:59:59.000Z

    A soil-gas survey was conducted near the 382 Pump House in the 300 Area of the Hanford Site. The objective of the soil-gas survey was to characterize the extent of petroleum product contamination in the soil beneath the 382-1 underground gasoline storage tank excavation. The tank was discovered to have leaked when it was removed in September 1992. The results of this soil-gas survey indicate petroleum products released from the 382-1 tank are probably contained in a localized region of soil directly beneath the tank excavation site. The soil-gas data combined with earlier tests of groundwater from a nearby downgradient monitoring well suggest the spilled petroleum hydrocarbons have not penetrated the soil profile to the water table.

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

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghuraji Agro IndustriesTownDells,1 U.S. Department of Energygasoline4 Space2.9PetroleumSalt Cavern Storage

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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)

  18. 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)

    NONE

    1996-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Rosner, Stephen Anthony

    1984-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Underground construction is a means of providing efficient use of land space. In recent times, the most extensive use of underground construction has been in Sweden. However, possible uses of underground space were recognized... widespread and efficient use of underground space has been in Sweden. This is facilitated in part by the competent rock that is found there. The stratigraphy in Sweden is dominated by Pre-Cambrian and Paleozoic rock with a thin covering of moraine sediment...

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

    2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Paris-Sud XI, Université de

    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

  2. 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

  3. Evaluation and Optimization of Underground Thermal Energy Storage Systems of Energy Efficient Buildings (WKSP)- A Project within the new German R&D- Framework EnBop

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Bockelmann, F.; Kipry, H.; Plesser, S.; Fisch, M. N.

    of these research projects and presents detailed results of project WKSP. The performance of buildings with systems for underground thermal energy storage is analysed in this project. As the analyses show several systems work worse than expected. Within the project...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  5. 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)

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

    1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  6. Corrective Action Decision Document for Corrective Action Unit 135: Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office

    1999-12-23T23:59:59.000Z

    This corrective action decision document identifies and rationalizes the US Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office's selection of a recommended corrective action alternative (CAA) appropriate to facilitate the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 135, Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks, under the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order. Located on the Nevada Test Site (NTS), CAU 135 consists of three Corrective Action Sites (CASs): 25-02-01, Underground Storage Tanks, referred to as the Engine, Maintenance, Assembly, and Disassembly Waste Holdup Tanks and Vault; 25-02-03, Underground Electrical Vault, referred to as the Deluge Valve Pit at the Test Cell A Facility; and 25-02-10, Underground Storage Tank, referred to as the former location of an aboveground storage tank for demineralized water at the Test Cell A Facility. Two of these CASs (25-02-03 and 25-02-10) were originally considered as underground storage tanks, but were found to be misidentified. Further, radio logical surveys conducted by Bechtel Nevada in January 1999 found no radiological contamination detected above background levels for these two sites; therefore, the closure report for CAU 135 will recommend no further action at these two sites. A corrective action investigation for the one remaining CAS (25-02-01) was conducted in June 1999, and analytes detected during this investigation were evaluated against preliminary action levels. It was determined that contaminants of potential concern included polychlorinated biphenyls, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act metals, total petroleum hydrocarbons as diesel-range organics, and radionuclides. Two corrective action objectives were identified for this CAS (i.e., prevention and mitigation of human exposure to sediments and surrounding areas), and subsequently two CAAs developed for consideration based on a review of existing data, future use, and current operations at the NTS. These CAAs were: Alternative 1 - No Further Action, and Alternative 2 - Unrestricted Release Decontamination and Verification Survey. Alternative 2 was chosen as the preferred CAA, after evaluation of technical merit which focused on performance, reliability, feasibility, and safety. This alternative was judged to meet all applicable state and federal regulations for closure of the site and reduces the potential future exposure pathways to the contaminated surfaces at this site.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2014-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  8. Loss analysis of thermal reservoirs for electrical energy storage schemes

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    White, Alexander

    2011-05-14T23:59:59.000Z

    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...

  9. Geological characterization and 3D visualizations of the gas storage reservoir at Hillsboro field, Montgomery County, IL

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Udegbunam, E.O.; Huff, B.G. [Illinois State Geological Survey, Champaign, IL (United States)

    1994-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    Geological characterizations, modeling and 3-D computer-generated visualizations of the Ordovician St. Peter Sandstone at the Hillsboro Gas Storage field in Montgomery County, Illinois, are discussed. Petrophysical analyses reveal four distinct hydraulic flow units in six cored wells. Furthermore, four lithologies, identified by thin section petrography, are associated with the various hydraulic units. Fieldwide visualizations of 3-D distributions of petrophysically-derived attributes reservoir quality index (RQI) and flow zone indicator (FZI) -- show considerable vertical variability but lateral continuity. This finding explains why it is easier to expand the gas bubble laterally than vertically. Advantages of the 3-D reservoir description of Hillsboro Gas Storage field include (1) improved definition of the spatial porosity distribution which leads to better estimation of reservoir volumetrics; (2) improved definition of reservoir hydraulic flow zones; and (3) development of realistic reservoir model(s) for the simulation and management of the gas storage field.

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

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

    Buscheck, Thomas A.

    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.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Valbuena Olivares, Ernesto

    2012-02-14T23:59:59.000Z

    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...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wiersma, B.; Hansen, A.

    2013-11-13T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  13. 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

  14. 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

  15. Intercomparison of simulation models for CO2 disposal in underground storage reservoirs

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

    2001-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  16. Intercomparison of simulation models for CO{sub 2} disposal in underground storage reservoirs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pruess, K.; Tsang, C.F.; Law, D.; Oldenburg, C.

    2001-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    An intercomparison study between simulation codes for terrestrial sequestration of CO{sub 2} is proposed. The objectives are, on the one hand, to focus and evaluate key processes through numerical simulation and, on the other, to explore the strengths of different codes and achieve acceptance of such codes for use in the development of geologic systems for CO{sub 2} disposal. This will be carried out through the study of a series of test problems by groups using their simulation codes. A progression from simple and uncoupled to increasingly complex and coupled problems is envisioned. The proposed study will attempt to involve interested technical groups worldwide, and will proceed through an iterative process of problem definition, solution comparison, discussion and refinement. The Internet will be used as a medium for communicating and organizing activities, and for a flexible exchange of information and documentation of results. In addition, it is planned to hold a series of workshops. The present write-up includes an initial set of eight proposed test problems and represents the first step in the process. Readers are encouraged to communicate with us at the email address above to indicate their interest and to provide suggestions and input.

  17. THERMAL ENERGY STORAGE IN AQUIFERS WORKSHOP

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Authors, Various

    2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    1975. Underground Storage of Treated Water: A Field Test.1975. "Underground Storage of Treated Water: A Field Test,"

  18. Saving an Underground Reservoir

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Wythe, Kathy

    2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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...

