National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for union gdp gross

  1. Fact# 904: December 21, 2015 Gross Domestic Product and Vehicle...

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

    GDP and VMT Trends, 1960-2015 Graph showing gross national product and vehicle travel trends during 2015. Note: Data for the last quarter of 2015 were not available and were ...

  2. New Contract Helps Portsmouth GDP Cleanup

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    To accelerate the Portsmouth GDP cleanup efforts left over from the Cold War, the Department of Energy made a huge step forward in our nuclear environmental cleanup efforts.

  3. Fact #564: March 30, 2009 Transportation and the Gross Domestic Product, 2007

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Transportation plays a major role in the U.S. economy. About 10% of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2007 is related to transportation. Housing, health care, and food are the only...

  4. "Table 2. Real Gross Domestic Product Growth Trends, Projected vs. Actual"

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

    Real Gross Domestic Product Growth Trends, Projected vs. Actual" "Projected Real GDP Growth Trend" " (cumulative average percent growth in projected real GDP from first year shown for each AEO)" ,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010,2011,2012,2013 "AEO

  5. Accommodation of GDP-Linked Sugars in the Active Site of GDP-Perosamine Synthase

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cook, Paul D.; Carney, Amanda E.; Holden, Hazel M.

    2009-01-12

    Perosamine (4-amino-4,6-dideoxy-d-mannose), or its N-acetylated form, is one of several dideoxy sugars found in the O-antigens of such infamous Gram-negative bacteria as Vibrio cholerae O1 and Escherichia coli O157:H7. It is added to the bacterial O-antigen via a nucleotide-linked version, namely GDP-perosamine. Three enzymes are required for the biosynthesis of GDP-perosamine starting from mannose 1-phosphate. The focus of this investigation is GDP-perosamine synthase from Caulobacter crescentus, which catalyzes the final step in GDP-perosamine synthesis, the conversion of GDP-4-keto-6-deoxymannose to GDP-perosamine. The enzyme is PLP-dependent and belongs to the aspartate aminotransferase superfamily. It contains the typically conserved active site lysine residue, which forms a Schiff base with the PLP cofactor. Two crystal structures were determined for this investigation: a site-directed mutant protein (K186A) complexed with GDP-perosamine and the wild-type enzyme complexed with an unnatural ligand, GDP-3-deoxyperosamine. These structures, determined to 1.6 and 1.7 {angstrom} resolution, respectively, revealed the manner in which products, and presumably substrates, are accommodated within the active site pocket of GDP-perosamine synthase. Additional kinetic analyses using both the natural and unnatural substrates revealed that the K{sub m} for the unnatural substrate was unperturbed relative to that of the natural substrate, but the k{sub cat} was lowered by a factor of approximately 200. Taken together, these studies shed light on why GDP-perosamine synthase functions as an aminotransferase whereas another very similar PLP-dependent enzyme, GDP-4-keto-6-deoxy-d-mannose 3-dehydratase or ColD, catalyzes a dehydration reaction using the same substrate.

  6. Fact# 904: December 21, 2015 Gross Domestic Product and Vehicle Travel:

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

    Both Increased during 2015 | Department of Energy 4: December 21, 2015 Gross Domestic Product and Vehicle Travel: Both Increased during 2015 Fact# 904: December 21, 2015 Gross Domestic Product and Vehicle Travel: Both Increased during 2015 SUBSCRIBE to the Fact of the Week The nation's highway vehicle miles of travel (VMT) and the U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) reflect strikingly similar patterns, indicating the strong relationship between the nation's economy and its travel. Beginning in

  7. grossWCI.dvi

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

    Nuclear multifragmentation, Its relation to general physics A rich test-ground of the fundamentals of statistical mechanics. D.H.E. Gross 1 Hahn-Meitner Institute Glienickerstr. 100 14109 Berlin, Germany gross@hmi.de; http://www.hmi.de/people/gross/ 2 Freie Universitš at Berlin, Fachbereich Physik. Received: date / Revised version: date Abstract. Heat can flow from cold to hot at any phase separation, even in macroscopic systems. Therefore also Lynden-Bell's famous gravo-thermal catastrophe [1]

  8. Fact #768: February 25, 2013 New Light Vehicle Sales and Gross Domestic

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

    Product | Department of Energy 8: February 25, 2013 New Light Vehicle Sales and Gross Domestic Product Fact #768: February 25, 2013 New Light Vehicle Sales and Gross Domestic Product Over the last four decades, new light vehicle sales have gone from a low of 9.9 million vehicles in 1970 to a high of 17.1 million vehicles sold in 2001, but along the way, there have been significant ups and downs. Those ups and downs are also reflected in the change in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) over time

  9. Agreement Type Union

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Union of North America 872 14 International Union of Oprating Engineers (Maintenance Engineers) 501 22 Local Joint Executive Board of Las vegas Culinary Workers 226 49...

  10. Samantha Gross | Department of Energy

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

    Samantha Gross About Us Samantha Gross - Director, Office of International Climate and Clean Energy Samantha Gross Samantha Gross is the Director for International Climate and Clean Energy at the Office of International Affairs in the U.S. Department of Energy. She directs U.S. activities under the Clean Energy Ministerial, including the secretariat and initiatives focusing on clean energy implementation and access and energy efficiency. Her office also supports the Assistant Secretary and

  11. Structures of NodZ ?1,6-fucosyltransferase in complex with GDP and GDP-fucose

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brzezinski, Krzysztof; Dauter, Zbigniew; Jaskolski, Mariusz

    2012-02-01

    Crystal structures of the bacterial ?1,6-fucosyltransferase NodZ in complex with GDP and GDP-fucose are presented. Rhizobial NodZ ?1,6-fucosyltransferase (?1,6-FucT) catalyzes the transfer of the fucose (Fuc) moiety from guanosine 5?-diphosphate-?-l-fucose to the reducing end of the chitin oligosaccharide core during Nod-factor (NF) biosynthesis. NF is a key signalling molecule required for successful symbiosis with a legume host for atmospheric nitrogen fixation. To date, only two ?1,6-FucT structures have been determined, both without any donor or acceptor molecule that could highlight the structural background of the catalytic mechanism. Here, the first crystal structures of ?1,6-FucT in complex with its substrate GDP-Fuc and with GDP, which is a byproduct of the enzymatic reaction, are presented. The crystal of the complex with GDP-Fuc was obtained through soaking of native NodZ crystals with the ligand and its structure has been determined at 2.35 Ć resolution. The fucose residue is exposed to solvent and is disordered. The enzyme–product complex crystal was obtained by cocrystallization with GDP and an acceptor molecule, penta-N-acetyl-l-glucosamine (penta-NAG). The structure has been determined at 1.98 Ć resolution, showing that only the GDP molecule is present in the complex. In both structures the ligands are located in a cleft formed between the two domains of NodZ and extend towards the C-terminal domain, but their conformations differ significantly. The structures revealed that residues in three regions of the C-terminal domain, which are conserved among ?1,2-, ?1,6- and protein O-fucosyltransferases, are involved in interactions with the sugar-donor molecule. There is also an interaction with the side chain of Tyr45 in the N-terminal domain, which is very unusual for a GT-B-type glycosyltransferase. Only minor conformational changes of the protein backbone are observed upon ligand binding. The only exception is a movement of the loop located between strand ?C2 and helix ?C3. In addition, there is a shift of the ?C3 helix itself upon GDP-Fuc binding.

  12. Enel Union Fenosa Renovables EUFER formerly Union Fenosa Energia...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Fenosa Renovables EUFER formerly Union Fenosa Energia Especiales Jump to: navigation, search Name: Enel Union Fenosa Renovables (EUFER) (formerly Union Fenosa Energia Especiales)...

  13. Structures of NodZ [alpha]1,6-fucosyltransferase in complex with GDP and GDP-fucose

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brzezinski, Krzysztof; Dauter, Zbigniew; Jaskolski, Mariusz

    2012-03-26

    Rhizobial NodZ {alpha}1,6-fucosyltransferase ({alpha}1,6-FucT) catalyzes the transfer of the fucose (Fuc) moiety from guanosine 5'-diphosphate-{beta}-L-fucose to the reducing end of the chitin oligosaccharide core during Nod-factor (NF) biosynthesis. NF is a key signaling molecule required for successful symbiosis with a legume host for atmospheric nitrogen fixation. To date, only two {alpha}1,6-FucT structures have been determined, both without any donor or acceptor molecule that could highlight the structural background of the catalytic mechanism. Here, the first crystal structures of {alpha}1,6-FucT in complex with its substrate GDP-Fuc and with GDP, which is a byproduct of the enzymatic reaction, are presented. The crystal of the complex with GDP-Fuc was obtained through soaking of native NodZ crystals with the ligand and its structure has been determined at 2.35 {angstrom} resolution. The fucose residue is exposed to solvent and is disordered. The enzyme-product complex crystal was obtained by cocrystallization with GDP and an acceptor molecule, penta-N-acetyl-L-glucosamine (penta-NAG). The structure has been determined at 1.98 {angstrom} resolution, showing that only the GDP molecule is present in the complex. In both structures the ligands are located in a cleft formed between the two domains of NodZ and extend towards the C-terminal domain, but their conformations differ significantly. The structures revealed that residues in three regions of the C-terminal domain, which are conserved among {alpha}1,2-, {alpha}1,6- and protein O-fucosyltransferases, are involved in interactions with the sugar-donor molecule. There is also an interaction with the side chain of Tyr45 in the N-terminal domain, which is very unusual for a GT-B-type glycosyltransferase. Only minor conformational changes of the protein backbone are observed upon ligand binding. The only exception is a movement of the loop located between strand {beta}C2 and helix {alpha}C3. In addition, there is a shift of the {alpha}C3 helix itself upon GDP-Fuc binding.

  14. Rate Of Oxidation Of Plasma Polymer (GDP or CH)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cook, B; Letts, S; Fearon, E

    2005-10-26

    There has been concern and uncertainty about the level of O incorporation in plastic shells prepared by coating mandrels with plasma polymer (GDP) and the Ge-doped analogs. In FY05 we undertook a controlled study of the rate of oxidation under various conditions, both to quantify the levels and to determine methods for restricting the le levels. Our results are shown in the Figure below. In summary, the level can be kept to less than 0.2 atom % by pyrolyzing the shells at 300 C (which is necessary for the removal of the P{alpha}MS mandrel), and then restricting the exposure to air to less than about 100 hours, which is easy to do. Based on this result we believe the NIF capsule specification for O can safely be lowered to 0.2 atom %, and this level should be used in future design calculations.

  15. Roughness Optimization at High Modes for GDP CHx Microshells

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Theobald, M.; Dumay, B.; Chicanne, C.; Barnouin, J.; Legaie, O.; Baclet, P.

    2004-03-15

    For the ''Megajoule'' Laser (LMJ) facility of the CEA, amorphous hydrogenated carbon (a-C:H) is the nominal ablator to be used for inertial confinement fusion (ICF) experiments. These capsules contain the fusible deuterium-tritium mixture to achieve ignition. Coatings are prepared by glow discharge polymerization (GDP) with trans-2-butene and hydrogen. The films properties have been investigated. Laser fusion targets must have optimized characteristics: a diameter of about 2.4 mm for LMJ targets, a thickness up to 175 {mu}m, a sphericity and a thickness concentricity better than 99% and an outer and an inner roughness lower than 20 nm at high modes. The surface finish of these laser fusion targets must be extremely smooth to minimize hydrodynamic instabilities.Movchan and Demchishin, and later Thornton introduced a structure zone model (SZM) based on both evaporated and sputtered metals. They investigated the influence of base temperature and the sputtering gas pressure on structure and properties of thick polycrystalline coatings of nickel, titanium, tungsten, aluminum oxide. An original cross-sectional analysis by atomic force microscopy (AFM) allows amorphous materials characterization and permits to make an analogy between the amorphous GDP material and the existing model (SZM). The purpose of this work is to understand the relationship between the deposition parameters, the growing structures and the surface roughness.The coating structure as a function of deposition parameters was first studied on plane silicon substrates and then optimized on PAMS shells. By adjusting the coating parameters, the structures are modified, and in some case, the high modes roughness decreases dramatically.

  16. Motor vehicle output and GDP, 1968-2007.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Santini, D. J.; Poyer, D. A.

    2008-01-01

    In this paper, we assess the performance of the BEA series 'value of motor vehicle output' as an indicator of the business cycle over the period 1968-2007. We statistically assess the causal relationship between real motor vehicle output (RMVO) and real gross domestic product (RGDP). This is accomplished by standard estimation and statistical methods used to assess vector autoregressive models. This assessment represents the initial results of a more encompassing research project, the intent of which is to determine the dynamic interaction of the transport sector with the overall economy. It's a start to a more comprehensive assessment of how transport and economic activity interrelate.

  17. Cloning and characterization of GDP-perosamine synthetase (Per) from Escherichia coli O157:H7 and synthesis of GDP-perosamine in vitro

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zhao Guohui; Liu Jun; Liu Xiang; Chen Min; Zhang Houcheng Wang, Peng George

    2007-11-23

    GDP-perosamine synthetase (Per, E.C. not yet classified) is important to the synthesis of Escherichia coli O157:H7 O-antigen. The mutant in per gene can disrupt the synthesis of O157 O-antigen. In this study, GDP-perosamine synthetase was cloned from E. coli O157:H7 and over-expressed in E. coli BL21 (DE3). The recombinant His-tagged Per fusion protein was a decamer with molecular weight of 431 kDa. The optimal pH value of this recombinant protein was 7.5. The divalent ions had no significant effect on Per-catalyzed reaction. The K{sub m} and K{sub cat}/K{sub m} for GDP-4-keto-6-deoxy-D-mannose were 0.09 mM and 2.1 x 10{sup 5} M{sup -1} S{sup -1}, and those for L-glutamate were 2 mM and 0.52 x 10{sup 5} M{sup -1}S{sup -1}, respectively. Per was used to synthesize GDP-perosamine from GDP-mannose together with recombinant GDP-mannose dehydratase (GMD, E.C. 4.2.1.47). The purified GDP-perosamine was identified by MS and NMR. In summary, this work provided a feasible approach for the synthesis of GDP-perosamine which can lead to the study of LPS biosynthesis of pathogenic E. coli O157:H7.

  18. Agreement Type Union

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Type Union Local #/Name Number of Employees Project Labor Agreement International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Allied Workers 135 2 International Brothehood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmith Forgers and Helpers 92 0 International Union of Bricklayers & Allied Craftsmen 13 0 Regional Council of Carpenters 1780 & 1977 13 Operative Plasterers and Cement Mason International Association Operative Plasterers and Cement Mason International Association 1

  19. Union Valley | Department of Energy

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

    Union Valley Union Valley This document discusses Union Valley. Topics include: * The area's safety * Any use limitations for the area * History and cleanup background for this area * How DOE's cleanup program addressed the problem PDF icon Union Valley More Documents & Publications Melton Valley Watershed Groundwater Contamination and Treatment at Department of Energy Sites Groundwater Contamination and Treatment at Department of Energy Sites - 2008

  20. Mechanical Properties of Thin GDP Shells Used as Cryogenic Direct Drive Targets at OMEGA

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Nikroo, A.; Czechowicz, D.G.; Chen, K.C.; Dicken, M.; Morris, C.; Andrews, R.; Greenwood, A.; Castillo, E.

    2004-03-15

    Thin glow discharge polymer (GDP) shells are currently used as the targets for cryogenic direct drive laser fusion experiments. These shells need to be filled with nearly 1000 atm of D{sub 2} and cooled to cryogenic temperatures without failing due to buckling and bursting pressures they experience in this process. Therefore, the mechanical and permeation properties of these shells are of utmost importance in successful and rapid filling with D{sub 2}. In this paper, we present an overview of buckle and burst pressures of several different types of GDP shells. These include those made using traditional GDP deposition parameters ('standard GDP') using a high deposition pressure and using modified parameters ('strong GDP') of low deposition pressure that leads to more robust shells.

  1. MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF THIN GDP SHELLS USED AS CRYOGENIC DIRECT DRIVE TARGETS AT OMEGA

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NIKROO,A; CZECHOWICZ,D; CHEN,K.C; DICKEN,M; MORRIS,C; ANDREWS,R; GREENWOOD,A.L; CASTILLO,E

    2003-06-01

    OAK-B135 Thin glow discharge polymer (GDP) shells are currently used as the targets for cryogenic direct drive laser fusion experiments. These shells need to be filled with nearly 1000 atm of D{sub 2} and cooled to cryogenic temperatures without failing due to buckling and bursting pressures they experience in this process. Therefore, the mechanical and permeation properties of these shells are of utmost importance in successful and rapid filling with D{sub 2}. In this paper, they present an overview of buckle and burst pressures of several different types of GDP shells. These include those made using traditional GDP deposition parameters (standard GDP) using a high deposition pressure and using modified parameters (strong GDP) of low deposition pressure that leads to more robust shells.

