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


1

Estimating Residual Solids Volume In Underground Storage Tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2014-01-08T23:59:59.000Z

2

Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

3

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Kannberg, L.D.

1982-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

4

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...

5

Kentucky Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

6

Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

7

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

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

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

8

Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

9

Nebraska Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

10

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Kannberg, L.D.

1982-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

11

,"Colorado Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"  

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

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

12

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,...

13

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...

14

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...

15

Underground pumped hydroelectric storage  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1984-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

16

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

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

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

17

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...

18

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...

19

Underground caverns for hydrocarbon storage  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1998-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

20

Investigating leaking underground storage tanks  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Upton, David Thompson

1989-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


21

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

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

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

22

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

23

Underground storage of oil and gas  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Bergman, S.M.

1984-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

24

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

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

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

25

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

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

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

26

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

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

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

27

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

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

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

28

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

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

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

29

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

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

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

30

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

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

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

31

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheetDryCrudeVolume

32

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"ShaleCoalbed Methane ProvedShaleCrudeNetVolume

33

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"ShaleCoalbedShale Proved+Net WithdrawalsVolume

34

,"New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale Proved Reserves (Billion CubicPrice Sold toResidential ConsumptionNet WithdrawalsVolume

35

,"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:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale Proved Reserves (Billion CubicPrice SoldPrice Sold to Electric PowerNet WithdrawalsVolume

36

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale Proved Reserves (Billion CubicPrice SoldPriceGas, Wet AfterShaleVolume (MMcf)"

37

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale Proved Reserves (Billion CubicPrice SoldPriceGas, Wet AfterShaleVolumeGas,Net

38

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

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

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

39

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...

40

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...

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


41

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1993-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

42

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

43

Underground storage tank management plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

44

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...

45

Underground Energy Storage Program. 1983 annual summary  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Kannberg, L.D.

1984-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

46

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...

47

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

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

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

48

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

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

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

49

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Kujat, Jonathon D.

1999-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

50

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Cutter, W. Bowman

2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

51

ADVANCED UNDERGROUND GAS STORAGE CONCEPTS REFRIGERATED-MINED CAVERN STORAGE  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1998-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

52

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.

53

Underground storage of hydrocarbons in Ontario  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1995-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

54

100-N Area underground storage tank closures  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Rowley, C.A.

1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

55

Underground-Energy-Storage Program, 1982 annual report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Kannberg, L.D.

1983-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

56

Permanent Closure of the TAN-664 Underground Storage Tank  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Bradley K. Griffith

2011-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

57

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1994-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

58

,"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"...

59

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

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

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

60

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...

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


61

,"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"...

62

,"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"...

63

,"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"...

64

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...

65

Appendix E: Underground Storage Annual Site Environmental Report  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Pennycook, Steve

66

Viewing Systems for Large Underground Storage Tanks.  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

67

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,...

68

Underground gas storage in New York State: A historical perspective  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1995-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

69

Appendix C: Underground Storage Annual Site Environmental Report  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Pennycook, Steve

70

Underground storage tank 511-D1U1 closure plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Mancieri, S.; Giuntoli, N.

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

71

Numerical Simulations of Leakage from Underground LPG Storage Caverns  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Yamamoto, Hajime; Pruess, Karsten

2004-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

72

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1994-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

73

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Lippmann, Marcelo J.; Benson, Sally M.

2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

74

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...

75

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Kim, H.M.

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

76

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

none

1998-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

77

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...

78

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1994-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

79

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Rosner, Stephen Anthony

2012-06-07T23:59:59.000Z

80

Permanent Closure of MFC Biodiesel Underground Storage Tank 99ANL00013  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Kerry L. Nisson

2012-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


81

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Lippmann, Marcelo J.; Benson, Sally M.

2002-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

82

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

83

Structural analysis of underground gunite storage tanks. Environmental Restoration Program  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1995-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

84

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Grennard, A.H.

1980-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

85

Numerical Simulations of Leakage from Underground LPG Storage Caverns  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Yamamoto, Hajime; Pruess, Karsten

2004-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

86

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...

87

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...

88

Underground pumped storage scheme in the Bukit Timah granite of Singapore  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1996-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

89

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

90

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

CW Enderlin; DG Alberts; JA Bamberger; M White

1998-09-25T23:59:59.000Z

91

Utah Underground Storage Tank Installation Permit | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

92

Georgia Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

93

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Peng, Dan

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

94

Underground storage tank 431-D1U1, Closure Plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Mancieri, S.

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

95

AGA Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas Total Underground Storage Capacity  

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

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

96

AGA Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals  

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

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

97

AGA Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas Working Underground Storage  

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

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

98

AGA Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working  

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

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

99

AGA Eastern Consuming Region Underground Natural Gas Storage - All  

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

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

100

AGA Producing Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage  

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

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

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


101

AGA Producing Region Natural Gas Total Underground Storage Capacity  

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

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

102

AGA Producing Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million  

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

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

103

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1992-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

104

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1996-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

105

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

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

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

106

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

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

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

107

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

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

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

108

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

Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

109

Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

110

Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

111

Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

112

Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

113

Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYear JanSeparation, Proved1 4.70 1967-2010 Imports 4.08 6.72

114

AGA Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteam Coal Import CostsLiquids Reserve3.Revenue3 Oil and GasPURPOSES.

115

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:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteam Coal Import CostsLiquids Reserve3.Revenue3 Oil and

116

AGA Western Consuming Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteam Coal Import CostsLiquids Reserve3.Revenue3 Oil and(Million

117

Alabama Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

118

Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteam Coal Import CostsLiquidsYear Jan FebProvedGrossYearDecade2.93Year

119

California Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteam Coal Import96 4.87 1967-2010 Imports 2.83 4.76 3.57 --

120

Illinois Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

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


121

Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

122

Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

123

Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

124

Louisiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia,(Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs Year in Review1,213Separation,Year Jan Feb

125

Maryland Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia,(Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs Year2 Macro-IndustrialFeet) Year Jan Feb Mar

126

Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia,(Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs Year2 Macro-IndustrialFeet)+YearFeet) Year

127

Mississippi Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

128

Missouri Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

129

Montana Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

130

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

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

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

131

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

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

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

132

Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia,(Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing ReservoirsYear-Month WeekReservesYear Jan Feb0 ' uYear Jan

133

Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

134

Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

135

Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

136

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:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteam Coal Import96 4.87 1967-2010Barrels) ReservesYear Jan

137

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

DeMuth, S.F.

1996-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

138

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Ortiz, I.; Anthony, R.V.

1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

139

Water Quality Program, Volume 2 (Alabama)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This volume of the water quality program mainly deals with Technical Standards, Corrective Action Requirements and Financial Responsibility for Owners and Operators of Underground Storage Tanks....

140

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1994-07-29T23:59:59.000Z

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


141

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1992-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

142

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

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

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

143

Underground Test Area Subproject Phase I Data Analysis Task. Volume VIII - Risk Assessment Documentation Package  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Volume VIII of the documentation for the Phase I Data Analysis Task performed in support of the current Regional Flow Model, Transport Model, and Risk Assessment for the Nevada Test Site Underground Test Area Subproject contains the risk assessment documentation. Because of the size and complexity of the model area, a considerable quantity of data was collected and analyzed in support of the modeling efforts. The data analysis task was consequently broken into eight subtasks, and descriptions of each subtask's activities are contained in one of the eight volumes that comprise the Phase I Data Analysis Documentation.

None

1996-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

144

Underground Test Area Subproject Phase I Data Analysis Task. Volume VII - Tritium Transport Model Documentation Package  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Volume VII of the documentation for the Phase I Data Analysis Task performed in support of the current Regional Flow Model, Transport Model, and Risk Assessment for the Nevada Test Site Underground Test Area Subproject contains the tritium transport model documentation. Because of the size and complexity of the model area, a considerable quantity of data was collected and analyzed in support of the modeling efforts. The data analysis task was consequently broken into eight subtasks, and descriptions of each subtask's activities are contained in one of the eight volumes that comprise the Phase I Data Analysis Documentation.

None

1996-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

145

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Chas. T. Main, Inc.

1982-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

146

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1994-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

147

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1996-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

148

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

149

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

150

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1995-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

151

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

152

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Wiersma, B.; Hansen, A.

2013-11-13T23:59:59.000Z

153

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

WEBER RA

2009-01-16T23:59:59.000Z

154

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

FOWLER KD

2007-12-27T23:59:59.000Z

155

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Stupka, R.C.