  19. Air ejector augmented compressed air energy storage system

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

    1980-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mclntire, Blayde; McPherson, Brian

    2013-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  2. ,"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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy SourcesRefinery, Bulk Terminal, and Natural GasU.S. Underground Natural Gas

  3. ,"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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy SourcesRefinery, Bulk Terminal, and Natural GasU.S. Underground Natural

  4. ,"AGA Producing Regions 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments; Unit:1996..........Region Natural Gas Underground

  5. ,"AGA Western Consuming Region 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments; Unit:1996..........Region Natural Gas UndergroundWestern

  6. The Performance of Underground Radioactive Waste Storage Tanks at the Savannah River Site: A 60-Year Historical Perspective

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

    Wiersma, Bruce J.

    2014-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Savannah River Site produced weapons-grade materials for nearly 35 years between 1953 and 1988. The legacy of this production is nearly 37 million gallons of radioactive waste. Since the 1950s, the liquid waste has been stored in large, underground carbon steel waste tanks. During the past 20 years, the site has begun to process the waste so that it may be stored in vitrified and grout forms, which are more suitable for long-term storage. Over the history of the site, some tanks have experienced leakage of the waste to the secondary containment. This article is a review of themore »instances of leakage and corrosion degradation that the tanks and associated equipment have experienced since the first tanks were built. Furthermore, the activities that the site has taken to mitigate the degradation and manage the service life of the tank for its anticipated lifetime are reviewed.« less

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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,

  8. Petro-electric modeling for CSEM reservoir characterization and monitoring

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Key, Kerry

    underground gas storage reservoir and demon- strated that the data are repeatable enough to detect in the magnetic and electric fields emitted in the vicinity of the sea floor by electric dipole transmitters fields, or inverted attributes, e.g., rock resis- tivity, can be associated to changes in fluid

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sobolik, Steven Ronald; Bartel, Lewis Clark

    2010-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  10. Predicting Well Stimulation Results in a Gas Storage Field in the Absence of Reservoir Data, Using Neural Networks

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Mohaghegh, Shahab

    SPE 31159 Predicting Well Stimulation Results in a Gas Storage Field in the Absence of Reservoir Data, Using Neural Networks Mohaghegh, S., West Virginia University, McVey, D., National Gas and Oil for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of date wells with the highest potential

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  12. AQUIFER THERMAL ENERGY STORAGE-A SURVEY

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Tsang, Chin Fu

    2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  13. AQUIFER THERMAL ENERGY STORAGE-A SURVEY

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Tsang, Chin Fu

    2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  14. ,"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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources andPlant Liquids,+ LeasePrice Sold to ElectricLNG Storage

  15. ,"Maryland 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments;NetPriceNonassociated NaturalCoalbedLNG StoragePrice

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

    2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Rutqvist, J.

    2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    associated with natural gas storage in Sweden, includingassociated with natural gas storage in Sweden. The main

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Rutqvist, J.

    2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    compressed air energy storage technology by the hydraulicscale electric energy storage technologies. Compressed air

  19. ,"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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources andPlant Liquids,+ LeasePrice Sold to ElectricLNG StorageVolume

  20. ,"Maryland 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments;NetPriceNonassociated NaturalCoalbedLNG StoragePrice SoldNet

  1. ,"New York 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources andPlant Liquids, ExpectedLNG Storage NetPrice Sold toNet Withdrawals

  2. ,"New York 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources andPlant Liquids, ExpectedLNG Storage NetPrice Sold toNet WithdrawalsVolume

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2012-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  4. Evaluation and Optimization of Underground Thermal Energy Storage Systems of Energy Efficient Buildings (WKSP)- A Project within the new German R&D- Framework EnBop 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Bockelmann, F.; Kipry, H.; Plesser, S.; Fisch, M. N.

    2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Evaluation and optimization of underground thermal energy storage systems of Energy Efficient Buildings (WKSP) - A project within the new German R&D-framework EnBop Dipl.-Ing. Franziska Bockelmann IGS ? Institute of Building Services... and Energydesign, Technical University of Braunschweig, Germany Dipl.-Ing. Herdis Kipry IGS ? Institute of Building Services and Energydesign, Technical University of Braunschweig, Germany Dipl.-Ing. Stefan Plesser Head of Energy Efficient Non...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office

    1999-05-05T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Oldenburg, Curtis M.

    2003-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2013-04-15T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Rutqvist, J.

    2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  9. 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)

    Gardner, William Payton

    2013-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    WEBER RA

    2009-01-16T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    FOWLER KD

    2007-12-27T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2003-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  13. Information retrieval system: impacts of water-level changes on uses of federal storage reservoirs of the Columbia River.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fickeisen, D.H.; Cowley, P.J.; Neitzel, D.A.; Simmons, M.A.

    1982-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A project undertaken to provide the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) with information needed to conduct environmental assessments and meet requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act (Regional Act) is described. Access to information on environmental effects would help BPA fulfill its responsibilities to coordinate power generation on the Columbia River system, protect uses of the river system (e.g., irrigation, recreation, navigation), and enhance fish and wildlife production. Staff members at BPA identified the need to compile and index information resources that would help answer environmental impact questions. A computer retrieval system that would provide ready access to the information was envisioned. This project was supported by BPA to provide an initial step toward a compilation of environmental impact information. Scientists at Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) identified, gathered, and evaluated information related to environmental effects of water level on uses of five study reservoirs and developed and implemented and environmental data retrieval system, which provides for automated storage and retrieval of annotated citations to published and unpublished information. The data retrieval system is operating on BPA's computer facility and includes the reservoir water-level environmental data. This project was divided into several tasks, some of which were conducted simultaneously to meet project deadlines. The tasks were to identify uses of the five study reservoirs, compile and evaluate reservoir information, develop a data entry and retrieval system, identify and analyze research needs, and document the data retrieval system and train users. Additional details of the project are described in several appendixes.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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.

  15. 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...

  16. Preliminary design study of underground pumped hydro and compressed-air energy storage in hard rock. Volume 5: site selection. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1981-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This volume documents a six-step site selection process undertaken to identify and subsequently rank potential sites suitable for either an underground pumped hydroelectric (UPH) facility, or a water-compensated hard-rock cavern compressed air energy storage (CAES) facility. The region of study was confined to the service area of the Potomac Electric Power Company (PEPCO) and contiguous areas. Overriding considerations related to geology, environmental impact and transmission-line routing were studies within the context of minimizing plant costs. The selection process led to the identification of several sites suitable for the development of either a CAES or an UPH facility. Design development and site exploration at the selected site are described in other volumes of the final report.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    this stage, water injection will also help in removal of residual natural gas stored in the mine. The mine coal mine is being developed into an underground water reservoir in Leyden, Colorado. Excess water from. Efficient operation of the storage-recovery process requires knowledge of water concentration and movement

  18. Economic comparison of CAES designs employing hardrock, salt, and aquifer storage reservoirs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Reilly, R.W.; Schainker, R.B.