  2. Biochemical characterization of GDP-L-fucose de novo synthesis pathway in fungus Mortierella alpina

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ren, Yan; Perepelov, Andrei V.; Wang, Haiyan; Zhang, Hao; Knirel, Yuriy A.; Wang, Lei; Chen, Wei

    2010-01-22

    Mortierella alpina is a filamentous fungus commonly found in soil, which is able to produce large amount of polyunsaturated fatty acids. L-Fucose is an important sugar found in a diverse range of organisms, playing a variety of biological roles. In this study, we characterized the de novo biosynthetic pathway of GDP-L-fucose (the nucleotide-activated form of L-fucose) in M. alpina. Genes encoding GDP-D-mannose 4,6-dehydratase (GMD) and GDP-keto-6-deoxymannose 3,5-epimerase/4-reductase (GMER) were expressed heterologously in Escherichia coli. The recombinant enzymes were produced as His-tagged fusion proteins. Conversion of GDP-mannose to GDP-4-keto-6-deoxy mannose by GMD and GDP-4-keto-6-deoxy mannose to GDP-L-fucose by GMER were analyzed by capillary electrophoresis, electro-spray ionization-mass spectrometry, and nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. The k{sub m} values of GMD for GDP-mannose and GMER for GDP-4-keto-6-deoxy mannose were determined to be 0.77 mM and 1.047 mM, respectively. Both NADH and NADPH may be used by GMER as the coenzyme. The optimum temperature and pH were determined to be 37 {sup o}C and pH 9.0 (GMD) or pH 7.0 (GMER). Divalent cations are not required for GMD and GMER activity, and the activities of both enzymes may be enhanced by DTT. To our knowledge this is the first report on the characterization of GDP-L-fucose biosynthetic pathway in fungi.

  3. Michael Gross | Photosynthetic Antenna Research Center

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

    Michael Gross Michael Gross Michael Gross Principal Investigator E-mail: mgross@wustl.edu Phone: (314) 935-4814 Website: Washington University in St. Louis Principal Investigator Dr. Gross's research interests include analytical chemistry, biological chemistry, biophysical chemistry, FT-ICR instrument development, MALDI matrix development, mass spectrometry for protein biochemistry and biophysics, modified DNA and cancer, physical organic chemistry, protein and peptide analysis, and proteomics.

  4. Unions, LANL sign labor agreements

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

    Unions, LANL sign labor agreements Unions, LANL sign labor agreements The New Mexico Building and Construction Trades Council and Los Alamos National Security LLC, announced the signing of a series of labor agreements that affect nearly 750 construction and maintenance workers. September 21, 2012 Jay Johnson renews the contracts with the Laboratory's union workers. Jay Johnson (left) associate director for maintenance and infrastructure planning, renews the contracts with the Laboratory's union

  5. Crystal structure of a tetrameric GDP-D-mannose 4,6-dehydratase from a bacterial GDP-D-rhamnose biosynthetic pathway

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Webb, N.A.; Mulichak, A.M.; Lam, J.S.; Rocchetta, H.L.; Garavito, R.M.

    2010-03-08

    D-Rhamnose is a rare 6-deoxy monosaccharide primarily found in the lipopolysaccharide of pathogenic bacteria, where it is involved in host-bacterium interactions and the establishment of infection. The biosynthesis of D-rhamnose proceeds through the conversion of GDP-D-mannose by GDP-D-mannose 4,6-dehydratase (GMD) to GDP-4-keto-6-deoxymannose, which is subsequently reduced to GDP-D-rhamnose by a reductase. We have determined the crystal structure of GMD from Pseudomonas aeruginosa in complex with NADPH and GDP. GMD belongs to the NDP-sugar modifying subfamily of the short-chain dehydrogenase/reductase (SDR) enzymes, all of which exhibit bidomain structures and a conserved catalytic triad (Tyr-XXX-Lys and Ser/Thr). Although most members of this enzyme subfamily display homodimeric structures, this bacterial GMD forms a tetramer in the same fashion as the plant MUR1 from Arabidopsis thaliana. The cofactor binding sites are adjoined across the tetramer interface, which brings the adenosyl phosphate moieties of the adjacent NADPH molecules to within 7 {angstrom} of each other. A short peptide segment (Arg35-Arg43) stretches into the neighboring monomer, making not only protein-protein interactions but also hydrogen bonding interactions with the neighboring cofactor. The interface hydrogen bonds made by the Arg35-Arg43 segment are generally conserved in GMD and MUR1, and the interacting residues are highly conserved among the sequences of bacterial and eukaryotic GMDs. Outside of the Arg35-Arg43 segment, residues involved in tetrameric contacts are also quite conserved across different species. These observations suggest that a tetramer is the preferred, and perhaps functionally relevant, oligomeric state for most bacterial and eukaryotic GMDs.

  6. MEETINGS WITH UNION OFFICIALS | Department of Energy

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    MEETINGS WITH UNION OFFICIALS MEETINGS WITH UNION OFFICIALS Guidance as to how to handle requests from union officials to meet with Department officials so that there is no undue legal risk. PDF icon GC GUIDANCE ON MEETINGS WITH UNION OFFICIALS More Documents & Publications AFGE Local 928 MEETINGS WITH UNION OFFICIALS NETL AFGE 1995 MEETINGS WITH UNION OFFICIALS NETL AFGE 1104

  7. David J. Gross and the Strong Force

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    published their proposal simultaneously with H. David Politzer, a graduate student at Harvard University who independently came up with the same idea. ... The discovery of Gross,...

  8. ,"Texas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  9. ,"Kansas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kansas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  10. ,"Pennsylvania Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Pennsylvania Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  11. ,"Kentucky Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kentucky Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  12. ,"Oregon Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Oregon Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301979" ,"Release...

  13. ,"Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  14. ,"Missouri Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Missouri Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  15. ,"Illinois Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Illinois Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  16. ,"Florida Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Florida Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  17. ,"Utah Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Utah Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  18. ,"Indiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Indiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  19. ,"Nevada Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Nevada Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301991" ,"Release...

  20. ,"Montana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Montana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  1. ,"Ohio Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Ohio Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  2. ,"California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  3. ,"Mississippi Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Mississippi Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  4. ,"Nebraska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Nebraska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  5. ,"Michigan Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Michigan Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  6. ,"Tennessee Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Tennessee Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  7. ,"Oklahoma Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Oklahoma Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  8. ,"Wyoming Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Wyoming Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  9. ,"Maryland Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Maryland Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  10. ,"Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  11. ,"Colorado Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Colorado Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  12. David J. Gross and the Strong Force

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

    David J. Gross and the Strong Force Resources with Additional Information The 2004 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to David Gross for "the discovery of asymptotic freedom in the theory of the strong interaction". 'Gross, who obtained his PhD in physics in 1966, currently is a professor of physics and director of the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics at UC Santa Barbara. ... David Gross Courtesy of UC Santa Barbara [When on the faculty at Princeton University,] he and

  13. A Rac1--GDP trimer complex binds zinc with tetrahedral and octahedral coordination, displacing magnesium

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Prehna, G.; Stebbins, C

    2007-01-01

    The Rho family of small GTPases represent well characterized signaling molecules that regulate many cellular functions such as actin cytoskeletal arrangement and the cell cycle by acting as molecular switches. A Rac1-GDP-Zn complex has been crystallized in space group P3221 and its crystal structure has been solved at 1.9 {angstrom} resolution. These trigonal crystals reveal the unexpected ability of Rac1 to coordinate Zn atoms in a tetrahedral fashion by use of its biologically relevant switch I and switch II regions. Upon coordination of zinc, the switch I region is stabilized in the GDP-bound conformation and contributes to a Rac1 trimer in the asymmetric unit. Zinc coordination causes switch II to adopt a novel conformation with a symmetry-related molecule. Additionally, zinc was found to displace magnesium from its octahedral coordination at switch I, although GDP binding remained stable. This structure represents the first reported Rac1-GDP-Zn complex, which further underscores the conformational flexibility and versatility of the small GTPase switch regions.

  14. A Rac1-GDP Trimer Complex Binds Zinc with Tetrahedral and Octahedral Coordination, Displacing Magnesium

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Prehna,G.; Stebbins, E.

    2007-01-01

    The Rho family of small GTPases represent well characterized signaling molecules that regulate many cellular functions such as actin cytoskeletal arrangement and the cell cycle by acting as molecular switches. A Rac1-GDP-Zn complex has been crystallized in space group P3{sub 2}21 and its crystal structure has been solved at 1.9 {angstrom} resolution. These trigonal crystals reveal the unexpected ability of Rac1 to coordinate Zn atoms in a tetrahedral fashion by use of its biologically relevant switch I and switch II regions. Upon coordination of zinc, the switch I region is stabilized in the GDP-bound conformation and contributes to a Rac1 trimer in the asymmetric unit. Zinc coordination causes switch II to adopt a novel conformation with a symmetry-related molecule. Additionally, zinc was found to displace magnesium from its octahedral coordination at switch I, although GDP binding remained stable. This structure represents the first reported Rac1-GDP-Zn complex, which further underscores the conformational flexibility and versatility of the small GTPase switch regions.

  15. Quantification of the Potential Gross Economic Impacts of Five...

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

    Quantification of the Potential Gross Economic Impacts of Five Methane Reduction Scenarios Quantification of the Potential Gross Economic Impacts of Five Methane Reduction ...

  16. Property:DailyOpWaterUseGross | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Property Name DailyOpWaterUseGross Property Type Number Description Daily Operation Water Use (afday) Gross. Retrieved from "http:en.openei.orgwindex.php?titleProperty:...

  17. Fact #564: March 30, 2009 Transportation and the Gross Domestic...

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

    4: March 30, 2009 Transportation and the Gross Domestic Product, 2007 Fact 564: March 30, 2009 Transportation and the Gross Domestic Product, 2007 Transportation plays a major ...

  18. ,"West Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)"

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

    ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"01042016 7:36:01 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: West Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N9010WV2" "Date","West...

  19. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)"

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

    ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"1292016 12:20:48 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N9010NM2" "Date","New Mexico...

  20. ,"Alaska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"01042016 7:35:06 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Alaska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production" "Sourcekey","N9010AK2","N9011AK2","N9012AK2"...

  1. ,"Alaska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"01042016 7:35:07 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Alaska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production" "Sourcekey","N9010AK2","N9011AK2","N9012AK2"...

  2. ,"New York Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)"

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

    ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12152015 12:10:48 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: New York Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N9010NY2" "Date","New York...

  3. Table 2. Real Gross Domestic Product Growth Trends, Projected vs. Actual

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Real Gross Domestic Product Growth Trends, Projected vs. Actual Projected Real GDP Growth Trend (cumulative average percent growth in projected real GDP from first year shown for each AEO) 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 AEO 1994 3.09 3.15 2.86 2.78 2.73 2.65 2.62 2.60 2.56 2.53 2.52 2.49 2.45 2.41 2.40 2.36 2.32 2.29 AEO 1995 3.66 2.77 2.53 2.71 2.67 2.61 2.55 2.48 2.46 2.45 2.45 2.43 2.39 2.35 2.31 2.27 2.24 AEO 1996 2.61

  4. Unions, LANL sign labor agreements

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

    the contracts with the Laboratory's union workers. To the right of Johnson are Ray Baca of the New Mexico Building and Construction Trades Council and Tim Babicke and Gerard...

  5. Cloning, purification and preliminary crystallographic analysis of the Bacillus subtilis GTPase YphC–GDP complex

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Xu, Ling; Muench, Stephen P.; Roujeinikova, Anna; Sedelnikova, Svetlana E.; Rice, David W.

    2006-05-01

    Crystals of a selenomethionine-incorporated YphC–GDP complex have been grown using the hanging-drop vapour-diffusion method and polyethylene glycol as a precipitating agent. The Bacillus subtilis YphC gene encodes an essential GTPase thought to be involved in ribosome binding and whose protein product may represent a target for the development of a novel antibacterial agent. Sequence analysis reveals that YphC belongs to the EngA family of GTPases, which uniquely contain two adjacent GTP-binding domains. Crystals of a selenomethionine-incorporated YphC–GDP complex have been grown using the hanging-drop vapour-diffusion method and polyethylene glycol as a precipitating agent. The crystals belong to space group P2{sub 1}2{sub 1}2{sub 1}, with unit-cell parameters a = 62.71, b = 65.05, c = 110.61 Ć, and have one molecule in the asymmetric unit. Data sets at three different wavelengths were collected on a single crystal to 2.5 Ć resolution at the Daresbury SRS in order to solve the structure by MAD. Ultimately, analysis of YphC in complex with GDP may allow a greater understanding of the EngA family of essential GTPases.

  6. Characterization of a Ras Mutant with Identical GDP- and GTP-Bound Structures

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ford, B.; Boykevisch, S; Zhao, C; Kunzelmann, S; Bar-Sagi, D; Herrmann, C; Nassar, N

    2009-01-01

    We previously characterized the G60A mutant of Ras and showed that the switch regions of the GTP-bound but not the GDP-bound form of this mutant adopt an 'open conformation' similar to that seen in nucleotide-free Ras. Here, we mutate Lys147 of the conserved {sup 145}SAK{sup 147} motif in the G60A background and characterize the resulting double mutant (DM). We show that RasDM is the first structure of a Ras protein with identical GDP- and GTP-bound structures. Both structures adopt the open conformation of the active form of RasG60A. The increase in the accessible surface area of the nucleotide is consistent with a 4-fold increase in its dissociation rate. Stopped-flow experiments show no major difference in the two-step kinetics of association of GDP or GTP with the wild type, G60A, or RasDM. Addition of Sos fails to accelerate nucleotide exchange. Overexpression of the G60A or double mutant of Ras in COS-1 cells fails to activate Erk and shows a strong dominant negative effect. Our data suggest that flexibility at position 60 is required for proper Sos-catalyzed nucleotide exchange and that structural information is somehow shared among the switch regions and the different nucleotide binding motifs.

  7. GC GUIDANCE ON MEETINGS WITH UNION OFFICIALS

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    MEETINGS WITH UNION OFFICIALS Department officials often receive requests to meet with officials of labor unions whose members are employees of Department contractors. Department officials should feel free to meet with such union officials subject to this guidance. Department officials must take care, however, not to insert themselves or the government inappropriately into the relationship between the unions and the contractors Sometimes unions will wish to meet with Department officials simply

  8. FORT UNION DEEP

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lyle A. Johnson Jr.

    2002-03-01

    Coalbed methane (CBM) is currently the hottest area of energy development in the Rocky Mountain area. The Powder River Basin (PRB) is the largest CBM area in Wyoming and has attracted the majority of the attention because of its high permeability and relatively shallow depth. Other Wyoming coal regions are also being targeted for development, but most of these areas have lower permeability and deeper coal seams. This project consists of the development of a CBM stimulation system for deep coal resources and involves three work areas: (1) Well Placement, (2) Well Stimulation, and (3) Production Monitoring and Evaluation. The focus of this project is the Washakie Basin. Timberline Energy, Inc., the cosponsor, has a project area in southern Carbon County, Wyoming, and northern Moffat County, Colorado. The target coal is found near the top of the lower Fort Union formation. The well for this project, Evans No.1, was drilled to a depth of 2,700 ft. Three coal seams were encountered with sandstone and some interbedded shale between seams. Well logs indicated that the coal seams and the sandstone contained gas. For the testing, the upper seam at 2,000 ft was selected. The well, drilled and completed for this project, produced very little water and only occasional burps of methane. To enhance the well, a mild severity fracture was conducted to fracture the coal seam and not the adjacent sandstone. Fracturing data indicated a fracture half-length of 34 ft, a coal permeability of 0.2226 md, and permeability of 15.3 md. Following fracturing, the gas production rate stabilized at 10 Mscf/day within water production of 18 bpd. The Western Research Institute (WRI) CBM model was used to design a 14-day stimulation cycle followed by a 30-day production period. A maximum injection pressure of 1,200 psig to remain well below the fracture pressure was selected. Model predictions were 20 Mscf/day of air injection for 14 days, a one-day shut-in, then flowback. The predicted flowback was a four-fold increase over the prestimulation rate with production essentially returning to prestimulation rates after 30 days. The physical stimulation was conducted over a 14-day period. Problems with the stimulation injection resulted in a coal bed fire that was quickly quenched when production was resumed. The poststimulation, stabilized production was three to four times the prestimulation rate. The methane content was approximately 45% after one day and increased to 65% at the end of 30 days. The gas production rate was still two and one-half times the prestimulation rate at the end of the 30-day test period. The field results were a good match to the numerical simulator predictions. The physical stimulation did increase the production, but did not produce a commercial rate.

  9. FORT UNION DEEP

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lyle A. Johnson Jr.