1989-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

156

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Carrington-Crouch, Robert

1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

157

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Wallenberg, H.A.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

158

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1993-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

159

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1995-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

160

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

Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

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


161

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

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

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

162

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Sobolik, Steven Ronald; Bartel, Lewis Clark

2010-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

163

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

164

AQUIFER THERMAL ENERGY STORAGE-A SURVEY  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Tsang, Chin Fu

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

165

AQUIFER THERMAL ENERGY STORAGE-A SURVEY  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Tsang, Chin Fu

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

166

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

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

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

167

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

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

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

168

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

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

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

169

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

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

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

170

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

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

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

171

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

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

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

172

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2012-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

173

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1997-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

174

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office

1999-05-05T23:59:59.000Z

175

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale Proved Reserves (Billion CubicPrice SoldPriceGas, Wet AfterShaleVolumeGas,Net Withdrawals

176

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Rutqvist, J.

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

177

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Rutqvist, J.

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

178

Assessment of Energy Storage Alternatives in the Puget Sound Energy System Volume 2: Energy Storage Evaluation Tool  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This volume presents the battery storage evaluation tool developed at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), which is used to evaluate benefits of battery storage for multiple grid applications, including energy arbitrage, balancing service, capacity value, distribution system equipment deferral, and outage mitigation. This tool is based on the optimal control strategies to capture multiple services from a single energy storage device. In this control strategy, at each hour, a look-ahead optimization is first formulated and solved to determine battery base operating point. The minute by minute simulation is then performed to simulate the actual battery operation. This volume provide background and manual for this evaluation tool.

Wu, Di; Jin, Chunlian; Balducci, Patrick J.; Kintner-Meyer, Michael CW

2013-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

179

Proceedings of the seventh symposium on containment of underground nuclear explosions. Volume 2  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This is Volume 2 of two unclassified volumes of a meeting of workers at all levels in the science and technology of containment. Papers on containment and related geological, geophysical, engineering, chemical, and computational topics were included. Particular topics in this volume include: Low-yield test beds, modeling and residual stress, material properties, collapse phenomena and shock diagnostics, stemming practices and performance, geophysics, and geosciences and weapons destruction. Individual papers are indexed separately on the data base.

Olsen, C.W. [ed.

1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

180

Proceedings of the seventh symposium on containment of underground nuclear explosions. Volume 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This is Volume 1 of two unclassified volumes of a meeting of workers at all levels in the science and technology of containment. Papers on containment and related geological, geophysical, engineering, chemical, and computational topics were included. Particular topics included in this volume are: General containment,tunnel and LOS topics, cavity conditions, and LYNER and chemical kiloton. Individual papers are indexed separately on the data base.

Olsen, C.W. [ed.] [ed.

1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

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


181

Nuclear Dynamics Consequence Analysis (NDCA) for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel in an Underground Geologic Repository - Volume 3: Appendices  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The United States Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management's (DOE/EM's) National Spent Nuclear Fuel Program (NSNFP), through a collaboration between Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) and Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), is conducting a systematic Nuclear Dynamics Consequence Analysis (NDCA) of the disposal of SNFs in an underground geologic repository sited in unsaturated tuff. This analysis is intended to provide interim guidance to the DOE for the management of the SNF while they prepare for final compliance evaluation. This report presents results from a Nuclear Dynamics Consequence Analysis (NDCA) that examined the potential consequences and risks of criticality during the long-term disposal of spent nuclear fuel owned by DOE-EM. This analysis investigated the potential of post-closure criticality, the consequences of a criticality excursion, and the probability frequency for post-closure criticality. The results of the NDCA are intended to provide the DOE-EM with a technical basis for measuring risk which can be used for screening arguments to eliminate post-closure criticality FEPs (features, events and processes) from consideration in the compliance assessment because of either low probability or low consequences. This report is composed of an executive summary (Volume 1), the methodology and results of the NDCA (Volume 2), and the applicable appendices (Volume 3).

Taylor, L.L.; Wilson, J.R. (INEEL); Sanchez, L.C.; Aguilar, R.; Trellue, H.R.; Cochrane, K. (SNL); Rath, J.S. (New Mexico Engineering Research Institute)

1998-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

182

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....

183

Soil load above Hanford waste storage tanks (2 volumes)  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document is a compilation of work performed as part of the Dome Load Control Project in 1994. Section 2 contains the calculations of the weight of the soil over the tank dome for each of the 75-feet-diameter waste-storage tanks located at the Hanford Site. The chosen soil specific weight and soil depth measured at the apex of the dome crown are the same as those used in the primary analysis that qualified the design. Section 3 provides reference dimensions for each of the tank farm sites. The reference dimensions spatially orient the tanks and provide an outer diameter for each tank. Section 4 summarizes the available soil surface elevation data. It also provides examples of the calculations performed to establish the present soil elevation estimates. The survey data and other data sources from which the elevation data has been obtained are printed separately in Volume 2 of this Supporting Document. Section 5 contains tables that provide an overall summary of the present status of dome loads. Tables summarizing the load state corresponding to the soil depth and soil specific weight for the original qualification analysis, the gravity load requalification for soil depth and soil specific weight greater than the expected actual values, and a best estimate condition of soil depth and specific weight are presented for the Double-Shell Tanks. For the Single-Shell Tanks, only the original qualification analysis is available; thus, the tabulated results are for this case only. Section 6 provides a brief overview of past analysis and testing results that given an indication of the load capacity of the waste storage tanks that corresponds to a condition approaching ultimate failure of the tank. 31 refs.

Pianka, E.W. [Advent Engineering Services, Inc., San Ramon, CA (United States)

1995-01-25T23:59:59.000Z

184

,"AGA Eastern 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:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy SourcesWyoming" "Item","Value","Rank" "Primary

185

,"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:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy SourcesWyoming" "Item","Value","Rank" "PrimaryRegion

186

,"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:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy SourcesWyoming" "Item","Value","Rank"Western Consuming

187

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

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

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

188

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

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

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

189

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

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

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

190

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

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

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

191

,"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:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"Shale Proved

192

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"Shale ProvedWellheadNet Withdrawals

193

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"Shale ProvedWellheadNetShaleNet

194

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"ShaleCoalbed MethaneGas, WetNet

195

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"ShaleCoalbed MethaneGas,PriceNet

196

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale Proved Reserves (Billion CubicPrice SoldPriceGas, Wet After LeasePriceNet

197

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: EnergyShale Proved Reserves (Billion CubicPriceCoalbed Methane Proved Reserves (BillionPrice

198

U.S. 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:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines About U.S. NaturalA. Michael SchaalNovember 26,8,Coal Stocks255,035Year Jan

199

Lower 48 States Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

200

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

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

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

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


201

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

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

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

202

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

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

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

203

,"U.S. 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: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia, Virginia:FAQ <Information AdministrationMonthly","2/2015"

204

Assessment of underground coal gasification in bituminous coals. Volume I. Executive summary. Final report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report describes the bituminous coal resources of the United States, identifies those resources which are potentially amenable to Underground Coal Gasification (UCG), identifies products and markets in the vicinity of selected target areas, identifies UCG concepts, describes the state of the art of UCG in bituminous coal, and presents three R and D programs for development of the technology to the point of commercial viability. Of the 670 billion tons of bituminous coal remaining in-place as identified by the National Coal Data System, 32.2 billion tons or 4.8% of the total are potentially amenable to UCG technology. The identified amenable resource was located in ten states: Alabama, Colorado, Illinois, Kentucky, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia, and West Virginia. The principal criteria which eliminated 87.3% of the resource was the minimum thickness (42 inches). Three R and D programs were developed using three different concepts at two different sites. Open Borehole, Hydraulic Fracture, and Electrolinking concepts were developed. The total program costs for each concept were not significantly different. The study concludes that much of the historical information based on UCG in bituminous coals is not usable due to the poor siting of the early field tests and a lack of adequate diagnostic equipment. This information gap requires that much of the early work be redone in view of the much improved understanding of the role of geology and hydrology in the process and the recent development of analytical tools and methods.

None

1981-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

205

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1992-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

206

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1992-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

207

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

TU, T.A.

2007-01-04T23:59:59.000Z

208

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

BARKER, S.A.

2006-07-27T23:59:59.000Z

209

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Rutqvist, J.

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

210

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Rutqvist, J.

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

211

Feasibility study for underground coal gasification at the Krabi coal mine site, Thailand: Volume 1. Progress report, December 1--31, 1995; Export trade information  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The report, conducted by Energy and Environmental Research Center, was funded by the US Trade and Development Agency. The objective of this report was to determine the technical, environmental and economic feasibility of developing, demonstrating, and commercializing underground coal gasification (UCG) at the Krabi coal mine site in Southern Thailand. This is Volume 1, the Progress Report for the period December 1, 1995, through December 31, 1995.

Young, B.C.; Schmit, C.R.