    1981-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The economic performance of three CAES designs is briefly examined. Each design was developed by a different A and E under different assumptions and constraints, and each employed a different type of air storage facility: a hardrock-mined cavity, a solution-mined salt deposit, and an aquifer. The results indicate that aquifer and salt storage facilities cost roughly 60 to 70% of the equivalent hardrock-mined cavern. In this comparison the aquifer storage facility was somewhat less expensive than the salt cavity, but this difference could be reversed with different salt and/or aquifer characteristics. For instance, if the aquifer had been less permeable, then more wells would have been required for the same power level, and total storage cost would have been higher. The major difference between the plant cost estimates lies not in the cost of storage facilities, but rather in vendor estimates of turbomachinery cost. And, since turbomachinery contributes about half of total plant cost, this difference could be critical to the decision to build a CAES plant.

  19. Preliminary design study of underground pumped hydro and compressed-air energy storage in hard rock. Volume 4. System planning studies. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1981-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Potomac Electric Power Company and Acres American Incorporated have been performing a three year DOE/EPRI/PEPCO sponsored program for preliminary design of water compensated Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES) and Underground Pumped Hydroelectric (UPH) power plants. This report presents both the costs of the CAES and UPH plant designs which were developed, and the results of economic evaluations performed for the PEPCO system. The PEPCO system planning analysis was performed in parallel stages with plant design development. Analyses performed early in the project indicated a requirement for 1000 MW/10,000 MWH of energy storage on a daily operating schedule, with economic installation in two segments of 500 MW in 1990 and 1997. The analysis was updated eighteen months later near the end of the project to reflect the impact of new growth projections and revised plant costs. The revised results indicated economic installations for either UPH or CAES of approximately 675 MW/6750 MWH on a daily cycle, installed in blocks of approximately 225 MW in 1990, 1993 and 1995. Significant savings in revenue requirements and oil fuel over the combustion turbine alternative were identified for both CAES and UPH.

  20. 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)

    Frigo, A.A.; Pistner, C.

    1980-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  1. Closure report: Nevada Test Site Underground Storage Tank (UST) number 25-3123-1: Nevada Division of Emergency Management case number H940825D corrective action unit 450

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document has been prepared as a final closure report documenting the assessment and corrective actions taken for the petroleum hydrocarbon release associated with underground storage tank (UST) UST25-3123-1. UST25-3123-1 was located at Area 25 within the Nevada Test Site. The UST was identified as abandoned to be closed under the U.S. Department of Energy/Nevada Operations Office Environmental Restoration Division Program during Fiscal Year 1994. The scope of work for closure of the UST included evaluating site conditions and closing the tank in accordance with all applicable regulations. Site evaluation analytic results of a soil sample collected below the tank showed a diesel concentration of 120 mg/kg at a depth of 3 meters. During remedial excavation, approximately 3.8 cubic meters of hydrocarbon impacted soil was removed. Laboratory analysis of the soil sample collected from the excavation bottom confirms that total petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations greater than 100 mg/kg are no longer present. Therefore, it is requested that the site be closed without further action. 4 refs., 2 figs., 3 tabs.

  2. Preliminary design study of underground pumped hydro and compressed-air energy storage in hard rock. Volume 1. Executive summary. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1981-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Potomac Electric Power Company (PEPCO) and Acres American Incorporated (AAI) have carried out a preliminary design study of water-compensated Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES) and Underground Pumped Hydroelectric (UPH) plants for siting in geological conditions suitable for hard rock excavations. The work was carried out over a period of three years and was sponsored by the US Department of Energy (DOE), the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and PEPCO. The study was divided into five primary tasks as follows: establishment of design criteria and analysis of impact on power system; selection of site and establishment of site characteristics; formulation of design approaches; assessment of environmental and safety aspects; and preparation of preliminary design of plant. The salient aspects considered and the conclusions reached during the consideration of the five primary tasks for both CAES and UPH are presented in this Executive Summary, which forms Volume 1 of the series of reports prepared during the study. The investigations and analyses carried out, together with the results and conclusions reached, are described in detail in Volumes 2 through 13 and ten appendices.

  3. Well injectivity during CO2storage operations in deep saline aquifers 6 Part 2: Numerical simulations of drying, salt deposit mechanisms and role of7

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Paris-Sud XI, Université de

    1 1 2 3 4 5 Well injectivity during CO2storage operations in deep saline aquifers ­6 Part 2 or industrial units and stored in underground geological reservoirs.30 Return on experience withCO2 injection-well field scale is proposed. This approach is of major40 importance because it makes it possible

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lord, Anna Snider

    2009-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BARKER, S.A.

    2006-07-27T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    TU, T.A.

    2007-01-04T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-09-12T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  8. Utah Division of Environmental Response and Remediation Underground...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

  9. Progress Continues Toward Closure of Two Underground Waste Tanks...

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

    fiscal year 2013, which ended Sept. 30, SRR reached contract milestones in the Interim Salt Disposition Process, which treats salt waste from the underground storage tanks. Salt...

  10. 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)

    Mozley, Peter; Evans, James; Dewers, Thomas

    2014-10-31T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Tsang, Chin Fu

    2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  12. 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)

    Grant Evenson

    2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  13. 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)

    Grant Evenson

    2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  14. Underground Exploration

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Underground Exploration and Testing A Report to Congress and the Secretary of Energy Nuclear Waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Use rail to support tunnel boring machine operation . . . . . . . . . 14 Excavate smaller diameter tunnels outside the portal-to-portal loop . 15 Use a tunnel boring machine to excavate the core test area

  15. Investigating leaking underground storage tanks

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Upton, David Thompson

    1989-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    and characterizing sites at which releases have been reported. The proposed requirements very nearly parallel those prepared by the E. P. A. , contained in 40 CFR parts 280 and 281. By their nature, these requirements necessitate that a thorough site investigation... be performed before the Texas Water Commission's concerns can be adequately addressed in the final site characterization and assessment report. However, the contents of these regulations do not indicate appropriate procedures for conducting such site...

  16. Multinational underground nuclear parks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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)

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2012-02-02T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  18. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto17 34 44Year Jan Feb MarDecadeFour-Dimensional2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

  19. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade Year-0E (2001)gasoline prices4 Oil demand expected to risesummerNov-14

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    True, W.R.