    2002-09-01

    Coalbed methane (CBM) is currently the hottest area of energy development in the Rocky Mountain area. The Powder River Basin (PRB) is the largest CBM area in Wyoming and has attracted the majority of the attention because of its high permeability and relatively shallow depth. Other Wyoming coal regions are also being targeted for development, but most of these areas have lower permeability and deeper coal seams. This project consists of the development of a CBM stimulation system for deep coal resources and involves three work areas: (1) Well Placement, (2) Well Stimulation, and (3) Production Monitoring and Evaluation. The focus of this project is the Washakie Basin. Timberline Energy, Inc., the cosponsor, has a project area in southern Carbon County, Wyoming, and northern Moffat County, Colorado. The target coal is found near the top of the lower Fort Union formation. The well for this project, Evans No.1, was drilled to a depth of 2,700 ft. Three coal seams were encountered with sandstone and some interbedded shale between seams. Well logs indicated that the coal seams and the sandstone contained gas. For the testing, the upper seam at 2,000 ft was selected. The well, drilled and completed for this project, produced very little water and only occasional burps of methane. To enhance the well, a mild severity fracture was conducted to fracture the coal seam and not the adjacent sandstone. Fracturing data indicated a fracture half-length of 34 ft, a coal permeability of 0.2226 md, and permeability of 15.3 md. Following fracturing, the gas production rate stabilized at 10 Mscf/day within water production of 18 bpd. The Western Research Institute (WRI) CBM model was used to design a 14-day stimulation cycle followed by a 30-day production period. A maximum injection pressure of 1,200 psig to remain well below the fracture pressure was selected. Model predictions were 20 Mscf/day of air injection for 14 days, a one-day shut-in, then flowback. The predicted flowback was a four-fold increase over the prestimulation rate with production essentially returning to prestimulation rates after 30 days. The physical stimulation was conducted over a 14-day period. Problems with the stimulation injection resulted in a coal bed fire that was quickly quenched when production was resumed. The poststimulation, stabilized production was three to four times the prestimulation rate. The methane content was approximately 45% after one day and increased to 65% at the end of 30 days. The gas production rate was still two and one-half times the prestimulation rate at the end of the 30-day test period. The field results were a good match to the numerical simulator predictions. The physical stimulation did increase the production, but did not produce a commercial rate.

  10. International Union for Conservation of Nature | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Union for Conservation of Nature Jump to: navigation, search Logo: International Union for Conservation of Nature Name: International Union for Conservation of Nature Address: Rue...

  11. Montana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Montana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2006 317 313...

  12. California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2006 998...

  13. Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per...

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2006 271 275...

  14. Federal Offshore--Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Federal Offshore--Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Federal Offshore--Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per...

  15. Arizona Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per...

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

    Arizona Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Arizona Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct...

  16. New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2006 4,406...

  17. Texas--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Texas--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

  18. Kansas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per...

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Kansas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2006 1,049...

  19. West Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) West Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2006...

  20. New York Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) New York Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2006 149 147...

  1. Agro Unione Ltda | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Jump to: navigation, search Name: Agro Unione Ltda Place: Brazil Product: Sugar and ethanol producer. References: Agro Unione Ltda1 This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI...

  2. Structural basis of GDP release and gating in G protein coupled Fe[superscript 2+] transport

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Guilfoyle, Amy; Maher, Megan J.; Rapp, Mikaela; Clarke, Ronald; Harrop, Stephen; Jormakka, Mika

    2009-09-29

    G proteins are key molecular switches in the regulation of membrane protein function and signal transduction. The prokaryotic membrane protein FeoB is involved in G protein coupled Fe{sup 2+} transport, and is unique in that the G protein is directly tethered to the membrane domain. Here, we report the structure of the soluble domain of FeoB, including the G protein domain, and its assembly into an unexpected trimer. Comparisons between nucleotide free and liganded structures reveal the closed and open state of a central cytoplasmic pore, respectively. In addition, these data provide the first observation of a conformational switch in the nucleotide-binding G5 motif, defining the structural basis for GDP release. From these results, structural parallels are drawn to eukaryotic G protein coupled membrane processes.

  3. Union Eolica Panamena UEP | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Eolica Panamena UEP Jump to: navigation, search Name: Union Eolica Panamena (UEP) Place: Granada, Spain Sector: Wind energy Product: Granada-based wind project developer company,...

  4. ,"Federal Offshore Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals...

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

    Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest...

  5. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"06301967" ,"Release...

  6. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Oil Wells (MMcf...

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Oil Wells (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release...

  7. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Gas Wells (MMcf...

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Gas Wells (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release...

  8. ,"Texas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (MMcf)"

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release...

  9. ,"Alabama--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf...

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alabama--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","129...

  10. ,"Louisiana--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf...

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","129...

  11. ,"Texas--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)...

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","129...

  12. ,"Alaska--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf...

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alaska--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","129...

  13. ,"US--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)"

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

    State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  14. ,"California--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf...

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","129...

  15. Nebraska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    09 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 View History Gross Withdrawals 2,916 2,255 1,980 1,328 1,032 402 1967-2014 From Gas Wells 2,734 2,092 1,854 1,317 1,027 400 1967-2014 From Oil Wells 182 163 126 11 5 1 1967-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 Repressuring 0 0 0 0 0 0 1967-2014 Vented and Flared 9 24 21 0 NA NA 1967-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 Marketed Production 2,908 2,231 1,959 1,328 1,032 402 1967-2014 Dry Production

  16. Oregon Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    09 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 View History Gross Withdrawals 821 1,407 1,344 770 770 950 1979-2014 From Gas Wells 821 1,407 1,344 770 770 950 1979-2014 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002-2014 Repressuring 0 0 0 0 0 0 1994-2014 Vented and Flared 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 0 0 0 0 0 0 1994-2014 Marketed Production 821 1,407 1,344 770 770 950 1979-2014 Dry Production 821 1,407 1,344 770 770 950

  17. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    10 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Gross Withdrawals 572,902 1,310,592 2,256,696 3,259,042 4,214,643 4,765,305 1967-2015 From Gas Wells 173,450 242,305 210,609 207,872 174,576 1967-2014 From Oil Wells 0 0 3,456 2,987 3,564 1967-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 399,452 1,068,288 2,042,632 3,048,182 4,036,504 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 Repressuring 0 0 0 0 0 1967-2014 Vented and Flared 0 0 0 0 0 1967-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 0 0 0 0 0 1997-2014 Marketed Production

  18. Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    09 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 View History Gross Withdrawals 140,738 147,255 151,094 146,405 139,382 131,885 1967-2014 From Gas Wells 16,046 23,086 20,375 21,802 26,815 27,052 1967-2014 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 9 9 9 2006-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 18,284 16,433 18,501 17,212 13,016 12,226 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 106,408 107,736 112,219 107,383 99,542 92,599 2006-2014 Repressuring 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003-2014 Vented and Flared NA NA NA 0 NA NA 1967-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 0 0 0 0 0 0 1997-2014

  19. Kansas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    10 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Gross Withdrawals 325,591 309,952 296,299 292,467 286,080 292,219 1967-2015 From Gas Wells 247,651 236,834 264,610 264,223 260,715 1967-2014 From Oil Wells 39,071 37,194 0 0 0 1967-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 38,869 35,924 31,689 28,244 25,365 2002-2014 Repressuring 548 521 0 NA NA 1967-2014 Vented and Flared 323 307 0 NA NA 1967-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 0 0 0 0 0 2002-2014 Marketed Production 324,720 309,124

  20. Kentucky Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    09 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 View History Gross Withdrawals 113,300 135,330 124,243 106,122 94,665 78,737 1967-2014 From Gas Wells 111,782 133,521 122,578 106,122 94,665 78,737 1967-2014 From Oil Wells 1,518 1,809 1,665 0 0 0 1967-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 Repressuring 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 Vented and Flared 0 0 0 0 0 0 1967-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 Marketed Production 113,300 135,330 124,243 106,122

  1. Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    10 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Gross Withdrawals 2,218,283 3,040,523 2,955,437 2,366,943 1,987,630 1,943,739 1967-2015 From Gas Wells 911,967 883,712 775,506 780,623 737,185 1967-2014 From Oil Wells 63,638 68,505 49,380 51,948 50,638 1967-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 1,242,678 2,088,306 2,130,551 1,534,372 1,199,807 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 2002-2014 Repressuring 3,606 5,015 0 2,829 3,199 1967-2014 Vented and Flared 4,578 6,302 0 3,912 4,143 1967-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases

  2. June 11, 2009, HSS/Union Task Meeting on 2009 HSS/Union Task Progress - Agenda

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    06-05-09 HSS/Union Working Group Meeting June 11, 2009 1:00 - 2:30 pm EST FORS 7E-069 Call-in: 301-903-0688 SUBJECT: 2009 HSS/Union Task Progress Union Working Group Participants: 2008 Topical Union Leads Ron Ault/Tom Schaffer..................AFL-CIO Metal Trades Department Pete Stafford...................................... Building and Construction Trades Department Center for Construction Research & Training (BCTD CPWR) Chico McGill/Dennis Phelps............International Brotherhood of

  3. June 11, 2009, HSS/Union Task Meeting on 2009 HSS/Union Task Progress - Summary

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    23-09 HSS/Union Working Group Meeting 2009 HSS/Union Task Progress and Next Steps June 11, 2009 In introductory remarks, Glenn Podonsky, Chief Health, Safety and Security Officer, underscored HSS's commitment to engage in this collective effort with the Unions and stakeholders to improve worker health, safety and security across the DOE Complex. He provided an overview of the past several years of the HSS Focus Group effort in which the worker, through Union representatives and stakeholders,

  4. RĂ©union publique HR

    ScienceCinema (OSTI)

    None

    2011-10-06

    Chers CollÚgues,Je me permets de vous rappeler qu'une réunion publique organisée par le Département HR se tiendra aujourd'hui:Vendredi 30 avril 2010 à 9h30 dans l'Amphithéùtre principal (café offert dÚs 9h00).Durant cette réunion, des informations générales seront données sur:le CERN Admin e-guide, qui est un nouveau guide des procédures administratives du CERN ayant pour but de faciliter la recherche d'informations pratiques et d'offrir un format de lecture convivial;le régime d'Assurance Maladie de l'Organisation (présentation effectuée par Philippe Charpentier, Président du CHIS Board) et;la Caisse de Pensions (présentation effectuée par Théodore Economou, Administrateur de la Caisse de Pensions du CERN).Une transmission simultanée de cette réunion sera assurée dans l'Amphithéùtre BE de Prévessin et également disponible à l'adresse suivante: http://webcast.cern.chJe me réjouis de votre participation!Meilleures salutations,Anne-Sylvie CatherinChef du Département des Ressources humaines__________________________________________________________________________________Dear Colleagues,I should like to remind you that a plublic meeting organised by HR Department will be held today:Friday 30 April 2010 at 9:30 am in the Main Auditorium (coffee from 9:00 am).During this meeting, general information will be given about:the CERN Admin e-guide which is a new guide to the Organization's administrative procedures, drawn up to facilitate the retrieval of practical information and to offer a user-friendly format;the CERN Health Insurance System (presentation by Philippe Charpentier, President of the CHIS Board) and;the Pension Fund (presentation by Theodore Economou, Administrator of the CERN Pension Fund).A simultaneous transmission of this meeting will be broadcast in the BE Auditorium at Prévessin and will also be available at the following address. http://webcast.cern.chI look forward to your participation!Best regards,Anne-Sylvie CatherinHead, Human Resources Department

  5. Mutational, Structural, and Kinetic Evidence for a Dissociative Mechanism in the GDP-mannose Mannosyl Hydrolase Reaction

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Xia,Z.; Azurmendi, H.; lairson, L.; Withers, S.; Gabelli, S.; Bianchet, M.; Amzel, L.; Mildvan, A.

    2005-01-01

    GDP-mannose hydrolase (GDPMH) catalyzes the hydrolysis of GDP-{alpha}-D-sugars by nucleophilic substitution with inversion at the anomeric C1 atom of the sugar, with general base catalysis by H124. Three lines of evidence indicate a mechanism with dissociative character. First, in the 1.3 Angstrom X-ray structure of the GDPMH-Mg{sup 2+}-GDP{center_dot}Tris{sup +} complex, the GDP leaving group interacts with five catalytic components: R37, Y103, R52, R65, and the essential Mg{sup 2+}. As determined by the effects of site-specific mutants on k{sub cat}, these components contribute factors of 24-, 100-, 309-, 24-, and {ge}10{sup 5}-fold, respectively, to catalysis. Both R37 and Y103 bind the {beta}-phosphate of GDP and are only 5.0 Angstroms apart. Accordingly, the R37Q/Y103F double mutant exhibits partially additive effects of the two single mutants on k{sub cat}, indicating cooperativity of R37 and Y103 in promoting catalysis, and antagonistic effects on K{sub m}. Second, the conserved residue, D22, is positioned to accept a hydrogen bond from the C2-OH group of the sugar undergoing substitution at C1, as was shown by modeling an {alpha}-D-mannosyl group into the sugar binding site. The D22A and D22N mutations decreased k{sub cat} by factors of 10{sup 2.1} and 10{sup 2.6}, respectively, for the hydrolysis of GDP-{alpha}-D-mannose, and showed smaller effects on K{sub m}, suggesting that the D22 anion stabilizes a cationic oxocarbenium transition state. Third, the fluorinated substrate, GDP-2F-{alpha}-D-mannose, for which a cationic oxocarbenium transition state would be destabilized by electron withdrawal, exhibited a 16-fold decrease in k{sub cat} and a smaller, 2.5-fold increase in K{sub m}. The D22A and D22N mutations further decreased the k{sub cat} with GDP-2F-{alpha}-D-mannose to values similar to those found with GDP-{alpha}-D-mannose, and decreased the K{sub m} of the fluorinated substrate. The choice of histidine as the general base over glutamate, the preferred base in other Nudix enzymes, is not due to the greater basicity of histidine, since the pK{sub a} of E124 in the active complex (7.7) exceeded that of H124 (6.7), and the H124E mutation showed a 10{sup 2.2}-fold decrease in k{sub cat}and a 4.0-fold increase in K{sub m} at pH 9.3. Similarly, the catalytic triad detected in the X-ray structure (H124---Y127---P120) is unnecessary for orienting H124, since the Y127F mutation had only 2-fold effects on k{sub cat} and K{sub m} with either H124 or E124 as the general base. Hence, a neutral histidine rather than an anionic glutamate may be necessary to preserve electroneutrality in the active complex.

  6. Helix Dipole Movement and Conformational Variability Contribute to Allosteric GDP Release in G[alpha] Subunits

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Preininger, Anita M.; Funk, Michael A.; Oldham, William M.; Meier, Scott M.; Johnston, Christopher A.; Adhikary, Suraj; Kimple, Adam J.; Siderovski, David P.; Hamm, Heidi E.; Iverson, Tina M.

    2009-06-01

    Heterotrimeric G proteins (Galphabetagamma) transmit signals from activated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) to downstream effectors through a guanine nucleotide signaling cycle. Numerous studies indicate that the carboxy-terminal alpha5 helix of Galpha subunits participates in Galpha-receptor binding, and previous EPR studies suggest this receptor-mediated interaction induces a rotation and translation of the alpha5 helix of the Galpha subunit [Oldham, W. M., et al. (2006) Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 13, 772-777]. On the basis of this result, an engineered disulfide bond was designed to constrain the alpha5 helix of Galpha(i1) into its EPR-measured receptor-associated conformation through the introduction of cysteines at position 56 in the alpha1 helix and position 333 in the alpha5 helix (I56C/Q333C Galpha(i1)). A functional mimetic of the EPR-measured alpha5 helix dipole movement upon receptor association was additionally created by introduction of a positive charge at the amino terminus of this helix, D328R Galpha(i1). Both proteins exhibit a dramatically elevated level of basal nucleotide exchange. The 2.9 A resolution crystal structure of I56C/Q333C Galpha(i1) in complex with GDP-AlF(4)(-) reveals the shift of the alpha5 helix toward the guanine nucleotide binding site that is anticipated by EPR measurements. The structure of the I56C/Q333C Galpha(i1) subunit further revealed altered positions for the switch regions and throughout the Galpha(i1) subunit, accompanied by significantly elevated crystallographic temperature factors. Combined with previous evidence in the literature, the structural analysis supports the critical role of electrostatics of the alpha5 helix dipole and overall conformational variability during nucleotide release.

  7. Union Temporal de Empresas UTE | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Temporal de Empresas UTE Jump to: navigation, search Name: Union Temporal de Empresas (UTE) Place: Spain Sector: Solar Product: Developer of PV solar parks. References: Union...

  8. Structure of the protein core of translation initiation factor 2 in apo, GTP-bound and GDP-bound forms

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Simonetti, Angelita; Fabbretti, Attilio; Hazemann, Isabelle; Jenner, Lasse; Gualerzi, Claudio O.; Klaholz, Bruno P.