1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

212

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Østensen, Marie

2005-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

213

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...

214

Office of Technology Development`s Research, Development, Demonstration, Testing and Evaluation Mid-Year Program Review. Volume 2  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document, Volume 2, presents brief summaries of programs being investigated at USDOE sites for waste processing, remedial action, underground storage tank remediation, and robotic applications in waste management.

Not Available

1994-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

215

Regional assessment of aquifers for thermal-energy storage. Volume 2. Regions 7 through 12  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This volume contains information on the geologic and hydrologic framework, major aquifers, aquifers which are suitable and unsuitable for annual thermal energy storage (ATES) and the ATES potential of the following regions of the US: Unglaciated Central Region; Glaciated Appalachians, Unglaciated Appalachians; Coastal Plain; Hawaii; and Alaska. (LCL)

Not Available

1981-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

216

Regional assessment of aquifers for thermal energy storage. Volume 1. Regions 1 through 6  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This volume contains information on the geologic and hydrologic framework, major aquifers, aquifers which are suitable and unsuitable for annual thermal energy storage (ATES) and the ATES potential of the following regions of the US: the Western Mountains; Alluvial Basins; Columbia LAVA Plateau; Colorado Plateau; High Plains; and Glaciated Central Region. (LCL)

Not Available

1981-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

217

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Frigo, A.A.; Pistner, C.

1980-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

218

Monitored retrievable storage submission to Congress: Volume 3, Monitored retrievable storage program plan. [Contains glossary  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document presents the current DOE program objectives and the strategy for implementing the proposed program for the integral MRS facility. If the MRS proposal is approved by Congress, any needed revisions to the Program Plan will be made available to the Congress, the State of Tennessee, affected Indian tribes, local governments, other federal agencies, and the public. The proposal for constructing an MRS facility must include: the establishment of a federal program for the siting, development, construction, and operation of MRS facilities; a plan for funding the construction and operation of MRS facilities; site-specific designs, specifications, and cost estimates for the first such facility; a plan for integrating MRS facilities with other storage and disposal facilities authorized by the NWPA. 32 refs., 14 figs., 1 tab.

none,

1987-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

219

Underground Exploration  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

220

Nuclear Dynamics Consequence Analysis (NDCA) for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel in an Underground Geologic Repository--Volume 2: Methodology and Results  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The US Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management's (DOE/EM's) National Spent Nuclear Fuel Program (NSNFP), through a collaboration between Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) and Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), is conducting a systematic Nuclear Dynamics Consequence Analysis (NDCA) of the disposal of SNFs in an underground geologic repository sited in unsaturated tuff. This analysis is intended to provide interim guidance to the DOE for the management of the SNF while they prepare for final compliance evaluation. This report presents results from a Nuclear Dynamics Consequence Analysis (NDCA) that examined the potential consequences and risks of criticality during the long-term disposal of spent nuclear fuel owned by DOE-EM. This analysis investigated the potential of post-closure criticality, the consequences of a criticality excursion, and the probability frequency for post-closure criticality. The results of the NDCA are intended to provide the DOE-EM with a technical basis for measuring risk which can be used for screening arguments to eliminate post-closure criticality FEPs (features, events and processes) from consideration in the compliance assessment because of either low probability or low consequences. This report is composed of an executive summary (Volume 1), the methodology and results of the NDCA (Volume 2), and the applicable appendices (Volume 3).

Taylor, L.L.; Wilson, J.R.; Sanchez, L.C.; Aguilar, R.; Trellue, H.R.; Cochrane, K.; Rath, J.S.

1998-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


221

NGLW RCRA Storage Study  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2000-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

222

ICPP calcined solids storage facility closure study. Volume III: Engineering design files  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The following information was calculated to support cost estimates and radiation exposure calculations for closure activities at the Calcined Solids Storage Facility (CSSF). Within the estimate, volumes were calculated to determine the required amount of grout to be used during closure activities. The remaining calcine on the bin walls, supports, piping, and floor was also calculated to approximate the remaining residual calcine volumes at different stages of the removal process. The estimates for remaining calcine and vault void volume are higher than what would actually be experienced in the field, but are necessary for bounding purposes. The residual calcine in the bins may be higher than was is experienced in the field as it was assumed that the entire bin volume is full of calcine before removal activities commence. The vault void volumes are higher as the vault roof beam volumes were neglected. The estimations that follow should be considered rough order of magnitude, due to the time constraints as dictated by the project`s scope of work. Should more accurate numbers be required, a new analysis would be necessary.

NONE

1998-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

223

Utah Division of Environmental Response and Remediation Underground...  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

224

High level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID), Volume 6  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The High-Level Waste Storage Tank Farms/242-A Evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID) is contained in multiple volumes. This document (Volume 6) outlines the standards and requirements for the sections on: Environmental Restoration and Waste Management, Research and Development and Experimental Activities, and Nuclear Safety.

Not Available

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

225

High-level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID), Volume 4  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The High-Level Waste Storage Tank Farms/242-A Evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID) is contained in multiple volumes. This document (Volume 4) presents the standards and requirements for the following sections: Radiation Protection and Operations.

Not Available

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

226

High-level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID), Volume 2  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The High-Level Waste Storage Tank Farms/242-A Evaporator Standards/Requirements Document (S/RID) is contained in multiple volumes. This document (Volume 2) presents the standards and requirements for the following sections: Quality Assurance, Training and Qualification, Emergency Planning and Preparedness, and Construction.

Not Available

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

227

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Grant Evenson

2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

228

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Grant Evenson

2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

229

Estimating Plume Volume for Geologic Storage of CO2 in Saline Aquifers  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Typically, when a new subsurface flow and transport problem is first being considered, very simple models with a minimal number of parameters are used to get a rough idea of how the system will evolve. For a hydrogeologist considering the spreading of a contaminant plume in an aquifer, the aquifer thickness, porosity, and permeability might be enough to get started. If the plume is buoyant, aquifer dip comes into play. If regional groundwater flow is significant or there are nearby wells pumping, these features need to be included. Generally, the required parameters tend to be known from pre-existing studies, are parameters that people working in the field are familiar with, and represent features that are easy to explain to potential funding agencies, regulators, stakeholders, and the public. The situation for geologic storage of carbon dioxide (CO{sub 2}) in saline aquifers is quite different. It is certainly desirable to do preliminary modeling in advance of any field work since geologic storage of CO{sub 2} is a novel concept that few people have much experience with or intuition about. But the parameters that control CO{sub 2} plume behavior are a little more daunting to assemble and explain than those for a groundwater flow problem. Even the most basic question of how much volume a given mass of injected CO{sub 2} will occupy in the subsurface is non-trivial. However, with a number of simplifying assumptions, some preliminary estimates can be made, as described below. To make efficient use of the subsurface storage volume available, CO{sub 2} density should be large, which means choosing a storage formation at depths below about 800 m, where pressure and temperature conditions are above the critical point of CO{sub 2} (P = 73.8 bars, T = 31 C). Then CO{sub 2} will exist primarily as a free-phase supercritical fluid, while some CO{sub 2} will dissolve into the aqueous phase.

Doughty, Christine

2008-07-11T23:59:59.000Z

230

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Tsang, Chin Fu

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

231

Multinational underground nuclear parks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

232

Underground Natural Gas Storage by Storage Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

233

Underground Natural Gas Storage by Storage Type  

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

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

234

Potential underground risks associated with CAES.  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

235

Panel 2, Geologic Storage of Hydrogen  

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

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

236

Technical and economic assessment of fluidized-bed-augmented compressed-air energy-storage system. Volume I. Executive summary  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

An energy storage system which could be attractive for future electric utility peak-load applications is a modified gas turbine power system utilizing underground storage of very high pressure air. The compressed air energy storage (CAES) concept involves using off-peak electricity generated from indigenous coal or nuclear sources to compress air, storing the air in large underground facilities, and withdrawing the air during peak-load periods when it would be heated by combustion and expanded through gas turbines to generate power. The attractiveness of the CAES concept is based upon its potential to supply competitively priced peaking energy, to reduce peak-load power plant dependence on petroleum-based fuels, and to provide a means for leveling the utility system load demand. Therefore, a technical and economic assessment of coal-fired fluidized bed (FBC) combustor/compressed air energy storage (FBC/CAES) systems was performed and is described. The conclusions drawn from the FBC/CAES study program are encouraging. They indicate that pressurized FBC/CAES power plants should be technologically feasible, provide good performance, and be economically competitive. Specifically, it is concluded that: coal-fired FBC/CAES systems should be technically feasible in the near future and potentially attractive for peak-load power generation; and an open-bed PFBC/CAES configuration would provide the best candidate for early commercialization. It has relatively low risk combined with moderate cost and reasonable round-trip heat rate. It also has the potential for future growth options which tend to reduce costs and lower fuel consumption.