    1994-09-12T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Haszeldine, Stuart

    -day distribution of natural CO2 suggests emplacement up a fault to the west, bounding the basin. A scoping study, and show no difference from standard burial cementation trends. The physical distribution of calcite reservoir quality, and which give an insight into the distribution of minerals in the oilfield

  2. Metrics to assess the mitigation of global warming by carbon capture and storage in the ocean and in geological reservoirs

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Fortunat, Joos

    Metrics to assess the mitigation of global warming by carbon capture and storage in the ocean to assess mitigation of global warming by carbon capture and storage are discussed. The climatic impact penalty for carbon capture. For an annual leakage rate of 0.01, surface air temperature becomes higher

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

    2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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

  4. 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]

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

    2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    with in situ reservoir volume change data, especially sinceGorges Reservoir, China using the SRTM DEM data, Int. J.in the GRACE data caused by the reservoir filling as W12502

  5. Sandia National Laboratories: Carbon Storage

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

    from improved climate models to performance models for underground waste storage to 3D printing and digital rock physics. Marianne Walck (Director ... Joint SandiaUniversity of...

  6. Sandia National Laboratories: Energy Storage

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

    from improved climate models to performance models for underground waste storage to 3D printing and digital rock physics. Marianne Walck (Director ... Recent Sandia Secure,...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  8. Underground infrastructure damage for a Chicago scenario

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2011-01-25T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  9. Sandia National Laboratories: hydrogen storage options

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

    storage options Storing Hydrogen Underground Could Boost Transportation, Energy Security On February 26, 2015, in Capabilities, Center for Infrastructure Research and Innovation...

  10. 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.

  11. Sandia National Laboratories: Carbon Capture & Storage

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

    from improved climate models to performance models for underground waste storage to 3D printing and digital rock physics. Marianne Walck (Director ... Federal Laboratory...

  12. Using the Choquet integral for screening geological CO2 storage sites

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Zhang, Y.

    2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    reservoirs, deep saline aquifers, and in salt caverns. 1 Before a detailed storage site characterization

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Pruess, Karsten

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  14. SWEDISH-AMERICAN COOPERATIVE PROGRAM ON RADIOACTIVE WASTE STORAGE IN MINED CAVERNS. PROGRAM SUMMARY

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Witherspoon, P.A.

    2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    field investigations on the general problem of underground waste storage.field work will be carried out aimed at the general nroblen of underground radioacti\\'e waste storage.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Craney, Patrick Wayne

    1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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...

  16. 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)

    Dahowski, Robert T.; Bachu, Stefan

    2007-03-05T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  17. Impact of Reservoir Evaporation and Evaporation Suppression on Water Supply Capabilities

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Ayala, Rolando A

    2013-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Reservoir storage is essential for developing dependable water supplies and is a major component of the river system water budget. The storage contents of reservoirs fluctuate greatly with variations in water use and climatic conditions that range...

  18. Understanding the use of natural gas storage for generators of electricity

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1995-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  19. 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...

  20. -Reservoir Technology -Geothermal Reservoir Engineering

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Stanford University

    SGP-TR-91 - Reservoir Technology - Geothermal Reservoir Engineering Research at Stanford Principal in Engineering and Earth Sciences STANFORD UNIVERSITY Stanford, California #12;TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ...PREFACE................................................................................ 20 3.4 Thermal Stress Effects on Thermal Conductivity .................................... 27 #12

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Tsang, Chin Fu

    2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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 ~~-

  2. Reservoir Outflow (RESOUT) Model 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Purvis, Stuart Travis

    1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    rating tables for a comprehensive range of outlet structure types and configurations, simulating a dam breach, routing a hydrograph through the reservoir, and performing drawdown analyses. The thesis describes the basic equations and computational... of Rating Curves Rating Curves for Uncontrolled Ogee Spillways Rating Curves for Uncontrolled Broad-crested Spillways Rating Curves for Spillway Gates Rating Curves for Drop Inlet Spillways Rating Curves for Outlet Works Breach Simulation Storage...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2011-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  5. Underground nuclear energy complexes - technical and economic advantages

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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.

  6. 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...

  7. 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...

  8. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0 0.0Decade4Year

  9. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0 0.0Decade4Year114,937 114,274 111,271

  10. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0Decade Year-0Base7 3 2 1 0 0

  11. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0Decade Year-0Base7 3 2 1 0 0284,747

  12. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0DecadeYearDecade Year-0Thousand

  13. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0DecadeYearDecade Year-0Thousand82,221

  14. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0 1 1996-2013 Lease20 55 10 41

  15. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0 1 1996-2013 Lease20 55 10 4120,359

  16. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0579,766 568,661 511,096 438,064

  17. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0579,766 568,661 511,096

  18. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 00.0 0.0

  19. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 00.0 0.04,000 64,000 64,000 64,000

  20. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3Exportsper Thousand Cubic9 6 0

  1. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3Exportsper Thousand Cubic9 6 01,062,339

  2. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet)Commercialper Thousand Cubic9 2.8 2.66,992

  3. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet)Commercialper Thousand Cubic9 2.8

  4. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic Feet)Same Month443,025(Million

  5. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic Feet)Same Month443,025(Million187,251

  6. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic

  7. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic32,876 10,889 11,502 13,845 13,845 13,845

  8. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial ConsumersThousandCubic Feet)4.Synthetic 1980-2003 Propane-Air340 340

  9. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial ConsumersThousandCubic Feet)4.Synthetic 1980-2003 Propane-Air340

  10. Alabama 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS8) Distribution Category UC-950 Cost and Quality of Fuels forA 6 J 9 U B u oDecadeSame52,051per0 1 2

  11. Alaska 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS8) Distribution Category UC-950 Cost and Quality of Fuels forA 6 J 9 U B uYearDecadeYearThousand From

  12. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion CubicPotentialNov-14 Dec-14 Jan-1538,469 39,194 39,008 38,823

  13. Arkansas 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion CubicPotentialNov-14SalesSame Month Previous1 0 11 102008

  14. Arkansas 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion CubicPotentialNov-14SalesSame Month Previous1 0 11 1020082,000

  15. California 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,128 2,469 2,321 2,590FuelDecadeCalifornia23 46 47 62 53

  16. California 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,128 2,469 2,321 2,590FuelDecadeCalifornia23 46 47 62 53498,705

  17. Colorado 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,128 2,469 2,321Spain,606,602 1,622,434 1,634,58723

  18. Colorado 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,128 2,469 2,321Spain,606,602 1,622,434 1,634,5872395,068

  19. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade1 Source: Office(BillionYear JanYearYear Jan8,859 8,560 8,662)

  20. Weekly Working Gas in 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40Coal Stocks at Commercial andSeptember 25, 2012 MEMORANDUM FOR:0,0, 1997Working

  1. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial602 1,397 125 Q 69 (Million Cubic58 810Year Jan Feb

  2. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial602 1,397 125 Q 69 (Million Cubic58 810Year Jan Feb39,287 39,210 41,309

  3. West 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial602 1,397 125 Q 69 (Million Cubic58(MillionYear Jan Feb(Dollars528,442

  4. Wyoming 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial602 1,397 125 Q 69 (MillionAdjustments (MillionYearYear Jan Feb162

  5. Wyoming 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial602 1,397 125 Q 69 (MillionAdjustments (MillionYearYear Jan Feb162111,167