    2013-06-01

    The crystal structures of the eubacterial translation initiation factor 2 in apo form and with bound GDP and GTP reveal conformational changes upon nucleotide binding and hydrolysis, notably of the catalytically important histidine in the switch II region. Translation initiation factor 2 (IF2) is involved in the early steps of bacterial protein synthesis. It promotes the stabilization of the initiator tRNA on the 30S initiation complex (IC) and triggers GTP hydrolysis upon ribosomal subunit joining. While the structure of an archaeal homologue (a/eIF5B) is known, there are significant sequence and functional differences in eubacterial IF2, while the trimeric eukaryotic IF2 is completely unrelated. Here, the crystal structure of the apo IF2 protein core from Thermus thermophilus has been determined by MAD phasing and the structures of GTP and GDP complexes were also obtained. The IF2–GTP complex was trapped by soaking with GTP in the cryoprotectant. The structures revealed conformational changes of the protein upon nucleotide binding, in particular in the P-loop region, which extend to the functionally relevant switch II region. The latter carries a catalytically important and conserved histidine residue which is observed in different conformations in the GTP and GDP complexes. Overall, this work provides the first crystal structure of a eubacterial IF2 and suggests that activation of GTP hydrolysis may occur by a conformational repositioning of the histidine residue.

  9. Nebraska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells Nebraska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed

  10. Kentucky Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells Kentucky Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed

  11. Maryland Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells Maryland Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed

  12. AVIC Changli Union Energy | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Beijing Municipality, China Product: China-based JV to manufacture and sell zinc-air batteries. References: AVIC Changli Union Energy1 This article is a stub. You can help...

  13. Union, Ohio: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    is a stub. You can help OpenEI by expanding it. Union is a city in Miami County and Montgomery County, Ohio. It falls under Ohio's 8th congressional district and Ohio's 3rd...

  14. Union of Concerned Scientists | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    http:www.ucsusa.org About "The Union of Concerned Scientists is the leading science-based nonprofit working for a healthy environment and a safer world. UCS combines...

  15. Property:CoolingTowerWaterUseSummerGross | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Property Name CoolingTowerWaterUseSummerGross Property Type Number Description Cooling Tower Water use (summer average) (afday) Gross. Retrieved from "http:en.openei.orgw...

  16. Physics Nobel winner David Gross gives public lecture at Jefferson...

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

    Physics Nobel winner David Gross gives public lecture at Jefferson Lab on June 12 (Monday) ... "The Coming Revolutions in Fundamental Physics" beginning at 8 p.m. at Jefferson Lab on ...

  17. ,"Alabama Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million...

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

    2015 12:34:05 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Alabama Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" "Sourcekey","NGMEPG0FGSSALMMCF" "Date","Alabama...

  18. Nevada Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Gas Wells (Million...

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

    from Gas Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Gas Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

  19. Other States Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Other States Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2002 0 0...

  20. Other States Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Oil Wells (Million...

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

    Oil Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Other States Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Oil Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 3,459 3,117...

  1. Quantification of the Potential Gross Economic Impacts of Five Methane

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Reduction Scenarios | Department of Energy Quantification of the Potential Gross Economic Impacts of Five Methane Reduction Scenarios Quantification of the Potential Gross Economic Impacts of Five Methane Reduction Scenarios This study assessed five potential methane reduction scenarios from natural gas transmission, storage, and distribution (TS&D) infrastructure using published literature on the costs and the estimated quantity of methane reduced. The results show that implementation

  2. X-ray, NMR, and Mutational Studies of the Catalytic Cycle of the GDP-Mannose Mannosyl Hydrolase Reaction

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gabelli,S.; Azurmendi, H.; Bianchet, M.; Amzel, L.; Mildva, A.

    2006-01-01

    GDP-mannose hydrolase catalyzes the hydrolysis with inversion of GDP-{alpha}-D-hexose to GDP and {beta}-D-hexose by nucleophilic substitution by water at C1 of the sugar. Two new crystal structures (free enzyme and enzyme-substrate complex), NMR, and site-directed mutagenesis data, combined with the structure of the enzyme-product complex reported earlier, suggest a four-stage catalytic cycle. An important loop (L6, residues 119-125) contains a ligand to the essential Mg{sup 2+} (Gln-123), the catalytic base (His-124), and three anionic residues. This loop is not ordered in the X-ray structure of the free enzyme due to dynamic disorder, as indicated by the two-dimensional 1H-15N HMQC spectrum, which shows selective exchange broadening of the imidazole nitrogen resonances of His-124 (k{sub ex} = 6.6 x 10{sup 4} s{sup -1}). The structure of the enzyme-Mg{sup 2+}-GDP-mannose substrate complex of the less active Y103F mutant shows loop L6 in an open conformation, while the structure of the enzyme-Mg{sup 2+}-GDP product complex showed loop L6 in a closed, 'active' conformation. 1H-15N HMQC spectra show the imidazole N of His-124 to be unprotonated, appropriate for general base catalysis. Substituting Mg{sup 2+} with the more electrophilic metal ions Mn{sup 2+} or Co{sup 2+} decreases the pK{sub a} in the pH versus k{sub cat} rate profiles, showing that deprotonation of a metal-bound water is partially rate-limiting. The H124Q mutation, which decreases k{sub cat} 103.4-fold and largely abolishes its pH dependence, is rescued by the Y103F mutation, which increases k{sub cat} 23-fold and restores its pH dependence. The structural basis of the rescue is the fact that the Y103F mutation shifts the conformational equilibrium to the open form moving loop L6 out of the active site, thus permitting direct access of the specific base hydroxide from the solvent. In the proposed dissociative transition state, which occurs in the closed, active conformation of the enzyme, the partial negative charge of the GDP leaving group is compensated by the Mg2+, and by the closing of loop L2 that brings Arg-37 closer to the -phosphate. The development of a positive charge at mannosyl C1, as the oxocarbenium-like transition state is approached, is compensated by closing the anionic loop, L6, onto the active site, further stabilizing the transition state.

  3. Gross alpha analytical modifications that improve wastewater treatment compliance

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tucker, B.J.; Arndt, S.

    2007-07-01

    This paper will propose an improvement to the gross alpha measurement that will provide more accurate gross alpha determinations and thus allow for more efficient and cost-effective treatment of site wastewaters. To evaluate the influence of salts that may be present in wastewater samples from a potentially broad range of environmental conditions, two types of efficiency curves were developed, each using a thorium-230 (Th-230) standard spike. Two different aqueous salt solutions were evaluated, one using sodium chloride, and one using salts from tap water drawn from the Bergen County, New Jersey Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW). For each curve, 13 to 17 solutions were prepared, each with the same concentration of Th-230 spike, but differing in the total amount of salt in the range of 0 to 100 mg. The attenuation coefficients were evaluated for the two salt types by plotting the natural log of the counted efficiencies vs. the weight of the sample's dried residue retained on the planchet. The results show that the range of the slopes for each of the attenuation curves varied by approximately a factor of 2.5. In order to better ensure the accuracy of results, and thus verify compliance with the gross alpha wastewater effluent criterion, projects depending on gross alpha measurements of environmental waters and wastewaters should employ gross alpha efficiency curves prepared with salts that mimic, as closely as possible, the salt content of the aqueous environmental matrix. (authors)

  4. Clay-Union Electric Coop | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Clay-Union Electric Coop Jump to: navigation, search Name: Clay-Union Electric Coop Place: South Dakota Phone Number: 605-624-2673 Website: www.clayunionelectric.coop Facebook:...

  5. EERE Success Story-Iowa: West Union Green Transformation Project...

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

    West Union Green Transformation Project EERE Success Story-Iowa: West Union Green ... These grant funds will be used to close up their buildings-making them more energy ...

  6. U.S.-European Union Joint Statement | Department of Energy

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

    -European Union Joint Statement U.S.-European Union Joint Statement U.S.-European Union Joint Statement prepared as part of the International Partnership for a Hydrogen Economy PDF icon us_eu_hydrogen_summit_statement.pdf More Documents & Publications Microsoft Word - Document1 International Partnerships for the Hydrogen Economy Fact Sheet International Partnerships for the Hydrogen Economy Fact Sheet

  7. Gross Gamma-Ray Calibration Blocks (May 1978) | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Gross Gamma-Ray Calibration Blocks (May 1978) Gross Gamma-Ray Calibration Blocks (May 1978) Gross Gamma-Ray Calibration Blocks (May 1978) PDF icon Gross Gamma-Ray Calibration Blocks (May 1978) More Documents & Publications Grade Assignments for Models Used for Calibration of Gross-Count Gamma-Ray Logging Systems (December 1983) A Brief Review of the Basis for, and the Procedures Currently Utilized in, Gross Gamma-Ray Log Calibration (October 1976) Parameter Assignments for Spectral Gamma-Ray

  8. The Structure of the MUR1 GDP-mannose 4,67-deydratase from A. thaliana: Implications for Ligand Binding Specificity

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mulichak, A.M.; Bonin, C.P.; Reiter, W.-D.; Garavito, R.M.

    2010-03-08

    GDP-D-mannose 4,6-dehydratase catalyzes the first step in the de novo synthesis of GDP-L-fucose, the activated form of L-fucose, which is a component of glycoconjugates in plants known to be important to the development and strength of stem tissues. We have determined the three-dimensional structure of the MUR1 dehydratase isoform from Arabidopsis thaliana complexed with its NADPH cofactor as well as with the ligands GDP and GDP-D-rhamnose. MUR1 is a member of the nucleoside-diphosphosugar modifying subclass of the short-chain dehydrogenase/reductase enzyme family, having homologous structures and a conserved catalytic triad of Lys, Tyr, and Ser/Thr residues. MUR1 is the first member of this subfamily to be observed as a tetramer, the interface of which reveals a close and intimate overlap of neighboring NADP{sup +}-binding sites. The GDP moiety of the substrate also binds in an unusual syn conformation. The protein-ligand interactions around the hexose moiety of the substrate support the importance of the conserved triad residues and an additional Glu side chain serving as a general base for catalysis. Phe and Arg side chains close to the hexose ring may serve to confer substrate specificity at the O2 position. In the MUR1/GDP-D-rhamnose complex, a single unique monomer within the protein tetramer that has an unoccupied substrate site highlights the conformational changes that accompany substrate binding and may suggest the existence of negative cooperativity in MUR1 function.

  9. US - Former Soviet Union environmental management activities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-09-01

    The Office of Environmental Management (EM) has been delegated the responsibility for US DOE`s cleanup of nuclear weapons complex. The nature and the magnitude of the waste management and environmental remediation problem requires the identification of technologies and scientific expertise from domestic and foreign sources. This booklet makes comparisons and describes coordinated projects and workshops between the USA and the former Soviet Union.

  10. Conversion and enrichment in the Soviet Union

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1991-04-01

    In the Soviet Union, just as in the West, the civilian nuclear industry emerged from research work undertaken for nuclear weapons development. At first, researchers tried various techniques for physical separation of uranium isotopes: electromagnetic and molecular-kinetic thermo-diffusion methods; gaseous diffusion; and centrifuge methods. All of those methods, which are based primarily on differences in the atomic mass of uranium isotopes, called for extensive research and the development of new, technically unprecedented equipment. Gradually gaseous diffusion and gas centrifuge technology became recognized as most feasible for industrial use, so research on other methods was terminated. Industrial-scale uranium enrichment in the Soviet Union began in 1949 using the gaseous diffusion method; by the early 1960s, centrifuge technology was in use on an industrial scale. All Soviet production of highly-enriched, weapons-grade uranium was halted in 1987. The Soviet Union now has four enrichment plants in operation (at classified locations), solely for civilian nuclear power needs. All four enrichment plants have centrifuge modules, and enrichment provided by gaseous diffusion accounts for less than 5% of their total output. Two of the four enrichment plants also incorporate facilities for conversion to uranium hexafluoride (UF{sub 6}).

  11. Property:CoolingTowerWaterUseAnnlAvgGross | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Property Name CoolingTowerWaterUseAnnlAvgGross Property Type Number Description Cooling Tower Water use (annual average) (afday) Gross. Retrieved from "http:en.openei.orgw...

  12. Property:CoolingTowerWaterUseWinterGross | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    lingTowerWaterUseWinterGross Property Type Number Description Cooling Tower Water use (winter average) (afday) Gross. Retrieved from "http:en.openei.orgwindex.php?titleProper...

  13. Federal Offshore California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Federal Offshore California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 5,417 5,166 5,431 1980's 5,900 12,763 17,751 24,168 46,363 64,558 59,078 54,805 49,167 50,791 1990's 49,972 51,855 55,231 52,150 53,561 54,790 66,784 73,345 74,985 77,809 2000's 76,075 70,947 67,816 58,095 54,655 54,088 40,407 45,516 44,902 41,229 2010's 41,200 36,579 27,262 27,454

  14. Federal Offshore--Alabama Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Offshore--Alabama Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Federal Offshore--Alabama Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 79,294 86,515 120,502 143,703 152,055 194,677 170,320 163,763 2000's 160,208 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 2010's NA NA 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  15. Federal Offshore--Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Federal Offshore--Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 3,838,521 4,101,321 4,262,607 1980's 4,200,273 4,202,553 3,879,918 3,313,354 3,750,641 3,286,091 3,071,900 3,384,442 3,418,949 3,373,680 1990's 3,549,524 3,401,801 3,304,336 3,351,101 3,513,981 3,460,103 3,689,170 3,760,953 3,759,040 3,732,046 2000's 3,671,424 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

  16. Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 3,838,521 4,600,197 4,750,119 1980's 4,617,585 4,584,491 4,246,464 3,635,942 4,070,279 3,542,827 3,279,165 3,610,041 3,633,594 3,577,685 1990's 3,731,764 3,550,230 3,442,437 3,508,112 3,673,494 3,554,147 3,881,697 3,941,802 3,951,997 3,896,569 2000's 3,812,991 153,871 137,192 133,456

  17. Louisiana--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 498,876 487,512 1980's 417,312 381,938 366,546 322,588 319,638 256,736 207,265 225,599 214,645 204,005 1990's 182,240 148,429 138,101 157,011 159,513 94,044 192,527 180,848 192,956 164,523 2000's 141,567 153,871 137,192 133,456 129,245 107,584 97,479 72,868 86,198 76,386 2010's 69,836

  18. Louisiana--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 1,535,033 1,538,511 1,552,603 1,608,633 1,469,698 1,357,155 1,386,478 1,434,389 2000's 1,342,963 1,370,802 1,245,270 1,244,672 1,248,050 1,202,328 1,280,758 1,309,960 1,301,523 1,482,252 2010's 2,148,447 2,969,297 2,882,193 2,289,193 1,925,968 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available;

  19. Alabama Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 9 13 1990's 19,861 32,603 191,605 218,023 349,380 356,598 361,068 409,091 392,320 376,435 2000's 361,289 200,862 202,002 194,339 165,630 152,902 145,762 134,451 125,502 109,214 2010's 101,487 84,270 87,398 75,660 70,827 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  20. Alabama--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 222,009 228,298 229,483 223,527 221,233 220,674 212,470 207,863 2000's 200,255 191,119 184,500 176,571 173,106 164,304 160,381 155,167 152,051 146,751 2010's 139,215 134,305 128,312 120,666 110,226 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  1. Alaska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 72,813 71,946 1980's 63,355 71,477 66,852 68,776 68,315 62,454 63,007 69,656 101,440 122,595 1990's 144,064 171,665 216,377 233,198 224,301 113,552 126,051 123,854 133,111 125,841 2000's 263,958 262,937 293,580 322,010 334,125 380,568 354,816 374,204 388,188 357,490 2010's 370,148 364,702

  2. Alaska--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 2,409,336 2,545,144 2,861,599 3,256,352 3,247,533 3,257,096 3,245,736 3,236,241 2000's 3,265,436 3,164,843 3,183,857 3,256,295 3,309,960 3,262,379 2,850,934 3,105,086 3,027,696 2,954,896 2010's 2,826,952 2,798,220 2,857,485 2,882,956 2,803,429 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  3. Calif--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Calif--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 386,382 346,733 334,987 322,544 326,919 317,137 315,701 347,667 2000's 334,983 336,629 322,138 303,480 287,205 291,271 301,921 286,584 281,088 258,983 2010's 273,136 237,388 214,509 219,386 218,512 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  4. California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 5,417 19,929 20,394 1980's 19,980 26,692 31,904 38,084 60,207 84,062 77,355 67,835 60,308 59,889 1990's 58,055 59,465 62,473 58,635 60,765 60,694 73,092 80,516 81,868 84,547 2000's 83,882 78,209 74,884 64,961 61,622 60,773 47,217 52,805 51,931 47,281 2010's 46,755 41,742

  5. Texas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 88,258 418,474 760,566 1980's 949,177 1,010,772 1,120,830 992,041 1,021,260 942,413 1,169,038 1,330,604 1,376,093 1,457,841 1990's 1,555,568 1,494,494 1,411,147 1,355,333 1,392,727 1,346,674 1,401,753 1,351,067 1,241,264 1,206,045 2000's 1,177,257 53,649 57,063 53,569 44,946 36,932 24,785

  6. Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 475,615 415,395 446,189 427,529 421,558 394,184 392,974 396,947 399,564 436,848 434,276 458,989 1992 453,270 402,327 420,967 411,917 431,327 417,000 427,388 382,708 381,170 414,845 406,315 428,235 1993 423,076 382,554 406,496 395,723 411,114 394,868 412,879 420,433 417,563 440,892 458,579 482,445 1994 441,368 402,280 436,425 423,914 438,127

  7. Illinois Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 41 38 40 39 38 37 37 38 37 40 40 41 1992 31 28 30 29 28 27 28 28 28 30 30 31 1993 30 29 29 27 27 27 27 28 28 29 27 30 1994 30 29 29 27 27 27 26 28 27 28 26 29 1995 30 29 29 27 27 27 27 28 27 28 26 29 1996 29 28 28 26 27 27 21 22 22 23 21 24 1997 23 22 22 20 21 21 17 17 17 18 16 18 1998 21 20 20 18 19 19 15 16 15 16 15 17 1999 19 18 18 17 17

  8. Indiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 21 18 20 19 19 19 19 18 19 20 19 21 1992 15 14 15 14 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 1993 17 15 16 16 16 15 15 15 15 17 17 17 1994 9 8 9 9 9 8 9 9 8 9 9 10 1995 4 34 22 42 21 13 22 18 8 21 28 16 1996 14 15 28 33 34 30 30 29 27 33 45 41 1997 38 40 34 34 40 29 30 40 34 39 115 52 1998 37 52 51 45 11 21 85 75 74 69 66 28 1999 76 69 79 70 82 70 66 75 59

  9. Federal Offshore Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    Annual-Million Cubic Feet Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 View History Gross Withdrawals NA NA NA 0 0 0 1977-2014 From Gas Wells NA NA NA 0 0 0 1977-2014 From Oil Wells NA NA NA 0 0 0 1977-2014 Repressuring 1992-1998 Marketed Production 1992-1998

  10. Novel protein and Mg[superscript 2+] configurations in the Mg[superscript 2+] GDP Complex of the SRP GTPase ffh

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Focia, Pamela J.; Alam, Hena; Lu, Thanh; Ramirez, Ursula D.; Freymann, Douglas M.