Giramonti, A.J.; Lessard, R.D.; Merrick, D.; Hobson, M.J.

1981-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

237

Desiccant bed on hydrocarbon charged to and removed from underground (salt) cavern  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A hydrocarbon fluid storage system is described which consists of in operable conjunction: a cavern formed within an underground salt strata below a ground surface, the cavern comprises a lower liquid volume of saturated sodium chloride storage brine and an upper fluid volume of wet hydrocarbon storage fluid, surface fluid handling means; conduit connecting the lower storage brine and upper storage hydrocarbon fluid with the surface fluid handling means, of fluid transfer means enabling transfer of brine and hydrocarbon fluid from the surface to the cavern and from the cavern to the surface, such that brine can be added to or withdrawn from the lower brine volume and hydrocarbon fluids can be added to or withdrawn from the upper hydrocarbon fluid volume, and at least one desiccant drier means positioned at the surface in operable association with the surface fluid handling means whereby the wet hydrocarbon fluid upon withdrawal from the cavern passes through the desiccant drier means and thereby becomes dry, and dry hydrocarbon fluid intended for storage passes through the desiccant drier prior to entering the storage cavern and thereby becomes wet.

Washer, S.P.

1986-06-03T23:59:59.000Z

238

Technical and economic assessment of fluidized bed augmented compressed air energy storage system. Volume III. Preconceptual design  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A technical and economic assessment of fluidized bed combustion augmented compressed air energy storage systems is presented. The results of this assessment effort are presented in three volumes. Volume III - Preconceptual Design contains the system analysis which led to the identification of a preferred component configuration for a fluidized bed combustion augmented compressed air energy storage system, the results of the effort which transformed the preferred configuration into preconceptual power plant design, and an introductory evaluation of the performance of the power plant system during part-load operation and while load following.

Giramonti, A.J.; Lessard, R.D.; Merrick, D.; Hobson, M.J.

1981-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

239

COBRA-SFS (Spent Fuel Storage): A thermal-hydraulic analysis computer code: Volume 1, Mathematical models and solution method  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

COBRA-SFS (Spent Fuel Storage) is a general thermal-hydraulic analysis computer code used to predict temperatures and velocities in a wide variety of systems. The code was refined and specialized for spent fuel storage system analyses for the US Department of Energy's Commercial Spent Fuel Management Program. The finite-volume equations governing mass, momentum, and energy conservation are written for an incompressible, single-phase fluid. The flow equations model a wide range of conditions including natural circulation. The energy equations include the effects of solid and fluid conduction, natural convection, and thermal radiation. The COBRA-SFS code is structured to perform both steady-state and transient calculations: however, the transient capability has not yet been validated. This volume describes the finite-volume equations and the method used to solve these equations. It is directed toward the user who is interested in gaining a more complete understanding of these methods.

Rector, D.R.; Wheeler, C.L.; Lombardo, N.J.

1986-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

240

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

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

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

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


241

West Hackberry Strategic Petroleum Reserve site brine-disposal monitoring, Year I report. Volume III. Biological oceanography. Final report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Department of Energy's Strategic Petroleum Reserve Program began discharging brine into the Gulf of Mexico from its West Hackberry site near Cameron, Louisiana in May 1981. The brine originates from underground salt domes being leached with water from the Intracoastal Waterway, making available vast underground storage caverns for crude oil. The effects of brine discharge on aquatic organisms are presented in this volume. The topics covered are: benthos; nekton; phytoplankton; zooplankton; and data management.

DeRouen, L.R.; Hann, R.W.; Casserly, D.M.; Giammona, C.; Lascara, V.J. (eds.)

1983-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

242

COBRA-SFS (Spent Fuel Storage): A thermal-hydraulic analysis computer code: Volume 2, User's manual  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

COBRA-SFS (Spent Fuel Storage) is a general thermal-hydraulic analysis computer code used to predict temperatures and velocities in a wide variety of systems. The code was refined and specialized for spent fuel storage system analyses for the US Department of Energy's Commercial Spent Fuel Management Program. The finite-volume equations governing mass, momentum, and energy conservation are written for an incompressible, single-phase fluid. The flow equations model a wide range of conditions including natural circulation. The energy equations include the effects of solid and fluid conduction, natural convection, and thermal radiation. The COBRA-SFS code is structured to perform both steady-state and transient calculations; however, the transient capability has not yet been validated. This volume contains the input instructions for COBRA-SFS and an auxiliary radiation exchange factor code, RADX-1. It is intended to aid the user in becoming familiar with the capabilities and modeling conventions of the code.

Rector, D.R.; Cuta, J.M.; Lombardo, N.J.; Michener, T.E.; Wheeler, C.L.

1986-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

243

COBRA-SFS (Spent Fuel Storage): A thermal-hydraulic analysis computer code: Volume 3, Validation assessments  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report presents the results of the COBRA-SFS (Spent Fuel Storage) computer code validation effort. COBRA-SFS, while refined and specialized for spent fuel storage system analyses, is a lumped-volume thermal-hydraulic analysis computer code that predicts temperature and velocity distributions in a wide variety of systems. Through comparisons of code predictions with spent fuel storage system test data, the code's mathematical, physical, and mechanistic models are assessed, and empirical relations defined. The six test cases used to validate the code and code models include single-assembly and multiassembly storage systems under a variety of fill media and system orientations and include unconsolidated and consolidated spent fuel. In its entirety, the test matrix investigates the contributions of convection, conduction, and radiation heat transfer in spent fuel storage systems. To demonstrate the code's performance for a wide variety of storage systems and conditions, comparisons of code predictions with data are made for 14 runs from the experimental data base. The cases selected exercise the important code models and code logic pathways and are representative of the types of simulations required for spent fuel storage system design and licensing safety analyses. For each test, a test description, a summary of the COBRA-SFS computational model, assumptions, and correlations employed are presented. For the cases selected, axial and radial temperature profile comparisons of code predictions with test data are provided, and conclusions drawn concerning the code models and the ability to predict the data and data trends. Comparisons of code predictions with test data demonstrate the ability of COBRA-SFS to successfully predict temperature distributions in unconsolidated or consolidated single and multiassembly spent fuel storage systems.

Lombardo, N.J.; Cuta, J.M.; Michener, T.E.; Rector, D.R.; Wheeler, C.L.

1986-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

244

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

245

Underground Layout Configuration  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

A. Linden

2003-09-25T23:59:59.000Z

246

Monitored retrievable storage submission to Congress: Volume 2, Environmental assessment for a monitored retrievable storage facility. [Contains glossary  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Environmental Assessment (EA) supports the DOE proposal to Congress to construct and operate a facility for monitored retrievable storage (MRS) of spent fuel at a site on the Clinch River in the Roane County portion of Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The first part of this document is an assessment of the value of, need for, and feasibility of an MRS facility as an integral component of the waste management system. The second part is an assessment and comparison of the potential environmental impacts projected for each of six site-design combinations. The MRS facility would be centrally located with respect to existing reactors, and would receive and canister spent fuel in preparation for shipment to and disposal in a geologic repository. 207 refs., 57 figs., 132 tabs.

none,

1986-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

247

High-level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID), Volume 7. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The High-Level Waste Storage Tank Farms/242-A Evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID) is contained in multiple volumes. This document (Volume 7) presents the standards and requirements for the following sections: Occupational Safety and Health, and Environmental Protection.

Burt, D.L.

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

248

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.

249

Final Long-Term Management and Storage of Elemental Mercury Environmental Impact Statement Volume 2  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Pursuant to the Mercury Export Ban Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-414), DOE was directed to designate a facility or facilities for the long-term management and storage of elemental mercury generated within the United States. Therefore, DOE has analyzed the storage of up to 10,000 metric tons (11,000 tons) of elemental mercury in a facility(ies) constructed and operated in accordance with the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (74 FR 31723). DOE prepared this Final Mercury Storage EIS in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) implementing regulations (40 CFR 1500–1508), and DOE’s NEPA implementing procedures (10 CFR 1021) to evaluate reasonable alternatives for a facility(ies) for the long-term management and storage of elemental mercury. This Final Mercury Storage EIS analyzes the potential environmental, human health, and socioeconomic impacts of elemental mercury storage at seven candidate locations: Grand Junction Disposal Site near Grand Junction, Colorado; Hanford Site near Richland, Washington; Hawthorne Army Depot near Hawthorne, Nevada; Idaho National Laboratory near Idaho Falls, Idaho; Kansas City Plant in Kansas City, Missouri; Savannah River Site near Aiken, South Carolina; and Waste Control Specialists, LLC, site near Andrews, Texas. As required by CEQ NEPA regulations, the No Action Alternative was also analyzed as a basis for comparison. DOE intends to decide (1) where to locate the elemental mercury storage facility(ies) and (2) whether to use existing buildings, new buildings, or a combination of existing and new buildings. DOE’s Preferred Alternative for the long-term management and storage of mercury is the Waste Control Specialists, LLC, site near Andrews, Texas.