  6. Texas 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto17 34 44Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul2011 20123.9684,094 673,410

  7. Texas 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto17 34 44Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul2011 20123.9684,094

  8. The Basics of Underground Natural Gas 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto17 34 44Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul2011Dry ProductionThe Basics

  9. Utah 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto17 34 44Year Jan FebIncreases (BillionThousand Cubic Feet)403

  10. Utah 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto17 34 44Year Jan FebIncreases (BillionThousand Cubic

  11. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto17 34 44Year JanDecade Year-0 Year-11,113,016 1,124,7170 0 0

  12. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto17 34 44Year JanDecade Year-0 Year-11,113,016 1,124,7170 0 06,200

  13. Underground Natural Gas in 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 onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghuraji Agro IndustriesTownDells,1Stocks Nov-14TotalThe Outlook269,023Year69,023USWNC MO

  14. Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)

    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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade1 Source: Office of(Millionthrough 1996)200971 andEIA projects9,233,469

  15. Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)

    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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade1 Source: Office of(Millionthrough 1996)200971 andEIA

  16. The Basics of Underground Natural Gas 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 onYou are nowTotal" (Percent) Type: Sulfur Content API GravityDakota" "Fuel, quality", 2013,Iowa"Dakota"YearProductionShale ProvedA(MillionGrossNatural Gas

  17. Illinois 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,12803 TableTotal Consumptionper Thousand Cubic4 15 0 0

  18. Illinois 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,12803 TableTotal Consumptionper Thousand Cubic4 15 0 0977,989

  19. Montana 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,12803andYear Jan Feb Mar AprYear Jan FebThousand198,539

  20. Montana 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,12803andYear Jan Feb Mar AprYear Jan FebThousand198,53974,201

  1. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,12803andYear Janthrough2,869,960 3,958,315 5,817,1223,751,360

  2. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,12803andYear Janthrough2,869,9601. Natural5,1958 2009 2010

  3. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,12803andYearWithdrawals (MillionYear Jan FebThousand9

  4. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,12803andYearWithdrawals (MillionYear Jan FebThousand94,850

  5. Working Gas in Underground Storage Figure

    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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade1(MillionExtensionsThousand Cubic%perYear Jan Feb Marper3Working Gas in

  6. Working Gas in Underground Storage Figure

    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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade1(MillionExtensionsThousand Cubic%perYear Jan Feb Marper3Working Gas

  7. Alabama 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building Floorspace (Square Feet)SalesYear Jan Feb Mar Aprper Thousand0 16,900

  8. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOE Office of ScienceandMesa del SolStrengthening aTurbulence mayUndergraduate Program Undergraduate

  9. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5 Tables July 1996 Energy Information Administration Office ofthroughYear Jan Feb Mar AprYear Jan Feb Mar Apr MayPeachThree 0 0 0 0

  10. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto17 3400,Information55,035 283,879 317,647 348,809 322,670 Salt Caverns

  11. New Mexico 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto ChinaThousand Cubic Feet)Feet)Feet)556,905136 14980,000

  12. New York 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto ChinaThousand CubicSeparation 29 0Year Jan0 0 0 0 0 08.1228,613

  13. Ohio 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto ChinaThousandDecade Year-0Separation3,262,7160 0 0

  14. Oklahoma 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto ChinaThousandDecadeSales (Billion CubicDecadeSameThousand1.4

  15. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5 Tables July 1996 Energy Information Administration Office ofthrough 1996) in Delaware (Million3,751,360 3,740,757 Annual55,035 283,879

  16. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5 Tables July 1996 Energy Information Administration Office ofthroughYear Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul9Thousand Cubic Feet)7 5 1 1

  17. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5 Tables July 1996 Energy Information Administration Office ofthroughYear Jan Feb Mar Apr MayYear Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul

  18. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5 Tables July 1996 Energy Information Administration Office ofthroughYear Jan Feb Mar Apr MayYear Jan FebYear Jan FebYearYear27,713

  19. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion Cubic Feet)Year Jan FebFeet) Gas WellsNatural Gas Glossary

  20. Oregon 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial Consumers (NumberThousand Cubic Feet) DecadeYear JanYear0.9 0.929,415

  1. Peak Underground Working 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial Consumers (NumberThousand Cubic Feet) 0PADPrevious Articles Previous

  2. Peak Underground Working 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial Consumers (NumberThousand Cubic Feet) 0PADPrevious Articles

  3. Peak Underground Working 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial Consumers (NumberThousand Cubic Feet) 0PADPrevious

  4. Pennsylvania 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial Consumers (NumberThousand CubicFuelDecade Year-0(Dollars per 0 0

  5. Sandia National Laboratories: cost-effective hydrogen storage

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

    cost-effective hydrogen storage Storing Hydrogen Underground Could Boost Transportation, Energy Security On February 26, 2015, in Capabilities, Center for Infrastructure Research...

  6. 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]

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

    2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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:

  7. SIMULATION OF CARBON DIOXIDE STORAGE APPLYING ...

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Capture and storage of Carbon dioxide in aquifers and reservoirs is one of the solutions to mitigate the greenhouse effect. Geophysical methods can be used to

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  9. The lifetime of carbon capture and storage as a climate-change mitigation technology

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Juanes, Ruben [MIT

    2013-12-30T23:59:59.000Z

    In carbon capture and storage (CCS), CO2 is captured at power plants and then injected underground into reservoirs like deep saline aquifers for long-term storage. While CCS may be critical for the continued use of fossil fuels in a carbon-constrained world, the deployment of CCS has been hindered by uncertainty in geologic storage capacities and sustainable injection rates, which has contributed to the absence of concerted government policy. Here, we clarify the potential of CCS to mitigate emissions in the United States by developing a storage-capacity supply curve that, unlike current large-scale capacity estimates, is derived from the fluid mechanics of CO2 injection and trapping and incorporates injection-rate constraints. We show that storage supply is a dynamic quantity that grows with the duration of CCS, and we interpret the lifetime of CCS as the time for which the storage supply curve exceeds the storage demand curve from CO2 production. We show that in the United States, if CO2 production from power generation continues to rise at recent rates, then CCS can store enough CO2 to stabilize emissions at current levels for at least 100 years. This result suggests that the large-scale implementation of CCS is a geologically viable climate-change mitigation option in the United States over the next century.

  10. 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...

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Angel Restrepo, Juan Alejandro

    2000-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This work introduces new type curve solutions for an unfractured well in an infinite-acting naturally fractured reservoir, including wellbore storage and skin effects. Both pseudosteady-state¹ and transient²?³ interporosity flow models are studied...

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Yan, Bicheng

    2013-07-15T23:59:59.000Z

    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...

  13. Underground waste barrier structure

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

    1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  14. Rainwater Harvesting: Soil Storage and Infiltration System

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Mechell, Justin; Lesikar, Bruce J.