    2010-03-05

    Ffh is the signal sequence recognition and targeting subunit of the prokaryotic signal recognition particle (SRP). Previous structural studies of the NG GTPase domain of Ffh demonstrated magnesium-dependent and magnesium-independent binding conformations for GDP and GMPPNP that are believed to reflect novel mechanisms for exchange and activation in this member of the GTPase superfamily. The current study of the NG GTPase bound to Mg{sup 2+} GDP reveals two new binding conformations - in the first the magnesium interactions are similar to those seen previously, however, the protein undergoes a conformational change that brings a conserved aspartate into its second coordination sphere. In the second, the protein conformation is similar to that seen previously, but the magnesium coordination sphere is disrupted so that only five oxygen ligands are present. The loss of the coordinating water molecule, at the position that would be occupied by the oxygen of the {gamma}-phosphate of GTP, is consistent with that position being privileged for exchange during phosphate release. The available structures of the GDP-bound protein provide a series of structural snapshots that illuminate steps along the pathway of GDP release following GTP hydrolysis.

  11. Physics Nobel winner David Gross gives public lecture at Jefferson Lab on

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

    June 12 (Monday) | Jefferson Lab Physics Nobel winner David Gross gives public lecture at Jefferson Lab on June 12 (Monday) June 6, 2006 David Gross David Gross, Nobel Prize recipient and lecturer David Gross, Nobel Prize recipient is scheduled to give a free, public lecture titled "The Coming Revolutions in Fundamental Physics" beginning at 8 p.m. at Jefferson Lab on (Monday) June 12. He is one of three men - Frank Wilczek, H. David Politzer and Gross - to have their work

  12. Structural Studies of the Nudix GDP-mannose Hydrolase from E. coli Reveals a New Motif for Mannose Recognition

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    A Boto; W Xu; J Jakoncic; A Pannuri; T Romeo; M Bessman; S Gabelli; L Amzel

    2011-12-31

    The Nudix hydrolase superfamily, characterized by the presence of the signature sequence GX5EX7REUXEEXGU (where U is I, L, or V), is a well-studied family in which relations have been established between primary sequence and substrate specificity for many members. For example, enzymes that hydrolyze the diphosphate linkage of ADP-ribose are characterized by having a proline 15 amino acids C-terminal of the Nudix signature sequence. GDPMK is a Nudix enzyme that conserves this characteristic proline but uses GDP-mannose as the preferred substrate. By investigating the structure of the GDPMK alone, bound to magnesium, and bound to substrate, the structural basis for this divergent substrate specificity and a new rule was identified by which ADP-ribose pyrophosphatases can be distinguished from purine-DP-mannose pyrophosphatases from primary sequence alone. Kinetic and mutagenesis studies showed that GDPMK hydrolysis does not rely on a single glutamate as the catalytic base. Instead, catalysis is dependent on residues that coordinate the magnesium ions and residues that position the substrate properly for catalysis. GDPMK was thought to play a role in biofilm formation because of its upregulation in response to RcsC signaling; however, GDPMK knockout strains show no defect in their capacity of forming biofilms.

  13. President Obama's Final State of the Union - Energy Department Supercut |

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Department of Energy President Obama's Final State of the Union - Energy Department Supercut President Obama's Final State of the Union - Energy Department Supercut Addthis From climate change to wind and solar power to electric vehicles, President Obama touched on a lot of key energy topics in his final State of the Union address. He mentioned how the United States has cut carbon pollution more than any other country on earth and the fact that clean energy is cheaper than ever before.

  14. Deputy Secretary Roundtable Meeting with Unions | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Deputy Secretary Roundtable Meeting with Unions Deputy Secretary Roundtable Meeting with Unions Meeting Date: March 16, 2010 Documents Available for Download PDF icon Meeting Agenda PDF icon Meeting Summary PDF icon Safety and Security Reform Plan PDF icon Union Contact List More Documents & Publications Technical Standards Newsletter - December 2008 DOE Safety and Security Reform Meeting Active DPF for Off-Road Particulate Matter (PM) Control

  15. The City of Union City | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Sector Wind energy Facility Type Community Wind Facility Status In Service Owner Performance Services Energy Purchaser AEP - Indiana Michigan Power Location Union City IL...

  16. Union County, Ohio: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Places in Union County, Ohio Dublin, Ohio Magnetic Springs, Ohio Marysville, Ohio Milford Center, Ohio Plain City, Ohio Richwood, Ohio Unionville Center, Ohio Retrieved from...

  17. Kraftwerk Union KWU Siemens Power Generation | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Services Product: KWU is a provider of components and services to the commercial nuclear utility industry. References: Kraftwerk Union (KWU) - Siemens Power Generation.1...

  18. Illustrative Scenarios Tool (European Union) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Summary LAUNCH TOOL Name: Illustrative Scenarios Tool (European Union) Focus Area: Propane Topics: Opportunity Assessment & Screening Website: www.eutransportghg2050.eucms...

  19. High Temperature Fuel Cells in the European Union

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Presentation on High Temperature Fuel Cells in the European Union to the High Temperature Membrane Working Group, May 25, 2004 in Philadelphia, PA.

  20. Union County, South Carolina: Energy Resources | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Carlisle, South Carolina Jonesville, South Carolina Lockhart, South Carolina Monarch Mill, South Carolina Union, South Carolina Retrieved from "http:en.openei.orgw...

  1. Union County, Illinois: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Pass, Illinois Anna, Illinois Cobden, Illinois Dongola, Illinois Jonesboro, Illinois Mill Creek, Illinois Retrieved from "http:en.openei.orgwindex.php?titleUnionCounty,Il...

  2. Union County, Florida: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Climate Zone Number 2 Climate Zone Subtype A. Places in Union County, Florida Lake Butler, Florida Raiford, Florida Worthington Springs, Florida Retrieved from "http:...

  3. Union Bridge, Maryland: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Union Bridge, Maryland: Energy Resources Jump to: navigation, search Equivalent URI DBpedia Coordinates 39.5689895, -77.176927 Show Map Loading map... "minzoom":false,"mapping...

  4. West Union, New York: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    "alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":"" Hide Map West Union is a town in Steuben County, New York.1 References US Census Bureau...

  5. New Mars rover findings revealed at American Geophysical Union...

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

    Mars rover findings revealed at AGU conference New Mars rover findings revealed at American Geophysical Union conference A group of scientists revealed that the Curiosity rover...

  6. Union County, Arkansas: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Number 3 Climate Zone Subtype A. Places in Union County, Arkansas Calion, Arkansas El Dorado, Arkansas Felsenthal, Arkansas Huttig, Arkansas Junction City, Arkansas Norphlet,...

  7. Union County, New Jersey: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    New Jersey Strategic Energy LLC (New Jersey) Places in Union County, New Jersey Berkeley Heights, New Jersey Clark, New Jersey Cranford, New Jersey Elizabeth, New Jersey...

  8. Gross Input to Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Units

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Day) Process: Gross Input to Atmospheric Crude Oil Dist. Units Operable Capacity (Calendar Day) Operating Capacity Idle Operable Capacity Operable Utilization Rate Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Process Area Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 View History U.S. 17,178 16,963 16,394 15,690 16,673 16,848 1985-2015 PADD 1 1,192 1,196 1,063 1,133 1,190 1,136 1985-2015 East

  9. December 4, 2008; HSS/Union Working Group Meeting on 2008 HSS/Union Topical Wrap Up - Agenda

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Union Working Group Meeting December 4, 2008 1:00 - 4:00 pm EST FORS 7E-069 SUBJECT: 2008 HSS/Union Topical Wrap Up Meeting Facilitation by 2008 Topical Union Leads Ron Ault/Tom Schaffer............... AFL-CIO Metal Trades Department Pete Stafford/Patricia Quinn/.............Building and Construction Trades Department Center for Don Ellenberger Construction Research & Training (BCTD CPWR) Dennis Phelps.............................International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers [IBEW] Gary

  10. California--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) California--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 14,763 14,963 1980's 14,080 13,929 14,153 13,916 13,844 19,504 18,277 13,030 11,141 9,098 1990's 8,083 7,610 7,242 6,484 7,204 5,904 6,309 7,171 6,883 6,738 2000's 7,808 7,262 7,068 6,866 6,966 6,685 6,809 7,289 7,029 6,052 2010's 5,554 5,163 5,051 5,470 5,961 - = No Data Reported; -- =

  11. Colorado Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 21,103 24,172 24,435 25,590 23,263 23,548 23,557 24,550 23,440 24,584 25,178 31,698 1992 28,269 26,307 25,490 26,125 27,205 27,139 26,396 27,842 27,128 28,391 29,527 34,175 1993 32,694 29,383 33,718 34,380 36,385 33,931 32,995 34,802 33,910 35,488 36,448 39,870 1994 39,207 35,941 38,103 38,734 41,588 36,686 38,457 39,010 39,176 40,396 39,810

  12. Kansas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 64,057 54,742 58,012 52,088 50,888 46,821 45,032 42,868 43,595 50,514 58,127 63,441 1992 65,091 56,523 53,640 47,570 50,404 48,717 49,180 48,695 47,944 56,453 64,486 71,039 1993 68,326 59,556 61,876 55,016 56,230 53,159 53,089 51,079 47,670 54,487 60,596 67,071 1994 70,958 61,850 64,259 57,135 58,396 55,207 55,134 53,046 49,506 56,586 62,930

  13. Kentucky Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Kentucky Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 7,021 6,303 6,870 6,515 6,458 6,272 6,394 6,382 6,194 6,740 6,739 7,017 1992 5,425 7,142 6,716 7,270 7,191 6,365 6,320 7,295 6,011 6,813 6,684 6,458 1993 7,343 7,269 6,783 6,309 6,962 9,647 6,801 7,537 5,997 6,422 6,163 9,732 1994 6,171 6,109 5,700 5,302 5,850 8,107 5,715 6,333 5,040 5,397 5,179 8,179 1995 6,312 6,249 5,831 5,423 5,984 8,293

  14. Mississippi Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Mississippi Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 16,689 14,603 15,913 14,873 14,762 14,321 14,814 14,777 13,871 15,072 15,320 15,756 1992 15,037 13,554 14,071 13,563 13,972 13,882 13,992 13,905 11,566 14,054 14,043 13,898 1993 13,573 12,177 12,578 12,247 12,462 12,188 12,879 11,849 11,949 11,652 10,841 10,630 1994 10,324 9,474 10,554 9,984 10,227 9,886 10,159 10,675 10,780 10,098 9,632

  15. Missouri Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 0 0 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 1992 4 4 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 3 1993 2 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 2 1994 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 1995 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 0 0 1 3 3 1996 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 0 0 3 3 11 1997 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1998 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1999 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2001 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003

  16. Montana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 5,317 4,533 4,861 4,866 4,600 3,543 3,583 4,173 4,023 4,479 4,241 4,783 1992 5,106 4,902 5,332 4,653 4,504 3,734 3,938 3,854 3,842 4,583 5,144 5,218 1993 5,335 4,826 5,124 4,790 4,693 4,058 3,995 3,454 4,095 5,064 4,920 5,163 1994 4,998 4,529 4,625 4,439 4,132 3,399 3,440 3,797 3,970 4,512 4,533 4,698 1995 4,965 4,316 4,752 4,417 4,186 3,459

  17. Maryland Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Maryland Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 3 0 0 16 1992 4 4 3 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 1993 2 2 2 2 1 2 3 3 3 3 3 2 1994 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 1995 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1996 2 15 21 9 11 11 11 6 10 22 6 11 1997 2 13 18 8 10 10 9 5 9 20 5 9 1998 5 4 3 4 5 7 6 6 5 6 5 6 1999 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 2000 3 2 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2001 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2002 2 1 1 1 1

  18. Michigan Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Michigan Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 15,965 14,322 17,792 18,491 19,993 16,466 16,940 16,169 16,512 15,527 15,816 17,420 1992 14,533 13,052 16,483 15,598 13,484 21,140 16,680 17,672 19,682 18,086 14,749 19,320 1993 19,565 10,672 25,042 20,172 14,793 18,282 21,131 17,417 18,866 16,233 14,930 13,195 1994 28,151 3,543 36,182 8,227 26,191 18,882 21,165 18,682 20,799 15,884 19,038

  19. DOE Roundtable Meeting with Union Leaders | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Roundtable Meeting with Union Leaders DOE Roundtable Meeting with Union Leaders Meeting Date: January 25, 2011 Documents Available for Download PDF icon Meeting Agenda PDF icon Meeting Summary and Participants More Documents & Publications DOE/Labor Leadership Roundtable Meeting DOE/Labor Leadership Roundtable Meeting

  20. December 4, 2008; HSS/Union Working Group Meeting on 2008 HSS/Union Topical Wrap Up - Union Lead Action Priorities

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    UNION TOPICAL LEAD PRIORITY ACTION SUBMITTALS FOR DECEMBER 4 HSS/UNION TOPICAL WRAP UP MEETING SMWIA Submittal of Action Priorities: The priorities below reflect SMWIA/training subcommittee input for moving forward in 2009 and beyond. 1. A pre-requisite requirement of OSHA-10 Hour Training for workers to gain access to DOE sites 2. Standardized training requirements across the DOE network of facilities supported by the NIEHS model for support for all building trades and sub crafts 3. Support for

  1. Table 6.4 Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Natural Gas Well Productivity, 1960-2011

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

    Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Natural Gas Well Productivity, 1960-2011 Year Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals From Crude Oil, Natural Gas, Coalbed, and Shale Gas Wells Natural Gas Well Productivity Texas 1 Louisiana 1 Oklahoma Other States 1 Federal Gulf of Mexico 2 Total Onshore Offshore Total Gross With- drawals From Natural Gas Wells 3 Producing Wells 4 Average Productivity Federal State Total Million Cubic Feet Million Cubic Feet Million Cubic Feet Number Cubic Feet per Well 1960 6,964,900

  2. Spatial confinement and thermal deconfinement in the Gross-Neveu model

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Malbouisson, J. M. C.; Khanna, F. C.; Malbouisson, A. P. C.

    2007-06-19

    We discuss the occurrence of spatial confinement and thermal deconfinement in the massive, D-dimensional, Gross-Neveu model with compactified spatial dimensions.