Not Available

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

250

Final Long-Term Management and Storage of Elemental Mercury Environmental Impact Statement Volume1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Pursuant to the Mercury Export Ban Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-414), DOE was directed to designate a facility or facilities for the long-term management and storage of elemental mercury generated within the United States. Therefore, DOE has analyzed the storage of up to 10,000 metric tons (11,000 tons) of elemental mercury in a facility(ies) constructed and operated in accordance with the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (74 FR 31723).DOE prepared this Final Mercury Storage EIS in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) implementing regulations (40 CFR 1500–1508), and DOE’s NEPA implementing procedures (10 CFR 1021) to evaluate reasonable alternatives for a facility(ies) for the long-term management and storage of elemental mercury. This Final Mercury Storage EIS analyzes the potential environmental, human health, and socioeconomic impacts of elemental mercury storage at seven candidate locations:Grand Junction Disposal Site near Grand Junction, Colorado; Hanford Site near Richland, Washington; Hawthorne Army Depot near Hawthorne, Nevada; Idaho National Laboratory near Idaho Falls, Idaho;Kansas City Plant in Kansas City, Missouri; Savannah River Site near Aiken, South Carolina; and Waste Control Specialists, LLC, site near Andrews, Texas. As required by CEQ NEPA regulations, the No Action Alternative was also analyzed as a basis for comparison. DOE intends to decide (1) where to locate the elemental mercury storage facility(ies) and (2) whether to use existing buildings, new buildings, or a combination of existing and new buildings. DOE’s Preferred Alternative for the long-term management and storage of mercury is the Waste Control Specialists, LLC, site near Andrews, Texas.

Not Available

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

251

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...

252

Technical and economic assessment of fluidized bed augmented compressed air energy-storage system. Volume II. Introduction and technology assessment  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The results are described of a study subcontracted by PNL to the United Technologies Research Center on the engineering feasibility and economics of a CAES concept which uses a coal fired, fluidized bed combustor (FBC) to heat the air being returned from storage during the power production cycle. By burning coal instead of fuel oil, the CAES/FBC concept can completely eliminate the dependence of compressed air energy storage on petroleum fuels. The results of this assessment effort are presented in three volumes. Volume II presents a discussion of program background and an in-depth coverage of both fluid bed combustion and turbomachinery technology pertinent to their application in a CAES power plant system. The CAES/FBC concept appears technically feasible and economically competitive with conventional CAES. However, significant advancement is required in FBC technology before serious commercial commitment to CAES/FBC can be realized. At present, other elements of DOE, industrial groups, and other countries are performing the required R and D for advancement of FBC technology. The CAES/FBC will be reevaluated at a later date when FBC technology has matured and many of the concerns now plaguing FBC are resolved. (LCL)

Giramonti, A.J.; Lessard, R.D.; Merrick, D.; Hobson, M.J.

1981-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

253

Site characterization plan: Conceptual design report: Volume 4, Appendices F-O: Nevada Nuclear Waste Storage Investigations Project  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The site for the prospective repository is located at Yucca Mountain in southwestern Nevada, and the waste emplacement area will be constructed in the underlying volcanic tuffs. The target horizon for waste emplacement is a sloping bed of densely welded tuff more than 650 ft below the surface and typically more than 600 ft above the water table. The conceptual design described in this report is unique among repository designs in that it uses ramps in addition to shafts to gain access to the underground facility, the emplacement horizon is located above the water table, and it is possible that 300- to 400-ft-long horizontal waste emplacement boreholes will be used. This report summarizes the design bases, design and performance criteria, and the design analyses performed. The current status of meeting the preclosure performance objectives for licensing and of resolving the repository design and preclosure issues is presented. The repository design presented in this report will be expanded and refined during the advanced conceptual design, the license application design, and the final procurement and construction design phases. Volume 4 contains Appendices F to O.

MacDougall, H R; Scully, L W; Tillerson, J R [comps.] [comps.

1987-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

254

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Tsang, Chin Fu

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

255

Materials for electrochemical energy storage and conversion II -- Batteries, capacitors and fuel cells. Materials Research Society symposium proceedings, Volume 496  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Our energy-hungry world is increasingly relying on new methods to store and convert energy for portable electronics, as well as new, environmentally friendly modes of transportation and electrical energy generation. The availability of advanced materials is linked to the commercial success of improved power sources such as batteries, fuel cells and capacitors with higher specific energy and power, longer cycle life and rapid change/discharge rates. The papers in this symposium were heavily weighted toward lithium batteries. The proceedings volume is organized into six sections highlighting: general papers on a wide variety of rechargeable battery technologies; new approaches to modeling of Li batteries; advances in fuel-cell technology; new work on Li battery cathodes; anodes and electrolytes; and work on super-capacitors. The authors think the volume is an excellent snapshot of the current state of the art in energy storage and conversion technologies, many of which will make a significant impact on society. Separate abstracts were prepared for most papers in this volume.

Ginley, D.S.; Doughty, D.H.; Scrosati, B.; Takamura, T.; Zhang, Z.J. [eds.

1998-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

256

Regional assessment of aquifers for thermal-energy storage. Volume 3. Appendices  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This volume contains two appendices to the main report. The first lists the aquifers in the 12 geographic regions of the USA and characterizes each as containing sands and gravels or limestones or volcanic rock. The second appendix tabulates the hydrologic characteristics of each aquifer. (LCL)

Not Available

1981-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

257

Underground nuclear energy complexes - technical and economic advantages  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

258

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...

259

Oregon Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

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

260

Maryland Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

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

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


261

Colorado Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

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

262

West Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

263

Wyoming Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

264

Wyoming Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

265

Underground Natural Gas in Storage - All Operators  

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

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

266

Ohio Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

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

267

Oklahoma Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

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

268

Oregon Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

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

269

Pennsylvania Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

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

270

Underground Natural Gas Working Storage Capacity - Methodology  

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

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

271

Working Gas in Underground Storage Figure  

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

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

272

Working Gas in Underground Storage Figure  

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

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

273

Alabama Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

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

274

Alabama Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

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

275

Alaska Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

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

276

Alaska Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

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

277

Tennessee Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

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

278

Tennessee Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

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

279

Texas Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

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

280

Texas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

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

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


281

The Basics of Underground Natural Gas Storage  

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

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

282

Indiana Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

283

Indiana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

284

Iowa Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

285

Iowa Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

286

Kansas Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

287

Kansas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

288

Kentucky Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

289

Kentucky Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

290

Louisiana Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

291

Louisiana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

292

Maryland Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

293

Maryland Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

294

Michigan Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

295

Michigan Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

296

Minnesota Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

297

Minnesota Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

298

Mississippi Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

299

Mississippi Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

300

Missouri Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

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


301

Missouri Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

302

Montana Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

303

Montana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

304

The Basics of Underground Natural Gas Storage  

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

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

305

Weekly Working Gas in Underground Storage  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

306

Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)  

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

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

307

Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)  

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

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

308

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...

309

Colorado Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

310

Colorado Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

311

Illinois Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

312

Illinois Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

313

Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

314

Arkansas Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

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

315

California Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

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

316

Utah Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

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

317

Utah Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

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

318

Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

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

319

Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

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

320

Washington Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

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

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


321

Washington Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

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

322

Underground CO2 Storage | GE Global Research  

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

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

323

Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)  

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

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

324

Oregon Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

325

Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

326

Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

327

Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

328

Pennsylvania Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

329

Arkansas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

330

California Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

331

Natural Gas In Underground Storage (Summary)  

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

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

332

Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)  

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

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

333

Nebraska Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

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

334

Nebraska Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

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

335

New Mexico Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

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

336

New York Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

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

337

Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)  

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

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

338

Ohio Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

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

339

Oklahoma Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

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

340

CPP-603 Underwater Fuel Storage Facility Site Integrated Stabilization Management Plan (SISMP), Volume I  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The CPP-603 Underwater Fuel Storage Facility (UFSF) Site Integrated Stabilization Management Plan (SISMP) has been constructed to describe the activities required for the relocation of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) from the CPP-603 facility. These activities are the only Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) actions identified in the Implementation Plan developed to meet the requirements of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Recommendation 94-1 to the Secretary of Energy regarding an improved schedule for remediation in the Defense Nuclear Facilities Complex. As described in the DNFSB Recommendation 94-1 Implementation Plan, issued February 28, 1995, an INEL Spent Nuclear Fuel Management Plan is currently under development to direct the placement of SNF currently in existing INEL facilities into interim storage, and to address the coordination of intrasite SNF movements with new receipts and intersite transfers that were identified in the DOE SNF Programmatic and INEL Environmental Restoration and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement Record, of Decision. This SISMP will be a subset of the INEL Spent Nuclear Fuel Management Plan and the activities described are being coordinated with other INEL SNF management activities. The CPP-603 relocation activities have been assigned a high priority so that established milestones will be meet, but there will be some cases where other activities will take precedence in utilization of available resources. The Draft INEL Site Integrated Stabilization Management Plan (SISMP), INEL-94/0279, Draft Rev. 2, dated March 10, 1995, is being superseded by the INEL Spent Nuclear Fuel Management Plan and this CPP-603 specific SISMP.