    2008-08-11T23:59:59.000Z

    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...

  15. Underground and under scrutiny

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Lee, Leslie

    2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    2 txH2O Summer 2014 Story by Leslie Lee The Frio River, located in the Texas Hill Country, is spring-fed and therefore affected by groundwater pumping. Photo from istock.com. Underground and under scrutiny A changing state increasingly... 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...

  16. Compressed air energy storage system

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

    1981-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  17. 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,...

  18. 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...

  19. PARAMETER AND SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION FOR FLUID FLOW IN UNDERGROUND RESERVOIRS

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Ewing, Richard E.

    associated with two seem­ ingly disparate applications: production of petroleum and the remediation of water procedures associated with injection and production wells. Equations to describe the flow of fluids in porous. Such data can include pressure and flow rates of various fluid phases obtained during production, or during

  20. Reservoir evaluation tests on RRGE 1 and RRGE 2, Raft River Geothermal...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    to providing estimates on the permeability and storage parameters of the geothermal reservoir, the tests also indicated the possible existence of barrier boundaries. The data...

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Paris-Sud XI, Université de

    - 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

  2. Underground coal gasification. Presentations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The 8 presentations are: underground coal gasification (UCG) and the possibilities for carbon management (J. Friedmann); comparing the economics of UCG with surface gasification technologies (E. Redman); Eskom develops UCG technology project (C. Gross); development and future of UCG in the Asian region (L. Walker); economically developing vast deep Powder River Basin coals with UCG (S. Morzenti); effectively managing UCG environmental issues (E. Burton); demonstrating modelling complexity of environmental risk management; and UCG research at the University of Queensland, Australia (A.Y. Klimenko).

  3. Adsorption of water vapor on reservoir rocks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Progress is reported on: adsorption of water vapor on reservoir rocks; theoretical investigation of adsorption; estimation of adsorption parameters from transient experiments; transient adsorption experiment -- salinity and noncondensible gas effects; the physics of injection of water into, transport and storage of fluids within, and production of vapor from geothermal reservoirs; injection optimization at the Geysers Geothermal Field; a model to test multiwell data interpretation for heterogeneous reservoirs; earth tide effects on downhole pressure measurements; and a finite-difference model for free surface gravity drainage well test analysis.

  4. Underground and under scrutiny 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Lee, Leslie

    2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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...

  5. Oregon Underground Injection Control Program Authorized Injection...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Oregon Underground Injection Control Program Authorized Injection Systems Webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Oregon Underground...

  6. WPCF Underground Injection Control Disposal Permit Evaluation...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    WPCF Underground Injection Control Disposal Permit Evaluation and Fact Sheet Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Report: WPCF Underground Injection...

  7. 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...

  8. carbon storage rd index | netl.doe.gov

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

    properties of reservoirs and seals - Assessing the impact of chemical reactions and geomechanics on injectivity and storage permanence. Fundamental processes and properties -...

  9. annual water storage: Topics by E-print Network

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

    a program for farmer storage of surface irrigation water in Elephant Butte Reservoir, New Mexico. This program would allow individual farmers to store part of their annual surface...

  10. Water intrusion in underground structures

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Nazarchuk, Alex

    2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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, ...

  11. Opportunities in underground coal gasification

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bloomstran, M.A.; Davis, B.E.

    1984-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A review is presented of the results obtained on DOE-sponsored field tests of underground coal gasification in steeply-dipping beds at Rawlins, Wyoming. The coal gas composition, process parameters, and process economics are described. Steeply-dipping coal resources, which are not economically mineable using conventional coal mining methods, are identified and potential markets for underground coal gasification products are discussed. It is concluded that in-situ gasification in steeply-dipping deposits should be considered for commercialization.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Miyamoto, S; Yuan, F; Anand, Shilpa

    2010-08-23T23:59:59.000Z

    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...

  13. Identification and quantification of fracture behavior through reservoir simulation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1995-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  14. Underground Coal Thermal Treatment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2011-10-30T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  15. TECHNICAL NOTES Drought Storage Allocation Rules for Surface

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Pasternack, Gregory B.

    TECHNICAL NOTES Drought Storage Allocation Rules for Surface Reservoir Systems Jay R. Lund1 Abstract: This technical note develops a simple drought storage allocation rule to minimize evaporative and seepage water losses from a system of reservoirs. Such a rule might have value during a prolonged drought

  16. 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.

  17. NGLW RCRA Storage Study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2000-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Barzi, Houshang

    1972-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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...

  19. 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

  20. Reservoir Characterization Research Laboratory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Texas at Austin, University of

    Reservoir Characterization Research Laboratory for Carbonate Studies Executive Summary for 2014 Outcrop and Subsurface Characterization of Carbonate Reservoirs for Improved Recovery of Remaining/Al 0.00 0.02 0.04 Eagle Ford Fm #12;#12; Reservoir Characterization Research Laboratory Research Plans

  1. Gas Storage Technology Consortium

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Joel L. Morrison; Sharon L. Elder

    2006-07-06T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  2. Geologic Carbon Sequestration: Mitigating Climate Change by Injecting CO2 Underground

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Oldenburg

    2009-07-30T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2009-07-21T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    ScienceCinema (OSTI)

    Oldenburg, Curtis M [LBNL Earth Sciences Division

    2011-04-28T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  5. Underground coal gasification: environmental update

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dockter, L.; Mcternan, E.M.

    1985-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    To evaluate the potential for ground water contamination by underground coal gasification, extensive postburn groundwater monitoring programs are being continued at two test sites in Wyoming. An overview of the environmental concerns related to UCG and some results to date on the two field sites are presented in this report.

  6. TSUAHXETSUAHXE UndergroUnd tank

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Schladow, S. Geoffrey

    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

  7. High Temperature Superconducting Underground Cable

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Farrell, Roger, A.

    2010-02-28T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  8. 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)

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

    2012-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  9. Grid-Based Surrogate Reservoir Modeling (SRM) for Fast Track Analysis of Numerical Reservoir Simulation Models at the Grid block Level

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Mohaghegh, Shahab

    with a large number of producers, second, to a CO2 sequestration project in Australia, and finally to a numerical simulation study of potential carbon storage site in the United States. The numerical reservoir

  10. Advanced underground Vehicle Power and Control: The locomotive Research Platform

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Vehicle Projects LLC

    2003-01-28T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  11. Reservoir CharacterizationReservoir Characterization Research LaboratoryResearch Laboratory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Texas at Austin, University of

    Reservoir CharacterizationReservoir Characterization Research LaboratoryResearch Laboratory at Austin Austin, Texas 78713Austin, Texas 78713--89248924 #12;Reservoir Characterization Research Laboratory for Carbonate Studies Research Plans for 2012 Outcrop and Subsurface Characterization of Carbonate

  12. GRI highlights underground gasification effort

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1987-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A consortium headed by the Gas Research Institute is supporting major underground coal gasification tests to take place over the next two years at a site near Hanna, Wyoming. About 200 tons of coal will be gasified per day. Directional drilling will be used to form the horizontal gasification pathways linking the injection and production wells. The objectives of the program include a further evaluation of the controlled-retracting-injection-point technology. The technology involves the use of a device that is capable of igniting successive coal zones as it is retracted through a borehole in the coal seam. Comparable data will also be obtained during the test in sections where a linked-vertical-well concept will be used instead of the retracting-injection method. The linked-vertical-well concept, which has been used in most coal gasification tests, involves drilling a series of vertical wells into the coal seam gasification pathway for the ignition of successive coal zones. A parallel program will be conducted to evaluate environmental control technology applicable to underground coal gasification and to define the process requirements that must be satisfied to meet environmental quality standards. The results of these combined programs will provide the process and environmental data bases necessary to assess the economic potential of underground coal gasification from various US locations for a variety of end-product applications.