  3. Grade Assignments for Models Used for Calibration of Gross-Count Gamma-Ray

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Logging Systems (December 1983) | Department of Energy Grade Assignments for Models Used for Calibration of Gross-Count Gamma-Ray Logging Systems (December 1983) Grade Assignments for Models Used for Calibration of Gross-Count Gamma-Ray Logging Systems (December 1983) Grade Assignments for Models Used for Calibration of Gross-Count Gamma-Ray Logging Systems (December 1983) PDF icon Grade Assignments for Models Used for Calibration of Gross-Count Gamma-Ray Logging Systems (December 1983) More

  4. New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    10 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Gross Withdrawals 1,341,475 1,287,682 1,276,296 1,247,394 1,265,579 1,290,139 1967-2015 From Gas Wells 616,134 556,024 653,057 588,127 535,181 1967-2014 From Oil Wells 238,580 252,326 127,009 160,649 204,054 1967-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 71,867 93,071 127,548 167,961 214,502 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 414,894 386,262 368,682 330,658 311,842 2002-2014 Repressuring 7,513 6,687 9,906 12,583 16,701 1967-2014 Vented and Flared 1,586 4,360 12,259 21,053

  5. Other States Total Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    Monthly-Million Cubic Feet Monthly-Million Cubic Feet per Day Annual-Million Cubic Feet Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Gross Withdrawals 5,864,402 6,958,125 8,225,321 689,082 633,853 595,158 1991-2015 From Gas Wells 2,523,173 2,599,172 3,177,021 362,605 328,809 1991-2014 From Oil Wells 691,643 728,857 279,627 23,391 22,817 1991-2014 From

  6. Federal Offshore Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and

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

    Production Monthly-Million Cubic Feet Monthly-Million Cubic Feet per Day Annual-Million Cubic Feet Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Gross Withdrawals 2,259,144 1,830,913 1,527,875 1,326,697 1,275,213 1,346,074 1997-2015 From Gas Wells 1,699,908 1,353,929 1,013,914 817,340 706,413 1997-2014 From Oil Wells 559,235 476,984 513,961 509,357

  7. Gross national happiness as a framework for health impact assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pennock, Michael; Ura, Karma

    2011-01-15

    The incorporation of population health concepts and health determinants into Health Impact Assessments has created a number of challenges. The need for intersectoral collaboration has increased; the meaning of 'health' has become less clear; and the distinctions between health impacts, environmental impacts, social impacts and economic impacts have become increasingly blurred. The Bhutanese concept of Gross National Happiness may address these issues by providing an over-arching evidence-based framework which incorporates health, social, environmental and economic contributors as well as a number of other key contributors to wellbeing such as culture and governance. It has the potential to foster intersectoral collaboration by incorporating a more limited definition of health which places the health sector as one of a number of contributors to wellbeing. It also allows for the examination of the opportunity costs of health investments on wellbeing, is consistent with whole-of-government approaches to public policy and emerging models of social progress.

  8. State of the Union 2015: President Obama's Remarks on Energy | Department

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

    of Energy State of the Union 2015: President Obama's Remarks on Energy State of the Union 2015: President Obama's Remarks on Energy

  9. Cogeneration in the former Soviet Union

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Horak, W.C.

    1997-07-01

    The former Soviet Union made a major commitment to Cogeneration. The scale and nature of this commitment created a system conceptually different from Cogeneration in the west. The differences were both in scale, in political commitment, and in socio economic impact. This paper addresses some of the largest scale Cogeneration programs, the technology, and the residual impact of these programs. The integration of the Cogeneration and nuclear programs is a key focus of the paper. Soviet designed nuclear power plants were designed to produce both electricity and heat for residential and industrial uses. Energy systems used to implement this design approach are discussed. The significant dependence on these units for heat created an urgent need for continued operation during the winter. Electricity and heat are also produced in nuclear weapons production facilities, as well as power plants. The Soviets also had designed, and initiated construction of a number of nuclear power plants {open_quotes}ATETs{close_quotes} optimized for production of heat as well as electricity. These were canceled.

  10. Union job fight boiling at DOE cleanup sites

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Setzer, S.W.

    1993-11-15

    The US DOE is facing a growing jurisdictional dispute over which unions will perform the majority of clean-up work at its facilities. Unions affiliated with the AFL-CIO Metal Trades Council representing operations employees at the sites believe they have a fundamental right to work. Unions in the AFL-CIO's Building and Construction Trades Dept. insist that they have a clear mandate under federal labor law and the Davis-Bacon Act. The issue has heated up in recent weeks at the policy level and is boiling in a contentious dispute at DOE's Fernald site in Ohio.

  11. Iowa: West Union Green Transformation Project | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    West Union Green Transformation Project Iowa: West Union Green Transformation Project March 17, 2014 - 11:26am Addthis Utilizing funding from EERE and cost shares from other federal agencies, the City of West Union, Iowa, drilled geothermal wells in order to install a closed-loop geothermal heating and cooling system. The system is designed to serve 330,000 square feet of mixed used space in the downtown area, including 80% of the 60 downtown buildings. Funds have also been allocated to provide

  12. Iowa: West Union Green Transformation Project | Department of Energy

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

    West Union Green Transformation Project Iowa: West Union Green Transformation Project March 17, 2014 - 11:26am Addthis Utilizing funding from EERE and cost shares from other federal agencies, the City of West Union, Iowa, drilled geothermal wells in order to install a closed-loop geothermal heating and cooling system. The system is designed to serve 330,000 square feet of mixed used space in the downtown area, including 80% of the 60 downtown buildings. Funds have also been allocated to provide

  13. UNION CARBIDE MZALS DIVISION tiiAGARA FALLS, NEW YDRK

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    PRELIF",INARY SURVEY 0' ELECTRDMET iORPDF.&TiCIN UNION CARBIDE MZALS DIVISION tiiAGARA FALLS, NEW YDRK Work performed by the Health and Safety Research Division Dak Ridge National Laboratory Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY operated by UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION for the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY as part of the Fornierly Utilized Sites-- Remedial Action Program ,ELECTRD?'ISi 60RPOR:TION UNiON CARBIDE METALS DIVlSIOti NiASARA FALLS, NEA YORK At the requests o f the

  14. GDP-L-fucose: .beta.-D-galactoside 2-.alpha.-L-fucosyltransferases, DNA sequences encoding the same, method for producing the same and a method of genotyping a person

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Lowe, John B. (3125 Bolgos Cir., Ann Arbor, MI 48105); Lennon, Gregory (8309 Norris Canyon, Castro Valley, CA 94552); Rouquier, Sylvie (5, rue du Cannau, 34000 Montpellier, FR); Giorgi, Dominique (5, rue du Cannau, 34000 Montpellier, FR); Kelly, Robert J. (3164 Concord, Trenton, MI 48183)

    1998-01-01

    The gene encoding GDP-L-fucose: .beta.-D-Galactoside 2-.alpha.-L-fucosyltransferase has been cloned, and a mutation in this gene has been found to be responsible for an individual being a non-secretor.

  15. GDP-L-fucose: {beta}-D-galactoside 2-{alpha}-Lfucosyltransferases, DNA sequences encoding the same, method for producing the same and a method of genotyping a person

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Lowe, J.B.; Lennon, G.; Rouquier, S.; Giorgi, D.; Kelly, R.J.

    1998-09-15

    The gene encoding GDP-L-fucose: {beta}-D-Galactoside 2-{alpha}-Lfucosyltransferase has been cloned, and a mutation in this gene has been found to be responsible for an individual being a non-secretor. 30 figs.

  16. Union City, California: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by expanding it. Union City is a city in Alameda County, California. It falls under California's 13th congressional district.12...

  17. Beijing ChangLi Union Energy Company | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Municipality, China Product: China-based technology company that research in zinc-air batteries (fuel cells). References: Beijing ChangLi Union Energy Company1 This article is a...

  18. Union Hill-Novelty Hill, Washington: Energy Resources | Open...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    help OpenEI by expanding it. Union Hill-Novelty Hill is a census-designated place in King County, Washington.1 References US Census Bureau 2005 Place to 2006 CBSA...

  19. Union Suppo Battery Co Ltd | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Suppo Battery Co Ltd Jump to: navigation, search Name: Union Suppo Battery Co Ltd Place: Shenyang, China Zip: 110015 Product: Liaoning-based manufacturer of rechargeable NiMH...

  20. Union Light, Heat & Power Co | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Name: Union Light, Heat & Power Co Place: Kentucky References: Energy Information Administration.1 EIA Form 861 Data Utility Id 19446 This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI...

  1. Union Power Cooperative- Residential Energy Efficient Heat Pump Loan Program

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Union Power Cooperative offers low interest loans to help its qualifying residential customers finance new, energy-efficient heat pumps. Interest rates, currently at 9%, will be fixed for the term...

  2. Active Labor Unions Interfacing with DOE – June 2014

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This information book provides an overview of what has been learned through the interface with representative labor unions and related stakeholders as well as accomplishments and current efforts to address any identified areas of concern.

  3. Comment submitted by Consumers Union regarding the Energy Star Verification Testing Program

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This document is a comment submitted by Consumers Union regarding the Energy Star Verification Testing Program

  4. The R6A-1 peptide binds to switch II of G{alpha}{sub i1} but is not a GDP-dissociation inhibitor

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Willard, Francis S. . E-mail: fwillard@med.unc.edu; Siderovski, David P.

    2006-01-27

    Heterotrimeric G-proteins are molecular switches that convert signals from membrane receptors into changes in intracellular physiology. Recently, several peptides that bind heterotrimeric G-protein {alpha} subunits have been isolated including the novel G{alpha}{sub i1} . GDP binding peptides R6A and KB-752. The R6A peptide and its minimized derivative R6A-1 interact with G{alpha}{sub i1} . GDP. Based on spectroscopic analysis of BODIPYFL-GTP{gamma}S binding to G{alpha}{sub i1}, it has been reported that R6A-1 has guanine nucleotide dissociation inhibitor (GDI) activity against G{alpha}{sub i1} [W.W. Ja, R.W. Roberts, Biochemistry 43 (28) (2004) 9265-9275]. Using radioligand binding, we show that R6A-1 is not a GDI for G{alpha}{sub i1} subunits. Furthermore, we demonstrate that R6A-1 reduces the fluorescence quantum yield of the G{alpha}{sub i1}-BODIPYFL-GTP{gamma}S complex, thus explaining the previously reported GDI activity as a fluorescence artifact. We further show that R6A-1 has significant sequence similarity to the guanine nucleotide exchange factor peptide KB-752 that binds to switch II of G{alpha}{sub i1}. We use competitive binding analysis to show that R6A-1 also binds to switch II of G{alpha} subunits.

  5. State of the Union Remarks on Energy in Four Charts | Department of Energy

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

    the Union Remarks on Energy in Four Charts State of the Union Remarks on Energy in Four Charts January 22, 2015 - 10:23am Addthis Daniel Wood Daniel Wood Data Visualization and Cartographic Specialist, Office of Public Affairs Sarah Gerrity Sarah Gerrity Former Multimedia Editor, Office of Public Affairs More State of the Union Coverage Interested in hearing the President's energy and climate change related remarks from the State of the Union? Watch the video! In Tuesday's State of the Union

  6. Missouri Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Oil Wells (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    from Oil Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Oil Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 NA NA 2010's NA NA NA 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Oil Wells Missouri Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals

  7. Missouri Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Oil Wells (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    from Oil Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Oil Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 NA NA 2010's NA NA NA 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Oil Wells Missouri Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals

  8. Nevada Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Gas Wells (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    from Gas Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Gas Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Gas Wells Nevada Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and

  9. Nevada Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas Wells Nevada Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale

  10. Oregon Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas Wells Oregon Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas

  11. Fact #621: May 3, 2010 Gross Vehicle Weight vs. Empty Vehicle Weight |

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

    Department of Energy 1: May 3, 2010 Gross Vehicle Weight vs. Empty Vehicle Weight Fact #621: May 3, 2010 Gross Vehicle Weight vs. Empty Vehicle Weight The gross weight of a vehicle (GVW) is the weight of the empty vehicle plus the weight of the maximum payload that the vehicle was designed to carry. In cars and small light trucks, the difference between the empty weight of the vehicle and the GVW is not significantly different (1,000 to 1,500 lbs). The largest trucks and tractor-trailers,

  12. EIA Energy Efficiency-Table 4e. Gross Output by Selected Industries...

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

    e Page Last Modified: May 2010 Table 4e. Gross Output1by Selected Industries, 1998, 2002, and 2006 (Billion 2000 Dollars 2) MECS Survey Years NAICS Subsector and Industry 1998 2002...

  13. EIA Energy Efficiency-Table 3e. Gross Output by Selected Industries...

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

    e Page Last Modified: May 2010 Table 3e. Gross Output1 by Selected Industries, 1998, 2002, and 2006 (Current Billion Dollars) MECS Survey Years NAICS Subsector and Industry 1998...

  14. 23 V.S.A. Section 1392 Gross Weight Limits on Highways | Open...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Section 1392 Gross Weight Limits on HighwaysLegal Abstract Statute establishes the motor vehicle weight, load size, not to exceed 80,000 pounds without a permit. Published NA...

  15. U.S. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Gas Wells (Million Cubic...

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

    Gas Wells (Million Cubic Feet) U.S. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Gas Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 1,482,053 1,363,737...

  16. U.S. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Oil Wells (Million Cubic...

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

    Oil Wells (Million Cubic Feet) U.S. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Oil Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 475,614 500,196 1993...

  17. American Geophysical Union (AGU) Fall Meeting | Department of Energy

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

    American Geophysical Union (AGU) Fall Meeting American Geophysical Union (AGU) Fall Meeting December 14, 2015 8:00AM EST to December 18, 2015 6:00PM EST With nearly 24,000 attendees, AGU Fall Meeting is the largest Earth and space science meeting in the world. Now in its 48th year, AGU Fall Meeting is the best place to present your research; hear about the latest discoveries, trends, and challenges in the field; and network and make connections that can enhance your career. AGU Fall Meeting

  18. January 20, 2011, HSS Union Focus Group Meeting - Agenda

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    0-11 HSS/Union Focus Group Meeting January 20, 2011 2:00 - 3:00 PM (EST) Call-in: 301-903-0617 Agenda * Opening Remarks [G. Podonsky] * 2011 Strategic Initiatives - Status/Next Steps Overview - Safety & Security Reform Status [B. Eckroade/S. Kirchhoff] - NAPA Worker Dialogue [MJ Campagnone] - Aging Workforce [M. Ardaiz] - Training Assessment Pilots [L. Gasperow/J. Lozoya] * Safety Concerns: Safety Culture [J. Frederick] - DOE/EFCOG ISMS Task Team Report [P. Worthington] * DOE/Union

  19. China's Pathways to Achieving 40% ~ 45% Reduction in CO{sub 2} Emissions per Unit of GDP in 2020: Sectoral Outlook and Assessment of Savings Potential

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zheng, Nina; Fridley, David; Zhou, Nan; Levine, Mark; Price, Lynn; Ke, Jing

    2011-09-30

    Achieving China’s goal of reducing its carbon intensity (CO{sub 2} per unit of GDP) by 40% to 45% percent below 2005 levels by 2020 will require the strengthening and expansion of energy efficiency policies across the buildings, industries and transport sectors. This study uses a bottom-up, end-use model and two scenarios -- an enhanced energy efficiency (E3) scenario and an alternative maximum technically feasible energy efficiency improvement (Max Tech) scenario – to evaluate what policies and technical improvements are needed to achieve the 2020 carbon intensity reduction target. The findings from this study show that a determined approach by China can lead to the achievement of its 2020 goal. In particular, with full success in deepening its energy efficiency policies and programs but following the same general approach used during the 11th Five Year Plan, it is possible to achieve 49% reduction in CO{sub 2} emissions per unit of GDP (CO{sub 2} emissions intensity) in 2020 from 2005 levels (E3 case). Under the more optimistic but feasible assumptions of development and penetration of advanced energy efficiency technology (Max Tech case), China could achieve a 56% reduction in CO{sub 2} emissions intensity in 2020 relative to 2005 with cumulative reduction of energy use by 2700 Mtce and of CO{sub 2} emissions of 8107 Mt CO{sub 2} between 2010 and 2020. Energy savings and CO{sub 2} mitigation potential varies by sector but most of the energy savings potential is found in energy-intensive industry. At the same time, electricity savings and the associated emissions reduction are magnified by increasing renewable generation and improving coal generation efficiency, underscoring the dual importance of end-use efficiency improvements and power sector decarbonization.

  20. Energy & Science at the State of the Union Tonight

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    When the President begins his third State of the Union address this evening at 9pm EST, several important women and men in the fields of energy, science and technology will be sitting in the Capitol Building alongside First Lady Michelle Obama.