Denney, R.D.

1995-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


341

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

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

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

342

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...

343

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

344

Underground waste barrier structure  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

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

1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

345

Resource conservation and recovery act draft hazardous waste facility permit: Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). Attachments: Volume 4 of 4  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Volume IV contains the following attachments for Module IV: VOC monitoring plan for bin-room tests (Appendix D12); bin emission control and VOC monitoring system drawings; bin scale test room ventilation drawings; WIPP supplementary roof support system, underground storage area, room 1, panel 1, DOE/WIPP 91-057; and WIPP supplementary roof support system, room 1, panel 1, geotechnical field data analysis bi-annual report, DOE/WIPP 92-024.

Not Available

1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

346

Rainwater Harvesting: Soil Storage and Infiltration System  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Mechell, Justin; Lesikar, Bruce J.

2008-08-11T23:59:59.000Z

347

Hydrogen Storage DOI: 10.1002/anie.200801163  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

, is the development of a safe and practical storage system. As opposed to stationary storage, in which the tank volume required for storage near room temperature. 2. Hydrogen Storage Requirements 2.1. The US DoE Storage System

348

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,...

349

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...

350

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

351

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Srinivasan, Balaji S.

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

352

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...

353

Proceedings of the third international seminar on double layer capacitors and similar energy storage devices. Volume 3  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This book contains the papers presented at the Third International Seminar on Double Layer Capacitors and Similar Energy Storage Devices in December, 1993. The topics of the papers include basic electrochemical principles, testing of ultracapacitors and systems for application in electric powered vehicles, performance of capacitors, materials used in supercapacitors, and reliability of supercapacitors.

Not Available

1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

354

NEUTRON LIFETIME EXPERIMENT BASED ON AN `ACCORDION-LIKE' UCN STORAGE VOLUME COATED WITH `LOW TEMPERATURE FOMBLIN'  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

, Cambridge, MA, USA; 2 University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI, USA; 3 Joint Institute for Nuclear Research-fluorinated polymer, `Low Temperature Fomblin', has been tested as a wall coating in an ultracold neutron (UCN of an accordion-like storage vessel. In this system, the surface area and its distribution over height remain

Steyerl, Albert

355

BWR spent fuel storage cask performance test. Volume 2. Pre- and post-test decay heat, heat transfer, and shielding analyses  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report describes the decay heat, heat transfer, and shielding analyses conducted in support of performance testing of a Ridhihalgh, Eggers and Associates REA 2033 boiling water reactor (BWR) spent fuel storage cask. The cask testing program was conducted for the US Department of Energy (DOE) Commercial Spent Fuel Management Program by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) and by General Electric at the latters' Morris Operation (GE-MO) as reported in Volume I. The analyses effort consisted of performing pretest calculations to (1) select spent fuel for the test; (2) symmetrically load the spent fuel assemblies in the cask to ensure lateral symmetry of decay heat generation rates; (3) optimally locate temperature and dose rate instrumentation in the cask and spent fuel assemblies; and (4) evaluate the ORIGEN2 (decay heat), HYDRA and COBRA-SFS (heat transfer), and QAD and DOT (shielding) computer codes. The emphasis of this second volume is on the comparison of code predictions to experimental test data in support of the code evaluation process. Code evaluations were accomplished by comparing pretest (actually pre-look, since some predictions were not completed until testing was in progress) predictions with experimental cask testing data reported in Volume I. No attempt was made in this study to compare the two heat transfer codes because results of other evaluations have not been completed, and a comparison based on one data set may lead to erroneous conclusions.

Wiles, L.E.; Lombardo, N.J.; Heeb, C.M.; Jenquin, U.P.; Michener, T.E.; Wheeler, C.L.; Creer, J.M.; McCann, R.A.

1986-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

356

Underground radio technology saves miners and emergency response personnel  

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

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

357

Water intrusion in underground structures  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Nazarchuk, Alex

2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

358

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Pruess, Karsten

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

359

Underground Coal Thermal Treatment  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2011-10-30T23:59:59.000Z

360

Storage of LWR spent fuel in air. Volume 3, Results from exposure of spent fuel to fluorine-contaminated air  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Behavior of Spent Fuel in Storage (BSFS) Project has conducted research to develop data on spent nuclear fuel (irradiated U0{sub 2}) that could be used to support design, licensing, and operation of dry storage installations. Test Series B conducted by the BSFS Project was designed as a long-term study of the oxidation of spent fuel exposed to air. It was discovered after the exposures were completed in September 1990 that the test specimens had been exposed to an atmosphere of bottled air contaminated with an unknown quantity of fluorine. This exposure resulted in the test specimens reacting with both the oxygen and the fluorine in the oven atmospheres. The apparent source of the fluorine was gamma radiation-induced chemical decomposition of the fluoro-elastomer gaskets used to seal the oven doors. This chemical decomposition apparently released hydrofluoric acid (HF) vapor into the oven atmospheres. Because the Test Series B specimens were exposed to a fluorine-contaminated oven atmosphere and reacted with the fluorine, it is recommended that the Test Series B data not be used to develop time-temperature limits for exposure of spent nuclear fuel to air. This report has been prepared to document Test Series B and present the collected data and observations.

Cunningham, M.E.; Thomas, L.E.

1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


361

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Thorsness, C.B.

1980-11-26T23:59:59.000Z

362

Preliminary design study of compressed-air energy storage in a salt dome. Volume 4. CAES turbomachinery design. Final report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A summary is presented of the study undertaken by the Turbomachinery Subcontractor on Task 1, according to instructions received from the Middle South Services (MSS), the US Department of Energy (DOE) and the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). The subject of this study was to investigate the question of whether it would be possible to build an air storage generating plant capable of operating economically and using leached-out salt domes as air reservoirs. In the course of the work performed on Task 1, the Turbomachinery Subcontractors have on various occasions supplied information on the results obtained, in the form of preliminary subreports. The present summary includes all the previous reports, most of which have been revised to a large extent.

Not Available

1982-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

363

BWR spent fuel storage cask performance test. Volume 1. Cask handling experience and decay heat, heat transfer, and shielding data  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report documents a heat transfer and shielding performance test conducted on a Ridihalgh, Eggers and Associates REA 2023 boiling water reactor (BWR) spent fuel storage cask. The testing effort consisted of three parts: pretest preparations, performance testing, and post-test activities. Pretest preparations included conducting cask handling dry runs and characterizing BWR spent fuel assemblies from Nebraska Public Power District's Cooper Nuclear Station. The performance test matrix included 14 runs consisting of two loadings, two cask orientations, and three backfill environments. Post-test activities included calorimetry and axial radiation scans of selected fuel assemblies, in-basin sipping of each assembly, crud collection, video and photographic scans, and decontamination of the cask interior and exterior.

McKinnon, M.A.; Doman, J.W.; Tanner, J.E.; Guenther, R.J.; Creer, J.M.; King, C.E.

1986-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

364

Preliminary design study of compressed-air energy storage in a salt dome. Volume 1: executive summary. Final report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The preliminary design and cost estimate of a compressed air energy storage (CAES) plant located in the Middle South Utilities (MSU) system are summarized in this report. The 220 MWe CAES plant which stores air in two solution mined salt caverns, is located at the Carmichael salt dome near Jackson, Mississippi. The facility criteria, site selection and the turbomachinery and auxiliaries, are briefly described together with an outline of the proposed procedure for developing the caverns. Using this information and data, the preliminary CAES plant design was prepared; also the capital cost estimate, cash flow and project schedule were developed. The Environmental Assessment did not reveal any major site impediments to the construction of the plant. However, it is believed that an EIS is required primarily because CAES is a new technology without precedent in the United States. Although a final system planning study was not completed because of lack of funds, from preliminary analysis a CAES plant does not appear to be economic in the MSU system before the mid 1990s. This is due to the unique features of the MSU system. For other systems under more favorable conditions, CAES may be economic at an earlier date. The construction of a CAES plant with salt cavern air storage may by considered ready for use as a commercial electric generating plant. The experience at the Huntorf plant in West Germany demonstrates the technical feasibility of the CAES concept. Certain details of the plant defined in this study are different from the Huntorf plant. Design verification by limited testing and analysis would provide added confidence to those considering a CAES plant.