  13. European and Global Perspectives for CO2 Capture and Storage

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    European and Global Perspectives for CO2 Capture and Storage Heleen Groenenberg, Martine Uyterlinde, ECN Policy Studies, The Netherlands Abstract CO2 capture and storage (CCS) is increasingly mentioned a large point source, compression, transport and subsequent storage in a geological reservoir, the ocean

  14. The Subsurface Fluid Mechanics of Geologic Carbon Dioxide Storage

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    The Subsurface Fluid Mechanics of Geologic Carbon Dioxide Storage by Michael Lawrence Szulczewski S Mechanics of Geologic Carbon Dioxide Storage by Michael Lawrence Szulczewski Submitted to the Department capture and storage (CCS), CO2 is captured at power plants and then injected into deep geologic reservoirs

  15. Innostock 2012 The 12th International Conference on Energy Storage

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    exchanger (GHE) that may be used with ground source heat pump (GSHP) or underground thermal energy storage Innostock 2012 The 12th International Conference on Energy Storage 1 INNO-U-39 A quasi-two-dimensional standing column well model for ground source heat pump systems Annamalai Ramesh1 , Jeffrey Spitler2 1

  16. Reservoir management using streamline simulation

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Choudhary, Manoj Kumar

    2000-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    of information and sparsity of data. Quantifying this uncertainty in terms of reservoir performance forecast poses a major reservoir management challenge. One solution to this problem is flow simulation of a large number of these plausible reservoir descriptions...

  17. HIGH TEMPERATURE GEOTHERMAL RESERVOIR ENGINEERING

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Schroeder, R.C.

    2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    upon the available reservoir data. If the latter data a r eThe use of measured data in reservoir engineering simulationdata on the condition of the well and the static reservoir

  18. CO{sub 2} Geologic Storage: Coupled Hydro-Chemo-Thermo-Mechanical Phenomena - From Pore-scale Processes to Macroscale Implications -

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Santamarina, J. Carlos

    2013-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

    Global energy consumption will increase in the next decades and it is expected to largely rely on fossil fuels. The use of fossil fuels is intimately related to CO{sub 2} emissions and the potential for global warming. Geological CO{sub 2} storage aims to mitigate the global warming problem by sequestering CO{sub 2} underground. Coupled hydro-chemo-mechanical phenomena determine the successful operation and long term stability of CO{sub 2} geological storage. This research explores coupled phenomena, identifies different zones in the storage reservoir, and investigates their implications in CO{sub 2} geological storage. In particular, the research: Explores spatial patterns in mineral dissolution and precipitation (comprehensive mass balance formulation); experimentally determines the interfacial properties of water, mineral, and CO{sub 2} systems (including CO{sub 2}-water-surfactant mixtures to reduce the CO{sub 2}- water interfacial tension in view of enhanced sweep efficiency); analyzes the interaction between clay particles and CO{sub 2}, and the response of sediment layers to the presence of CO{sub 2} using specially designed experimental setups and complementary analyses; couples advective and diffusive mass transport of species, together with mineral dissolution to explore pore changes during advection of CO{sub 2}-dissolved water along a rock fracture; upscales results to a porous medium using pore network simulations; measures CO{sub 2} breakthrough in highly compacted fine-grained sediments, shale and cement specimens; explores sealing strategies; and experimentally measures CO{sub 2}-CH{sub 4} replacement in hydrate-bearing sediments during. Analytical, experimental and numerical results obtained in this study can be used to identify optimal CO{sub 2} injection and reservoir-healing strategies to maximize the efficiency of CO{sub 2} injection and to attain long-term storage.

  19. Production-management techniques for water-drive gas reservoirs. Annual Report, August 1990-December 1991

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hower, T.L.; Abbott, W.A.; Arsenault, J.W.; Jones, R.E.

    1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The project was designed to investigate production management strategies through a field study approach. The initial task was to prepare a summary of industry experience with water-drive gas and water-drive gas storage reservoirs. This activity was necessary to define the variety of reservoir situations in which water influx occurs, to identify those cases where alternative production practices will increase ultimate recovery, and to develop techniques to better characterize these reservoirs for further analysis. Four fields were selected for study: 1 onshore Gulf Coast gas reservoir, 2 offshore Gulf Coast reservoirs, and 1 mid-continent aquifier gas storage field. A modified material balance technique was developed and validated which predicts the pressure and production performance of water-drive gas reservoirs. This method yields more accurate results than conventional water influx techniques.

  20. Saving for dry days: Aquifer storage and recovery may help

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Wythe, Kathy

    2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    underground storage (MUS) of recoverable water. The Committee on Sustainable Underground Storage of Recoverable Water uses MUS ?to denote purposeful recharge of water into an aquifer system for intended recovery and use as an element of long-term water...tx H2O | pg. 2 Saving for dry days Story by Kathy Wythe tx H2O | pg. 3 Aquifer storage and recovery may help With reoccurring droughts and growing population, Texas will always be looking for better ways to save or use water. Some water...

  1. Method and apparatus for storage battery electrolyte circulation

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Inkmann, Mark S. (Milwaukee, WI)

    1980-09-09T23:59:59.000Z

    An electrolyte reservoir in fluid communication with the cell of a storage battery is intermittently pressurized with a pulse of compressed gas to cause a flow of electrolyte from the reservoir to the upper region of less dense electrolyte in the cell. Upon termination of the pressure pulse, more dense electrolyte is forced into the reservoir from the lower region of the cell by the differential pressure head between the cell and reservoir electrolyte levels. The compressed gas pulse is controlled to prevent the entry of gas from the reservoir into the cell.

  2. 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...

  3. 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...

  4. 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...

  5. 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...