  1. May 19, 2011, HSS/Union Focus Group Meeting - Agenda

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    16-11 HSS Focus Group Telecom Meeting Worker Health, Safety and Security Improvement Priorities/Task Activities May 19, 2011 Proposed AGENDA Introductory Remarks........................................................................ Glenn Podonsky Meeting Purpose/Intended Outcomes/Process.................. Pete Stafford/Mari-Jo Campagnone Priority Improvement Areas/Tasks Discussion * Safety & Security Reform.................................Bill Eckroade/Steve Kirchhoff/Unions * Background

  2. TONIGHT: @Energy Livetweets the State of the Union 2013 | Department of

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Energy TONIGHT: @Energy Livetweets the State of the Union 2013 TONIGHT: @Energy Livetweets the State of the Union 2013 February 12, 2013 - 12:25pm Addthis Stay tuned as we livetweet the President's annual State of the Union Address later this evening. | Graphic by Sarah Gerrity, Energy Department. Stay tuned as we livetweet the President's annual State of the Union Address later this evening. | Graphic by Sarah Gerrity, Energy Department. Erin R. Pierce Erin R. Pierce Former Digital

  3. December 4, 2008; HSS/Union Working Group Meeting on 2008 HSS/Union Topical Wrap Up - PRIORITY NEAR-TERM ACTION OVERVIEW

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Topical Wrap-Up Meeting December 4, 2008 PRIORITY NEAR-TERM ACTION OVERVIEW Background: Union representatives who participated in the initial 2007 HSS Focus Group meetings agreed to a path forward in which various unions combined to form working groups to address union identified health and safety issues by topical area. 2008 meetings were held to specifically address the topical areas of interest and concern related to worker health and safety at DOE sites: Training, 851 Rule Implementation,

  4. ,"Other States Total Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Total Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Other States Total Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release

  5. ,"US--Federal Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)"

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

    Federal Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","US--Federal Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  6. ,"Federal Offshore California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)"

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

    Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Federal Offshore California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  7. ,"Federal Offshore Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Federal Offshore Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1997" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release

  8. ,"Federal Offshore--Alabama Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)"

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

    Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Federal Offshore--Alabama Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  9. ,"Federal Offshore--Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)"

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

    Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Federal Offshore--Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  10. ,"Federal Offshore--Texas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)"

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

    Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Federal Offshore--Texas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  11. Sandians Participate in 46th Annual American Geophysical Union (AGU)

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

    Conference Participate in 46th Annual American Geophysical Union (AGU) Conference - Sandia Energy Energy Search Icon Sandia Home Locations Contact Us Employee Locator Energy & Climate Secure & Sustainable Energy Future Stationary Power Energy Conversion Efficiency Solar Energy Wind Energy Water Power Supercritical CO2 Geothermal Natural Gas Safety, Security & Resilience of the Energy Infrastructure Energy Storage Nuclear Power & Engineering Grid Modernization Battery Testing

  12. Amitava Bhattacharjee Elected a Fellow of the American Geophysical Union |

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

    Princeton Plasma Physics Lab Amitava Bhattacharjee Elected a Fellow of the American Geophysical Union By Raphael Rosen September 18, 2015 Tweet Widget Google Plus One Share on Facebook PPPL Physicist Amitava Bhattacharjee (Photo by Elle Starkman) PPPL Physicist Amitava Bhattacharjee Amitava Bhattacharjee, head of the Theory Department at the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) and professor of astrophysical sciences at Princeton University, has been elected a fellow of the American

  13. President Obama Praises NAMII in State of the Union Address

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    In his 2013 State of the Union address, President Obama used the National Additive Manufacturing Institute (NAMII) as a model of the potential for innovation in manufacturing in the U.S. His address made it clear that his Administration is making the revitalization of the manufacturing sector a priority, stating that he plans to make the U.S. "a magnet for new jobs and manufacturing." He laid out a plan for spurring growth in manufacturing in the following statement:

  14. Rotary union for use with ultrasonic thickness measuring probe

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Nachbar, Henry D. (Schenectady, NY)

    1992-01-01

    A rotary union for rotatably supporting an ultrasonic probe operable to nondestructively measure the thickness of steam generator tubes to determine the amount of corrosion experienced by the tubes includes a stationary body having a bore therethrough and an outlet drain, and a fitting rotatably mounted within the upper end of the body. The fitting has a bore aligned with the bore of the body. An electrical cable positioned within a water supply tube in an annular arrangement passes through the bore of the body and the bore of the fitting. This annular arrangement, in turn, is positioned within a connector element which extends outwardly from the fitting bore and is connected to the ultrasonic probe. An elastomeric lower bushing seals the annular arrangement to the lower end of the rotary union body and an elastomeric upper bushing seals the connector element to the fitting to permit the connector element and the ultrasonic probe connected thereto to rotate with the fitting relative to the body. The lower and upper bushings permit water to be passed through the annular arrangement and into the ultrasonic probe and thereafter discharged between the annular arrangement and the connector element to the outlet drain of the rotary union body.

  15. Rotary union for use with ultrasonic thickness measuring probe

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Nachbar, H.D.

    1992-09-15

    A rotary union for rotatably supporting an ultrasonic probe operable to nondestructively measure the thickness of steam generator tubes to determine the amount of corrosion experienced by the tubes includes a stationary body having a bore therethrough and an outlet drain, and a fitting rotatably mounted within the upper end of the body. The fitting has a bore aligned with the bore of the body. An electrical cable positioned within a water supply tube in an annular arrangement passes through the bore of the body and the bore of the fitting. This annular arrangement, in turn, is positioned within a connector element which extends outwardly from the fitting bore and is connected to the ultrasonic probe. An elastomeric lower bushing seals the annular arrangement to the lower end of the rotary union body and an elastomeric upper bushing seals the connector element to the fitting to permit the connector element and the ultrasonic probe connected thereto to rotate with the fitting relative to the body. The lower and upper bushings permit water to be passed through the annular arrangement and into the ultrasonic probe and thereafter discharged between the annular arrangement and the connector element to the outlet drain of the rotary union body. 5 figs.

  16. Gross error detection and stage efficiency estimation in a separation process

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Serth, R.W.; Srikanth, B. . Dept. of Chemical and Natural Gas Engineering); Maronga, S.J. . Dept. of Chemical and Process Engineering)

    1993-10-01

    Accurate process models are required for optimization and control in chemical plants and petroleum refineries. These models involve various equipment parameters, such as stage efficiencies in distillation columns, the values of which must be determined by fitting the models to process data. Since the data contain random and systematic measurement errors, some of which may be large (gross errors), they must be reconciled to obtain reliable estimates of equipment parameters. The problem thus involves parameter estimation coupled with gross error detection and data reconciliation. MacDonald and Howat (1988) studied the above problem for a single-stage flash distillation process. Their analysis was based on the definition of stage efficiency due to Hausen, which has some significant disadvantages in this context, as discussed below. In addition, they considered only data sets which contained no gross errors. The purpose of this article is to extend the above work by considering alternative definitions of state efficiency and efficiency estimation in the presence of gross errors.

  17. Word Pro - Untitled1

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Table 1.5 Energy Consumption, Expenditures, and Emissions Indicators Estimates, Selected Years, 1949-2011 Year Energy Consumption Energy Consumption per Capita Energy Expenditures 1 Energy Expenditures 1 per Capita Gross Output 3 Energy Expenditures 1 as Share of Gross Output 3 Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Energy Expenditures 1 as Share of GDP Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Energy Consumption per Real Dollar of GDP Carbon Dioxide Emissions 2 per Real Dollar of GDP Quadrillion Btu Million Btu

  18. Word Pro - S1

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

    value of gross domestic product (GDP) plus the value of intermediate inputs used to produce GDP. Web Page: http:www.eia.govtotalenergydatamonthlysummary. Source: Table 1.7

  19. Planning for a Sustainable Future of the Cincinnati Union Terminal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-04-30

    The Cincinnati Museum Center invited a number of local stakeholders, political leaders, nationally and internationally recognized design professionals and the Design Team, that has been engaged to help shape the future of this remarkable resource, to work together in a Workshop that would begin to shape a truly sustainable future for both the Museum and its home, the Union Terminal, one of the most significant buildings in America. This report summarizes and highlights the discussions that took place during the Workshop and presents recommendations for shaping a direction and a framework for the future.

  20. Union City, New Jersey 07087 Dear Mayor Walter:

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    En&igy ' - Washyon, DC20585 APR 0 3 ,I995 ,, -,,w ' -..-- -....-.. r- 11--a.-._ 3715 Paisade Avenue - .*<;1 Union City, New Jersey 07087 Dear Mayor Walter: Secretary of Energy Hazel O'Leary has announced a new approach to openness in the Department of Energy (DOE) and its communications with the public. In support of this initiative, we to forward the enclosed information related,to the former Callite performed work for DOE or its site in your jurisdiction that agencies.' This'information

  1. Watch Energy Highlights from the 2016 State of the Union | Department of

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Energy 2016 State of the Union Watch Energy Highlights from the 2016 State of the Union January 13, 2016 - 3:19pm Addthis Watch the Energy highlights from President Obama's final State of the Union delivered January 12, 2016. | Video by Simon Edelman, Energy Department. Simon Edelman Simon Edelman Chief Creative Officer Allison Lantero Allison Lantero Digital Content Specialist, Office of Public Affairs From climate change to wind and solar power to electric vehicles, President Obama touched

  2. Cooperation with the New Independent States of the Former Soviet Union |

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Department of Energy Cooperation with the New Independent States of the Former Soviet Union Cooperation with the New Independent States of the Former Soviet Union The following Acquisition Letter 95-14 includes the terms and conditions (both intellectual property and non-intellectual property) that are to be used in subcontracts between DOE national laboratories and institutes in the New Independent States of the Former Soviet Union (NIS). There are two patent and data clauses - one for the

  3. #SOTU Roundup: Energy Highlights from the 2014 State of the Union |

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

    Department of Energy #SOTU Roundup: Energy Highlights from the 2014 State of the Union #SOTU Roundup: Energy Highlights from the 2014 State of the Union January 29, 2014 - 12:45pm Addthis On January 28, 2014, President Obama delivered his fifth State of the Union address at the U.S. Capitol Building. Above, check out the energy and climate change highlights from the speech. | Video compilation by Matty Greene, Energy Department. Marissa Newhall Marissa Newhall Director of Digital Strategy

  4. PRELIMINARY SURVEY OF THE UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION METALS DIVISION PLANT, NIAGARA FALLS, NEW YORK

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    e - .' N"lr 7% PRELIMINARY SURVEY OF THE UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION METALS DIVISION PLANT, NIAGARA FALLS, NEW YORK Work performed by the Health and Safety Research Division Oak Ridge Natjonal Laboratory Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 December 1980 OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY operated by UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION for the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY as part of the Formerly Utilized Sites-- Remedial Action Program PRELIMINARY SURVEY OF THE UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION METALS DIVISION PLANT, NIAGARA FALLS,

  5. June 11, 2009, HSS/Union Task Meeting on 2009 HSS/Union Task Progress - Assessing Training Gaps in ORPS

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Assessing Training Gaps Using DOE's Occurrence Reporting and Processing System (ORPS) HSS/Union Meeting June 11, 2009 2 Highlights Training is a contributing cause in about 15% of DOE operational events (about 150 per year) * Poor management practices are the most common training cause * Poor training programs are next (cited about 50 times per year) Of ORPS-reported injuries, about 17% had training as a contributing cause (101 of 594) * About 30 per year HS-30 will develop a report with a few

  6. A look back at Union Carbides [first] 20 Years in Nuclear Energy...

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

    first 20 Years in Nuclear Energy The Gaseous Diffusion Plants Note: Union Carbide Nuclear Division, which started out as Carbide and Carbon Chemicals Company, operated the...

  7. Union zur F rderung von Oel und Proteinpflanzen Ufop | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    zur F rderung von Oel und Proteinpflanzen Ufop Jump to: navigation, search Name: Union zur Frderung von Oel- und Proteinpflanzen (Ufop) Place: Germany Product: Germany-based...

  8. Join @Energy for the 2016 State of the Union Address | Department of Energy

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

    @Energy for the 2016 State of the Union Address Join @Energy for the 2016 State of the Union Address January 11, 2016 - 11:10am Addthis Join us for live coverage of the State of the Union, starting at 9PM ET on Tuesday. | Image courtesy of Carly Wilkins. Join us for live coverage of the State of the Union, starting at 9PM ET on Tuesday. | Image courtesy of Carly Wilkins. Allison Lantero Allison Lantero Digital Content Specialist, Office of Public Affairs How can I participate? Follow along with

  9. April 30, 2008; HSS/Union Working Group Meeting to address training...

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

    ... direct marketing and public relations; and reports ... Department Safety and Health Committee American National Standards ... The union's official journal, The Electrical Worker, ...

  10. Join Energy.gov at the 2014 State of the Union | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Energy.gov at the 2014 State of the Union Join Energy.gov at the 2014 State of the Union January 28, 2014 - 11:23am Addthis Join Energy.gov tonight as we livetweet about all the major energy points in the President's State of the Union address. | Graphic by <a href="/node/379579">Sarah Gerrity</a>, Energy Department. Join Energy.gov tonight as we livetweet about all the major energy points in the President's State of the Union address. | Graphic by Sarah Gerrity, Energy

  11. Federal Offshore--Texas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Federal Offshore--Texas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 88,258 249,255 554,076 1980's 696,181 775,351 875,204 844,711 909,778 834,870 1,054,537 1,232,554 1,278,548 1,346,940 1990's 1,447,164 1,396,001 1,332,883 1,276,099 1,308,154 1,283,493 1,338,413 1,286,539 1,180,967 1,157,128 2000's 1,136,062 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 2010's NA NA 0 0 0 - = No Data

  12. Alabama--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 9 13 1990's 19,861 32,603 112,311 131,508 228,878 212,895 209,013 214,414 222,000 212,673 2000's 201,081 200,862 202,002 194,339 165,630 152,902 145,762 134,451 125,502 109,214 2010's 101,487 84,270 87,398 75,660 70,827 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to

  13. Alaska--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 72,813 71,946 1980's 63,355 71,477 66,852 68,776 68,315 62,454 63,007 69,656 101,440 122,595 1990's 144,064 171,665 216,377 233,198 224,301 113,552 126,051 123,854 133,111 125,841 2000's 263,958 262,937 293,580 322,010 334,125 380,568 354,816 374,204 388,188 357,490 2010's 370,148 364,702 307,306

  14. Federal Offshore--Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Federal Offshore--Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1997 432,713 396,681 438,926 423,131 435,592 426,888 434,325 439,712 428,689 440,668 425,849 441,756 1998 443,757 398,519 448,486 438,144 457,815 435,237 439,093 443,144 336,241 421,315 414,058 434,518 1999 436,171 395,293 435,012 424,724 432,489 414,495 431,981 424,513 408,237 421,312 409,660 419,049 2000

  15. Texas--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Texas--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 169,219 206,490 1980's 252,996 235,421 245,626 147,330 111,482 107,543 114,501 98,050 97,545 110,901 1990's 108,404 98,493 78,263 79,234 84,573 63,181 63,340 64,528 60,298 48,918 2000's 41,195 53,649 57,063 53,569 44,946 36,932 24,785 29,229 46,786 37,811 2010's 28,574 23,791 16,506 14,036 11,222 - = No

  16. U.S. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Offshore (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Gross Withdrawals Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) U.S. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 3,932,196 5,111,413 5,603,025 1980's 5,650,097 5,693,432 5,466,050 4,734,843 5,220,061 4,631,756 4,588,565 5,078,178 5,180,875 5,231,028 1990's 5,509,312 5,308,457 5,324,039 5,373,300 5,700,666 5,431,665 5,843,661 5,906,329 5,800,561 5,689,438 2000's 5,699,377 5,815,542 5,312,348 5,215,683 4,736,252

  17. US--Federal Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) US--Federal Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 3,932,196 4,355,742 4,822,114 1980's 4,902,354 4,990,667 4,772,873 4,182,233 4,706,782 4,185,519 4,185,515 4,671,801 4,746,664 4,771,411 1990's 5,046,660 4,849,657 4,771,744 4,765,865 4,996,197 4,942,089 5,246,422 5,315,514 5,185,312 5,130,746 2000's 5,043,769 5,136,962 4,615,443 4,505,443 4,055,340

  18. US--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) US--State Offshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 755,671 780,911 1980's 747,743 702,765 693,177 552,610 513,279 446,237 403,050 406,377 434,211 459,617 1990's 462,652 458,800 552,294 607,435 704,469 489,576 597,239 590,815 615,249 558,692 2000's 655,609 678,580 696,905 710,240 680,911 684,671 629,652 618,042 653,704 586,953 2010's 575,601 549,151 489,505

  19. Quantification of the Potential Gross Economic Impacts of Five Methane Reduction Scenarios

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

    Quantification of the Potential Gross Economic Impacts of Five Methane Reduction Scenarios David Keyser and Ethan Warner National Renewable Energy Laboratory Christina Curley Colorado State University Technical Report NREL/TP-6A50-63801 April 2015 The Joint Institute for Strategic Energy Analysis is operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC, on behalf of the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory, the University of Colorado-Boulder, the Colorado School of

  20. Quantification of the Potential Gross Economic Impacts of Five Methane Reduction Scenarios

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Keyser, David; Warner, Ethan; Curley, Christina

    2015-04-23

    Methane (CH4) is a potent greenhouse gas that is released from the natural gas supply chain into the atmosphere as a result of fugitive emissions1 and venting2 . We assess five potential CH4 reduction scenarios from transmission, storage, and distribution (TS&D) using published literature on the costs and the estimated quantity of CH4 reduced. We utilize cost and methane inventory data from ICF (2014) and Warner et al. (forthcoming) as well as data from Barrett and McCulloch (2014) and the American Gas Association (AGA) (2013) to estimate that the implementation of these measures could support approximately 85,000 jobs annually from 2015 to 2019 and reduce CH4 emissions from natural gas TS&D by over 40%. Based on standard input/output analysis methodology, measures are estimated to support over $8 billion in GDP annually over the same time period and allow producers to recover approximately $912 million annually in captured gas.