Not Available

1982-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

365

The Large Underground Xenon (LUX) Experiment  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

The Large Underground Xenon (LUX) collaboration has designed and constructed a dual-phase xenon detector, in order to conduct a search for Weakly Interacting Massive Particles(WIMPs), a leading dark matter candidate. The goal of the LUX detector is to clearly detect (or exclude) WIMPS with a spin independent cross section per nucleon of $2\\times 10^{-46}$ cm$^{2}$, equivalent to $\\sim$1 event/100 kg/month in the inner 100-kg fiducial volume (FV) of the 370-kg detector. The overall background goals are set to have $<$1 background events characterized as possible WIMPs in the FV in 300 days of running. This paper describes the design and construction of the LUX detector.

Akerib, D S; Bedikian, S; Bernard, E; Bernstein, A; Bolozdynya, A; Bradley, A; Byram, D; Cahn, S B; Camp, C; Carmona-Benitez, M C; Carr, D; Chapman, J J; Chiller, A; Chiller, C; Clark, K; Classen, T; Coffey, T; Curioni, A; Dahl, E; Dazeley, S; de Viveiros, L; Dobi, A; Dragowsky, E; Druszkiewicz, E; Edwards, B; Faham, C H; Fiorucci, S; Gaitskell, R J; Gibson, K R; Gilchriese, M; Hall, C; Hanhardt, M; Holbrook, B; Ihm, M; Jacobsen, R G; Kastens, L; Kazkaz, K; Knoche, R; Kyre, S; Kwong, J; Lander, R; Larsen, N A; Lee, C; Leonard, D S; Lesko, K T; Lindote, A; Lopes, M I; Lyashenko, A; Malling, D C; Mannino, R; Marquez, Z; McKinsey, D N; Mei, D -M; Mock, J; Moongweluwan, M; Morii, M; Nelson, H; Neves, F; Nikkel, J A; Pangilinan, M; Parker, P D; Pease, E K; Pech, K; Phelps, P; Rodionov, A; Roberts, P; Shei, A; Shutt, T; Silva, C; Skulski, W; Solovov, V N; Sofka, C J; Sorensen, P; Spaans, J; Stiegler, T; Stolp, D; Svoboda, R; Sweany, M; Szydagis, M; Taylor, D; Thomson, J; Tripathi, M; Uvarov, S; Verbus, J R; Walsh, N; Webb, R; White, D; White, J T; Whitis, T J; Wlasenko, M; Wolfs, F L H; Woods, M; Zhang, C

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

366

The Large Underground Xenon (LUX) Experiment  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

The Large Underground Xenon (LUX) collaboration has designed and constructed a dual-phase xenon detector, in order to conduct a search for Weakly Interacting Massive Particles(WIMPs), a leading dark matter candidate. The goal of the LUX detector is to clearly detect (or exclude) WIMPS with a spin independent cross section per nucleon of $2\\times 10^{-46}$ cm$^{2}$, equivalent to $\\sim$1 event/100 kg/month in the inner 100-kg fiducial volume (FV) of the 370-kg detector. The overall background goals are set to have $<$1 background events characterized as possible WIMPs in the FV in 300 days of running. This paper describes the design and construction of the LUX detector.

D. S. Akerib; X. Bai; S. Bedikian; E. Bernard; A. Bernstein; A. Bolozdynya; A. Bradley; D. Byram; S. B. Cahn; C. Camp; M. C. Carmona-Benitez; D. Carr; J. J. Chapman; A. Chiller; C. Chiller; K. Clark; T. Classen; T. Coffey; A. Curioni; E. Dahl; S. Dazeley; L. de Viveiros; A. Dobi; E. Dragowsky; E. Druszkiewicz; B. Edwards; C. H. Faham; S. Fiorucci; R. J. Gaitskell; K. R. Gibson; M. Gilchriese; C. Hall; M. Hanhardt; B. Holbrook; M. Ihm; R. G. Jacobsen; L. Kastens; K. Kazkaz; R. Knoche; S. Kyre; J. Kwong; R. Lander; N. A. Larsen; C. Lee; D. S. Leonard; K. T. Lesko; A. Lindote; M. I. Lopes; A. Lyashenko; D. C. Malling; R. Mannino; Z. Marquez; D. N. McKinsey; D. -M. Mei; J. Mock; M. Moongweluwan; M. Morii; H. Nelson; F. Neves; J. A. Nikkel; M. Pangilinan; P. D. Parker; E. K. Pease; K. Pech; P. Phelps; A. Rodionov; P. Roberts; A. Shei; T. Shutt; C. Silva; W. Skulski; V. N. Solovov; C. J. Sofka; P. Sorensen; J. Spaans; T. Stiegler; D. Stolp; R. Svoboda; M. Sweany; M. Szydagis; D. Taylor; J. Thomson; M. Tripathi; S. Uvarov; J. R. Verbus; N. Walsh; R. Webb; D. White; J. T. White; T. J. Whitis; M. Wlasenko; F. L. H. Wolfs; M. Woods; C. Zhang

2012-11-21T23:59:59.000Z

367

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.

368

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1999-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

369

2009 underground/longwall mining buyer's guide  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

2009-06-15T23:59:59.000Z

370

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

371

Preliminary design study of compressed-air energy storage in a salt dome. Volume 5. System, subsystem, and component design approach. Final report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The approach to system, subsystem, and component design for a compressed-air energy storage (CAES) plant located in the Middle South Services, Inc., is presented in this final report. The design approach is based on the facility design criteria described in Volume 2 and the site conditions at the Carmichael salt dome located near Jackson, Mississippi. For the selected weekly cycle, Brown Boveri Corporation selected a single-casing design of fired-high-power and fired-low-power turbines. The high-power (HP) turbine operates at inlet conditions of 609.2 psia (42 bar) and 1021.4/sup 0/F (550/sup 0/C), while the low-power (LP) turbine operates at 159.5 psia (11 bar) and 1633.4/sup 0/F (890/sup 0/C). A tubular design of exhaust gas recuperator heats the incoming air from the storage cavern from 138.4/sup 0/F (60/sup 0/C) to 692/sup 0/F (367/sup 0/C). The compressor design is a single-shaft, tandem-compound arrangement with a 3600-rpm LP compressor and a 6850-rpm HP compressor. The LP compressor is a combination six-stage axial, three-stage radial compressor with an integral cooler and diffuser built into the casing. The HP compressor is a five-stage radial compressor with external intercooler provided after both the second and fourth stages. Fenix and Scisson, Inc., selected two half-size air storage caverns, each capable of delivering full-turbine air mass flow. A solutioning rate of 1750 gpm will allow completion of both caverns without prolonging construction schedule. Fuel is No. 2 distillate, which is delivered on a weekly basis. Rather than construct a rail siding to the plant, a trade-off study showed it more economical to pump the fuel oil to the CAES plant through a seven-mile buried pipeline from the nearest existing rail line. The exhaust gas recuperator, synchronous clutches, and gear case between the HP and LP compressors are key components which require special attention in design and fabrication to ensure reliable CAES plant operation.

Not Available

1982-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

372

High Temperature Superconducting Underground Cable  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Farrell, Roger, A.