  6. Indiana Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working Gas) (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0 0.0Decade4Year Jan

  7. Indiana Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0 0.0Decade4Year114,937 114,274

  8. Injections of Natural Gas into Underground Storage - All Operators

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0 0.0Decade4Year114,9379 2010 2011

  9. Iowa Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-20 0

  10. Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0Decade Year-0 Year-1Decade

  11. Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0Decade Year-0 Year-1DecadeDecade Year-0

  12. Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0Decade Year-0 Year-1DecadeDecade Year-0

  13. Iowa Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0Decade Year-0Base7 3 2 1 0

  14. Kansas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0DecadeYear Jan Feb Mar Apr

  15. Kansas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0DecadeYear Jan Feb Mar AprYear Jan Feb

  16. Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0DecadeYear Jan FebNov-14TotalYear Jan

  17. Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0DecadeYear Jan FebNov-14TotalYear

  18. Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0DecadeYear Jan FebNov-14TotalYearDecade

  19. Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0DecadeYear Jan

  20. Kansas Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working Gas) (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0DecadeYear JanDecadeFeet) Working

  1. Kansas Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0DecadeYearDecade

  2. Kentucky Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) Kenai,Feet) Year Jan Feb

  3. Kentucky Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) Kenai,Feet) Year Jan FebFeet) Year

  4. Kentucky 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) Kenai,Feet)Year Jan Feb MarYear Jan

  5. Kentucky 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) Kenai,Feet)Year Jan Feb MarYear

  6. Kentucky 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) Kenai,Feet)Year Jan Feb MarYearDecade

  7. Kentucky 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) Kenai,Feet)Year Jan Feb

  8. Kentucky 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) Kenai,Feet)Year JanVentedFeet)

  9. Kentucky 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0 1 1996-2013 Lease20 55 10

  10. Louisiana 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0 1569 0 0Year Jan FebFeet)

  11. Louisiana 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0 1569 0 0Year Jan

  12. Louisiana 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0 1569 02,208,9204.49Year Jan Feb

  13. Louisiana 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0 1569 02,208,9204.49Year Jan

  14. Louisiana 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0 1569 02,208,9204.49Year JanDecade

  15. Louisiana 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0 1569 02,208,9204.49Year

  16. Louisiana Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0 1569Decade Year-0 Year-1Feet)

  17. Louisiana 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0 1569Decade Year-0

  18. Louisiana 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0579,766 568,661 511,096Feet)

  19. Lower 48 States 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0579,766236,957Cubic Feet)

  20. Lower 48 States 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0579,766236,957Cubic

  1. Lower 48 States Total Natural Gas Injections into 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0579,766236,957Cubicfrom

  2. Lower 48 States Total 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0579,766236,957CubicfromCubic

  3. Lower 48 States 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 07,755,432 7,466,375 6,741,759

  4. Lower 48 States Working Natural Gas Total Underground 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 07,755,432 7,466,375 6,741,759(Million

  5. Maryland 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Year Jan Feb

  6. Maryland 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Year Jan FebFeet)

  7. Maryland 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 00.0 0.0 0.05.03 5.68 4.61

  8. Maryland 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 00.0 0.0 0.05.03 5.68 4.61Feet)

  9. Maryland 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 00.0 0.0 0.05.03 5.68

  10. Maryland 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 00.0 0.0 0.05.03 5.68Year Jan Feb Mar

  11. Maryland 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 00.0 0.0 0.05.03 5.68YearYear

  12. Maryland 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 00.0 0.04,000 64,000 64,000

  13. Massachusetts Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 00.0Feet) (Million(Million Cubic

  14. Massachusetts 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 00.0Feet) (Million(Million

  15. Massachusetts 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 00.0Feet) (Million(MillionFeet)

  16. Michigan 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3Exports (NoYear Jan Feb MarFeet)

  17. Michigan 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3Exports (NoYear Jan Feb

  18. Michigan 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3Exports (NoYear Jan2009

  19. Michigan 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3Exports (NoYear Jan2009Feet) Decade

  20. Michigan 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3Exports (NoYear Jan2009Feet)

  1. Michigan 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3Exports (NoYear Jan2009Feet)Year Jan

  2. Michigan 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3Exports (NoYearDecade Year-0Feet)

  3. Michigan 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3Exportsper Thousand Cubic9 6

  4. Minnesota 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3Exportspercontinues,Decade

  5. Minnesota 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3Exportspercontinues,DecadeFeet) Year

  6. Minnesota 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet)Commercial Consumers (NumberTotalYear Jan

  7. Minnesota 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet)Commercial Consumers (NumberTotalYear

  8. Minnesota 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet)Commercial Consumers (NumberTotalYearDecade

  9. Minnesota 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet)Commercial Consumers

  10. Minnesota Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet)Commercial ConsumersDecade

  11. Minnesota 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet)Commercial ConsumersDecadeFeet) Working

  12. Minnesota 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet)Commercialper Thousand Cubic9 2.8Feet)

  13. Mississippi 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic Feet) Price All CountriesFeet)

  14. Mississippi 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic Feet) Price All

  15. Mississippi 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic Feet) PriceLiquids,35 922 858

  16. Mississippi 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic Feet) PriceLiquids,35 922 858Feet)

  17. Mississippi 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic Feet) PriceLiquids,35 922

  18. Mississippi 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic Feet) PriceLiquids,35 922Feet) Year

  19. Mississippi Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic Feet) PriceLiquids,35Feet)Year

  20. Mississippi 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic Feet)

  1. Mississippi 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic Feet)Same

  2. Missouri 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic Feet)Same 2011

  3. Missouri 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic Feet)Same 2011Feet) Year Jan Feb

  4. Missouri 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic Feet)SameThousandYear Jan Feb Mar Apr

  5. Missouri 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic Feet)SameThousandYear Jan Feb Mar

  6. Missouri 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic Feet)SameThousandYear Jan Feb MarDecade

  7. Missouri 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic Feet)SameThousandYear Jan Feb

  8. Missouri 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic Feet)SameThousandYearBase Gas)

  9. Missouri 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic32,876 10,889 11,502 13,845 13,845

  10. Montana 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic32,876 10,889Decade Year-0 Year-1

  11. Montana 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic32,876 10,889Decade Year-0 Year-1Feet)

  12. Montana 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic32,876 10,889Decade03 4.83 4.53TotalYear Jan

  13. Montana 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic32,876 10,889Decade03 4.83 4.53TotalYear

  14. Montana 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic32,876 10,889Decade03 4.83

  15. Montana 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic32,876 10,889Decade03 4.83Year Jan Feb Mar

  16. Montana 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic32,876 10,889Decade03 4.83YearYear

  17. Methodology for EIA Weekly Underground Natural Gas Storage Estimates

    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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOnItemResearch > The EnergyCenterDioxide Capture in the Presence of Water |Methodology

  18. Rhode Island Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial ConsumersThousand CubicCubic Feet) Yeara3,663 (MillionTotal(Million

  19. Rhode Island Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial ConsumersThousand CubicCubic Feet) Yeara3,663

  20. Rhode Island Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial ConsumersThousand CubicCubic Feet) Yeara3,663(Million Cubic Feet)