2010-02-28T23:59:59.000Z

373

TSUAHXETSUAHXE UndergroUnd tank  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Schladow, S. Geoffrey

374

Gas Storage Technology Consortium  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Joel L. Morrison; Sharon L. Elder

2006-07-06T23:59:59.000Z

375

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2009-07-21T23:59:59.000Z

376

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

ScienceCinema (OSTI)

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

Oldenburg, Curtis M [LBNL Earth Sciences Division

2011-04-28T23:59:59.000Z

377

Geologic Carbon Sequestration: Mitigating Climate Change by Injecting CO2 Underground  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Oldenburg

2009-07-30T23:59:59.000Z

378

Preliminary design study of compressed-air energy storage in a salt dome. Volume 6. CAES plant design. Final report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The preliminary plant design for a compressed-air energy storage (CAES) plant located in the Middle South Services, Inc. (MSS), is presented. The design is based upon the facility criteria; the specific site; and the systems, subsystems, and components identified in the other task of this study. The proposed 220-MW(e) plant is located at the Carmichael salt dome near Jackson, Mississippi. The compressed air is stored in two solution-mined caverns in the salt dome. The plant area, exclusive of the remote fuel unloading facility, occupies 20 acres. An equipment list, a plot plan, and general arrangement drawings define the CAES plant. The details concerning the major equipment and the operation of the mechanical systems are described. The capital investment cost (exclusive of owner's cost) of the 220-MW(e) CAES plant is $85.6 million in 1979 dollars or $389/kW. This cost is based on firing the turbines with No. 2 fuel oil. As an alternative, the capital investment cost under the same conditions for a plant firing No. 6 oil is $90.9 million or $413/kW. The project schedule from start of licensing to commercial operation is estimated to be 70 months, with actual construction (including dewatering of the caverns) estimated to be 39 months. Based on the cost estimate developed in this task and the modified financial data and fuel cost projections, the economic introduction of CAES into the MSS system was examined for the No. 2 oil-fired plant. Due to lack of funds, the economic analysis did not extend beyond the year 1988. No system analysis of the No. 6 oil-fired plant was made. The economic introduction of CAES in the MSS system before 1990 is unlikely because the older oil-fired units in the MSS system may be economically used for cycling and peaking, if required. For a system with a different composition of generating units (i.e., low-cost, coal-fired plants), CAES may be economical at an earlier date.

Not Available

1982-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

379

User manual for AQUASTOR: a computer model for cost analysis of aquifer thermal energy storage coupled with district heating or cooling systems. Volume I. Main text  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A computer model called AQUASTOR was developed for calculating the cost of district heating (cooling) using thermal energy supplied by an aquifer thermal energy storage (ATES) system. The AQUASTOR model can simulate ATES district heating systems using stored hot water or ATES district cooling systems using stored chilled water. AQUASTOR simulates the complete ATES district heating (cooling) system, which consists of two principal parts: the ATES supply system and the district heating (cooling) distribution system. The supply system submodel calculates the life-cycle cost of thermal energy supplied to the distribution system by simulating the technical design and cash flows for the exploration, development, and operation of the ATES supply system. The distribution system submodel calculates the life-cycle cost of heat (chill) delivered by the distribution system to the end-users by simulating the technical design and cash flows for the construction and operation of the distribution system. The model combines the technical characteristics of the supply system and the technical characteristics of the distribution system with financial and tax conditions for the entities operating the two systems into one techno-economic model. This provides the flexibility to individually or collectively evaluate the impact of different economic and technical parameters, assumptions, and uncertainties on the cost of providing district heating (cooling) with an ATES system. This volume contains the main text, including introduction, program description, input data instruction, a description of the output, and Appendix H, which contains the indices for supply input parameters, distribution input parameters, and AQUASTOR subroutines.

Huber, H.D.; Brown, D.R.; Reilly, R.W.

1982-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

380

Advanced underground Vehicle Power and Control: The locomotive Research Platform  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Vehicle Projects LLC

2003-01-28T23:59:59.000Z

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


381

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2008-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

382

User manual for AQUASTOR: a computer model for cost analysis of aquifer thermal-energy storage oupled with district-heating or cooling systems. Volume II. Appendices  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A computer model called AQUASTOR was developed for calculating the cost of district heating (cooling) using thermal energy supplied by an aquifer thermal energy storage (ATES) system. the AQUASTOR Model can simulate ATES district heating systems using stored hot water or ATES district cooling systems using stored chilled water. AQUASTOR simulates the complete ATES district heating (cooling) system, which consists of two prinicpal parts: the ATES supply system and the district heating (cooling) distribution system. The supply system submodel calculates the life-cycle cost of thermal energy supplied to the distribution system by simulating the technical design and cash flows for the exploration, development, and operation of the ATES supply system. The distribution system submodel calculates the life-cycle cost of heat (chill) delivered by the distribution system to the end-users by simulating the technical design and cash flows for the construction and operation of the distribution system. The model combines the technical characteristics of the supply system and the technical characteristics of the distribution system with financial and tax conditions for the entities operating the two systems into one techno-economic model. This provides the flexibility to individually or collectively evaluate the impact of different economic and technical parameters, assumptions, and uncertainties on the cost of providing district heating (cooling) with an ATES system. This volume contains all the appendices, including supply and distribution system cost equations and models, descriptions of predefined residential districts, key equations for the cooling degree-hour methodology, a listing of the sample case output, and appendix H, which contains the indices for supply input parameters, distribution input parameters, and AQUASTOR subroutines.

Huber, H.D.; Brown, D.R.; Reilly, R.W.

1982-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

383

THERMAL ENERGY STORAGE IN AQUIFERS WORKSHOP  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS FOR CAVERN STORAGE Some of the topicsgravel or sand into the cavern in order to reduce the volumeAbove ground equipment for cavern storage opera- tions.

Authors, Various

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

384

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...

385

Design of an underground compressed hydrogen gas storage.  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Powell, Tobin Micah

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

386

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...

387

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...

388

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...

389

Seasonal underground thermal energy storage using smart thermosiphon arrays.  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Jankovich, Philip Martin

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

390

Numerical Simulation of Underground Solar Thermal Energy Storage.  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Sweet, Marshall

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

391

EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Underground Natural Gas Storage  

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

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

392

EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Underground Natural Gas Storage  

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

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

393

EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Underground Natural Gas Storage  

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

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

394

West Virginia Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

395

West Virginia Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

396

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

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

397

West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

398

West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

399

West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

400

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

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

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


401

West Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

402

West Virginia Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

403

Western Consuming Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

404

Wisconsin Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

405

Wisconsin Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

406

Wisconsin Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

407

Withdrawals of Natural Gas from Underground Storage - All Operators  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

408

Wyoming Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

409

Wyoming Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

410

Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

411

Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

412

Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

413

Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

414

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

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

415

Wyoming Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

416

U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

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

417

Underground Natural Gas Working Storage Capacity - Energy Information  

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

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

418

New Jersey Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators  

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

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

419

New Jersey Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators  

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

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

420

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

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

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

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


421

New Mexico Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

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

422

New Mexico Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

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

423

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

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

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

424

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

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

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

425

New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

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

426

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

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

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

427

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

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

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

428

New Mexico Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

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

429

New York Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

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

430

New York Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

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

431

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

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

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

432

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

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

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

433

New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

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

434

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

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

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

435

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

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

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

436

New York Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

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

437

Nonsalt Producing Region Natural Gas Working Underground Storage (Billion  

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

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

438

North Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators  

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

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

439

North Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All  

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

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

440

North Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

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

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


441

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

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

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

442

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

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

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

443

Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

444

Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

445

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

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

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

446

Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

447

Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

448

Oklahoma Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

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

449

Oklahoma Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

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

450

Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

451

Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

452

Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

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

453

Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

454

Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

455

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

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

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

456

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

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

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

457

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

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

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

458

Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

459

Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

460

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

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

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

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


461

Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

462

Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

463

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

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

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

464

Pennsylvania Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

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

465

Pennsylvania Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic  

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

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

466

Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

467

Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

468

Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

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

469

Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

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

470

Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

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

471

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

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

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

472

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

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

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

473

Pennsylvania Natural Gas in Underground Storage - Change in Working Gas  

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

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

474

Pennsylvania Natural Gas in Underground Storage - Change in Working Gas  

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

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

475

U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYear Jan Feb2009 2010 2011Decade

476

U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYear Jan Feb2009 2010 2011DecadeLower 48 States

477

Underground Base Natural Gas in Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYear Jan Feb2009Two-DimensionalGrossFeet)

478

Underground Working Natural Gas in Storage - All Operators  

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

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

479

Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

480

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

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

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

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


481

Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

482

Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

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

483

Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYearFeet) Year Jan Feb% ofYear3.99 4.22

484

Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

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

485

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

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

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

486

West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million  

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

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

487

Western Consuming Region Natural Gas Working Underground Storage (Billion  

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

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

488

Western Consuming Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals  

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

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

489

Withdrawals of Natural Gas from Underground Storage - All Operators  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelines AboutDecemberSteamYearTexas--StateWinterYearFeet)perWesternPipeline andThousand362

490

Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

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

491

Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic  

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

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

492

AGA Producing Region Natural Gas Working Underground Storage Capacity  

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

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

493

AGA Producing Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working Gas)  

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

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

494

AGA Producing Region Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators  

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

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

495

AGA Producing Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals  

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

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

496

AGA Western Consuming Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity  

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

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

497

AGA Western Consuming Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals  

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

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

498

AGA Western Consuming Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working  

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

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

499

AGA Western Consuming Region Underground Natural Gas Storage - All  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProved Reserves (Billion CubicCubic Feet) Base Gas) (MillionOperators 1,095,725

500

AGA WesternConsuming Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity  

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

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