  1. Union Pacific Railroad`s LNG locomotive test program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Grimaila, B.

    1995-12-31

    Union Pacific Railroad is testing LNG in six locomotives through 1997 to determine if the liquefied natural gas technology is right for them. Two of the six LNG test locomotives are switch, or yard, locomotives. These 1,350 horsepower locomotives are the industry`s first locomotives totally fueled by natural gas. They`re being tested in the yard in the Los Angeles area. The other four locomotives are long-haul locomotives fueled by two tenders. These units are duel-fueled, operating on a mixture of LNG and diesel and are being tested primarily on the Los Angeles to North Platte, Nebraska corridor. All the information concerning locomotive emissions, locomotive performance, maintenance requirements, the overall LNG system design and the economic feasibility of the project will be analyzed to determine if UPR should expand, or abandon, the LNG technology.

  2. ,"Montana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Montana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  3. ,"Montana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Montana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  4. ,"Nebraska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Nebraska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  5. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  6. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Gas Wells (MMcf)"

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

    Gas Wells (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Gas Wells (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  7. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Oil Wells (MMcf)"

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

    Oil Wells (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Oil Wells (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  8. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  9. ,"New York Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New York Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  10. ,"North Dakota Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","North Dakota Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  11. ,"North Dakota Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Gas Wells (MMcf)"

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

    Gas Wells (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","North Dakota Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Gas Wells (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  12. ,"North Dakota Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Oil Wells (MMcf)"

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

    Oil Wells (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","North Dakota Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Oil Wells (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  13. ,"North Dakota Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","North Dakota Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  14. ,"Ohio Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Ohio Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1991" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  15. ,"Ohio Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Ohio Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  16. ,"Oklahoma Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Oklahoma Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  17. ,"Oklahoma Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Oklahoma Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  18. ,"Oregon Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Oregon Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1991" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  19. ,"Pennsylvania Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Pennsylvania Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1991" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  20. ,"Pennsylvania Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Pennsylvania Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  1. ,"South Dakota Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","South Dakota Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  2. ,"Tennessee Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Tennessee Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  3. ,"Texas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  4. ,"Texas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  5. ,"U.S. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Offshore (MMcf)"

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

    Offshore (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Offshore (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1090_nus_2a.xls" ,"Available

  6. ,"Utah Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Utah Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  7. ,"Utah Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Utah Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  8. ,"Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  9. ,"West Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","West Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1991" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  10. ,"West Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","West Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  11. ,"Wyoming Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Wyoming Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  12. ,"Alabama Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (MMcf)"

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

    Total Offshore (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alabama Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1090_sal_2a.xls"

  13. ,"Alaska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (MMcf)"

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

    Total Offshore (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alaska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1090_sak_2a.xls"

  14. ,"California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (MMcf)"

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

    Total Offshore (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1090_sca_2a.xls"

  15. ,"California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  16. ,"California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  17. ,"Colorado Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Colorado Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  18. ,"Colorado Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Colorado Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  19. ,"Florida Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Florida Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  20. ,"Florida Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Florida Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  1. ,"Illinois Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Illinois Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1991" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  2. ,"Illinois Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Illinois Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  3. ,"Indiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Indiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  4. ,"Kansas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kansas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  5. ,"Kansas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kansas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  6. ,"Kentucky Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kentucky Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  7. ,"Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (MMcf)"

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

    Total Offshore (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1090_sla_2a.xls"

  8. ,"Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  9. ,"Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  10. ,"Maryland Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Maryland Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  11. ,"Michigan Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Michigan Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production",10,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  12. ,"Michigan Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Michigan Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  13. ,"Mississippi Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Mississippi Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  14. ,"Missouri Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Missouri Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  15. CNS, labor union donate $15,000 to local March of Dimes | Y-12 National

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

    Security Complex CNS, labor union donate ... CNS, labor union donate $15,000 to local March of Dimes Posted: March 26, 2015 - 4:07pm At a recent kickoff luncheon, Y-12 Site Manager Bill Tindal (right) and Kimberly Mitchell of the Atomic Trades and Labor Council (left) gave a $15,000 check to Susie Racek, executive director of the local chapter of March of Dimes (center). The ATLC, an organization that represents 16 International Unions with more than 2,100 members, and Consolidated Nuclear

  16. Secretary Chu to Visit Houston to Highlight Obama's State of the Union

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Address, Discuss "All of the Above" Energy Strategy | Department of Energy Visit Houston to Highlight Obama's State of the Union Address, Discuss "All of the Above" Energy Strategy Secretary Chu to Visit Houston to Highlight Obama's State of the Union Address, Discuss "All of the Above" Energy Strategy February 1, 2012 - 3:47pm Addthis Washington, D.C. - As part of the Energy Department's ongoing efforts to highlight President Obama's State of the Union address

  17. September 8, 2011, HSS/Union Focus Group Work Group Telecom - Meeting Overview and Action Summary

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    09-12-11 Draft DRAFT Meeting Overview and Action Summary HSS/Union Focus Group Work Group Telecom September 8, 2011 Meeting Overview: Glenn Podonsky reflected on the HSS Focus Group's 5 year history and reported that 24 HSS/Union Focus group meetings have been held to date. He emphasized the value of the relationships that have been developed between HSS and the unions and the need to re-energize efforts and rally to move the ball forward in addressing worker health and safety concerns through

  18. September 8, 2011, HSS/Union Focus Group Work Group Telecom - Work Group matrix

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Rev 09-19-11) Work Group / HSS and Union Leads Union/Stakeholder/HSS Participants Improvement Issues/Goals Initial/Current Tasks Outputs 10CFR 851 -Implementation -Training HSS Leads: Pat Worthington / Bill McArthur Union Lead: Doug Stephens -USW Co-Lead: Barb McCabe - IUOE TBD - BCTD Dianne Whitten - HAMTC Stan Scott - HAMMER Gary Gustafson - LIUNA Steve Simonson - HSS Tom Staker - HSS Collectively work to ensure implementation of health and safety programs (851 Rule) within and among DOE site

  19. State of the Union Highlights Clean Energy Progress | Department of Energy

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

    State of the Union Highlights Clean Energy Progress State of the Union Highlights Clean Energy Progress February 5, 2014 - 12:00am Addthis President Obama focused on a variety of renewable energy and energy efficiency issues in his State of the Union address on January 28, highlighting progress toward a "shift to a cleaner energy economy" and spotlighting solar energy and fuel efficiency. "The shift to a cleaner energy economy won't happen overnight, and it will require tough

  20. Watch Energy Highlights from the State of the Union | Department of Energy

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

    Watch Energy Highlights from the State of the Union Watch Energy Highlights from the State of the Union January 21, 2015 - 11:46am Addthis Matty Greene Matty Greene Former Videographer From low gas prices to growth in renewable energy sources like wind and solar, energy featured prominently in President Obama's sixth State of the Union address last night. From the way we produce energy to how we use it in our homes and businesses, the President laid out key ways that he plans to fight climate

  1. APRIL 30, 2008, HSS/UNION MEETING TO ADDRESS TRAINING INTEGRATED EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND FINAL ACTION LIST

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

    HSS/UNION MEETING TO ADDRESS TRAINING INTEGRATED EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND FINAL ACTION LIST HSS and the labor unions who participated in the initial 2007 HSS Focus Group meetings agreed to a path forward in which various unions combined to form core working groups to address union identified issues by topical area. The following is a synthesis of actions/activities identified in the April 30 HSS/Union meeting to address training issues with focus in the areas of the development of DOE-wide HAMMER

  2. Fuxin Union Wind Power Co Ltd formerly known as Liaoning Zhangwu...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Wind Power Co Ltd formerly known as Liaoning Zhangwu Xiehe Wind Power Co Ltd Jump to: navigation, search Name: Fuxin Union Wind Power Co Ltd (formerly known as Liaoning Zhangwu...

  3. President Bush Highlights Energy in the State of the Union Address |

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

    Department of Energy Highlights Energy in the State of the Union Address President Bush Highlights Energy in the State of the Union Address February 3, 2005 - 10:01am Addthis "To keep our economy growing, we also need reliable supplies of affordable, environmentally responsible energy. Nearly four years ago, I submitted a comprehensive energy strategy that encourages conservation, alternative sources, a modernized electricity grid, and more production here at home -- including safe,

  4. April 30, 2008; HSS/Union Working Group Meeting to address training … Meeting Summary

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

    * * training. * area discussed. Center (NTC) National Training Center. * * * Conduct of Meeting. A 1. 2. 3. 4. HAMMER. HSS/UNION MEETING TO ADDRESS TRAINING DRAFT MEETING SUMMARY Introductory Remarks. Glenn Podonsky made the following points: More than a dialogue, the intent of HSS is to participate in a productive manner, to develop working relationships with the unions, to work the issues, identify actions, and institutionalize a process for addressing and resolving issues to improve worker

  5. September 8, 2011, HSS/Union Focus Group Work Group Telecom - Work Group Guidance

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    -29-11 Draft Collaboration provides an opportunity to serve as an entity that is greater than the sum of its parts. HSS FOCUS GROUP DRAFT PROPOSED WORK GROUP GUIDANCE BACKGROUND: The HSS Focus Group provides a forum for communication and collaboration related to worker health, safety and security among HSS management and staff, labor unions, DOE Programs and stakeholders. Based on the foundation that labor union representatives are an essential source of frontline perspective in identifying,

  6. November 17, 2009 HSS/Union Lead Checkpoint Meeting on Integrated Collaborative Oversight - Accomplishments Overview

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    November 17, 2008 2009 Priority Activities Accomplishments/Path Forward Overview Training Assessments Accomplishments: * HSS (NTC)/NIEHS/Union Collaboration - Completed Safety Training Workshop for the Oak Ridge Office (ORO) and the Y-12 Site Office (YSO) in July, 2009 - Over 50 attendees participated including representatives from Federal, contractor and union organizations (local and international) - ORO/YSO Safety Training Workshop Report completed and provided to ORO/YSO management -

  7. July 17, 2008; HSS/Union Working Group Meeting, Safety Standards, 10 CFR 851 - Agenda

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    6-24-08 Draft HSS/Union Working Group Meeting July 17, 2008 1:00 - 4:00 pm EST FORS 7E-069 Call-in: 301-903-9197 SUBJECT: SAFETY STANDARDS / 10 CFR 851 Core Union Working Groups Safety Standards: Metal Trades Department AFL-CIO - Lead International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Operative Plasterers' & Cement Masons' International Association (OPCMIA) 10 CFR 851: United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International

  8. May 19, 2011, HSS/Union Focus Group Meeting - Summary and Participants

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    - Final Draft 07-11-11 HSS Focus Group May 19 Teleconference with Union Representatives Reconciliation of HSS/Union Work Groups MEETING DISCUSSION Glenn Podonsky, Chief Health, Safety and Security Officer - Opening Remarks: * DOE Administration's strategic goals are supported by continued focus on national prosperity and security through energy, environmental, nuclear and science and technology advancement solutions. * Melvin Williams is recently appointed in the new position of Associate Deputy

  9. The European Union's emissions trading system in perspective

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    A. Denny Ellerman; Paul L. Joskow

    2008-05-15

    The performance of the European Union's Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) to date cannot be evaluated without recognizing that the first three years from 2005 through 2007 constituted a 'trial' period and understanding what this trial period was supposed to accomplish. Its primary goal was to develop the infrastructure and to provide the experience that would enable the successful use of a cap-and-trade system to limit European GHG emissions during a second trading period, 2008-12, corresponding to the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol. The trial period was a rehearsal for the later more serious engagement and it was never intended to achieve significant reductions in CO{sub 2} emissions in only three years. In light of the speed with which the program was developed, the many sovereign countries involved, the need to develop the necessary data, information dissemination, compliance and market institutions, and the lack of extensive experience with emissions trading in Europe, we think that the system has performed surprisingly well. Although there have been plenty of rough edges, a transparent and widely accepted price for tradable CO{sub 2} emission allowances emerged by January 1, 2005, a functioning market for allowances has developed quickly and effortlessly without any prodding by the Commission or member state governments, the cap-and-trade infrastructure of market institutions, registries, monitoring, reporting and verification is in place, and a significant segment of European industry is incorporating the price of CO{sub 2} emissions into their daily production decisions. The development of the EU ETS and the experience with the trial period provides a number of useful lessons for the U.S. and other countries. 27 refs., 7 figs., 5 tabs.

  10. A Brief Review of the Basis for, and the Procedures Currently Utilized in, Gross Gamma-Ray Log Calibration (October 1976)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    A Brief Review of the Basis for, and the Procedures Currently Utilized in, Gross Gamma-Ray Log Calibration (October 1976)

  11. July 17, 2008; HSS/Union Working Group Meeting, Safety Standards, 10 CFR 851 … Meeting Summary

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    10 CFR 851 and DOE Safety Standards Implementation July 17, 2008 Integrated Executive Summary and Final Action List HSS and the labor unions who participated in the initial 2007 HSS Focus Group meetings agreed to a path forward in which various unions combined to form core working groups to address union identified health and safety issues by topical area. The following is an overview of actions/activities identified in the July 17 HSS/Union meeting to address 851 Rule and DOE Safety Standards

  12. Failure of the gross theory of beta decay in neutron deficient nuclei

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Firestone, R. B.; Schwengner, R.; Zuber, K.

    2015-05-28

    The neutron deficient isotopes 117-121Xe, 117-124Cs, and 122-124Ba were produced by a beam of 28Si from the LBNL SuperHILAC on a target of natMo. The isotopes were mass separated and their beta decay schemes were measured with a Total Absorption Spectrometer (TAS). The beta strengths derived from these data decreased dramatically to levels above ?1 MeV for the even-even decays; 3–4 MeV for even-Z, odd-N decays; 4–5 MeV for the odd-Z, even-N decays; and 7–8 MeV for the odd-Z, odd-N decays. The decreasing strength to higher excitation energies in the daughters contradicts the predictions of the Gross Theory of Beta Decay. The integrated beta strengths are instead found to be consistent with shell model predictions where the single-particle beta strengths are divided amoung many low-lying levels. The experimental beta strengths determined here have been used calculate the half-lives of 143 neutron deficient nuclei with Z=51–64 to a precision of 20% with respect to the measured values.

  13. Weak decay processes in pre-supernova core evolution within the gross theory

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ferreira, R. C.; Dimarco, A. J.; Samana, A. R.; Barbero, C. A.

    2014-03-20

    The beta decay and electron capture rates are of fundamental importance in the evolution of massive stars in a pre-supernova core. The beta decay process gives its contribution by emitting electrons in the plasma of the stellar core, thereby increasing pressure, which in turn increases the temperature. From the other side, the electron capture removes free electrons from the plasma of the star core contributing to the reduction of pressure and temperature. In this work we calculate the beta decay and electron capture rates in stellar conditions for 63 nuclei of relevance in the pre-supernova stage, employing Gross Theory as the nuclear model. We use the abundances calculated with the Saha equations in the hypothesis of nuclear statistical equilibrium to evaluate the time derivative of the fraction of electrons. Our results are compared with other evaluations available in the literature. They have shown to be one order less or equal than the calculated within other models. Our results indicate that these differences may influence the evolution of the star in the later stages of pre-supernova.

  14. Other States Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Gas Wells (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Gas Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Other States Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Gas Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 72,328 63,451 67,732 63,118 62,276 59,557 61,217 60,722 59,142 65,119 67,627 70,643 1992 66,374 62,007 65,284 63,487 63,488 60,701 62,949 63,036 61,442 66,259 65,974 68,514 1993 66,943 61,161 64,007 60,709 61,964 63,278 60,746 62,204 59,969 64,103 63,410 70,929 1994 65,551 60,458 63,396 60,438 60,965 61,963 60,675 62,160

  15. Other States Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet) Other States Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 13,204 11,926 13,204 12,778 13,204 12,778 13,204 13,204 12,778 13,204 12,778 13,204 2008 12,755 11,932 12,755 12,343 12,755 12,343 12,755 12,755 12,343 12,755 12,343 12,755 2009 12,222 11,039 12,222 11,827 12,222 11,827 12,222 12,222 11,827 12,222 11,827 12,222 2010 11,842 10,659 11,705 11,180 11,541 11,189 11,357 11,589

  16. Failure of the gross theory of beta decay in neutron deficient nuclei

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

    Firestone, R. B.; Schwengner, R.; Zuber, K.

    2015-05-28

    The neutron deficient isotopes 117-121Xe, 117-124Cs, and 122-124Ba were produced by a beam of 28Si from the LBNL SuperHILAC on a target of natMo. The isotopes were mass separated and their beta decay schemes were measured with a Total Absorption Spectrometer (TAS). The beta strengths derived from these data decreased dramatically to levels above ≈1 MeV for the even-even decays; 3–4 MeV for even-Z, odd-N decays; 4–5 MeV for the odd-Z, even-N decays; and 7–8 MeV for the odd-Z, odd-N decays. The decreasing strength to higher excitation energies in the daughters contradicts the predictions of the Gross Theory of Betamore » Decay. The integrated beta strengths are instead found to be consistent with shell model predictions where the single-particle beta strengths are divided amoung many low-lying levels. The experimental beta strengths determined here have been used calculate the half-lives of 143 neutron deficient nuclei with Z=51–64 to a precision of 20% with respect to the measured values.« less

  17. Join @Energy for the 2015 State of the Union Address | Department of Energy

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

    us for live coverage of the State of the Union, starting at 9PM ET. | Image courtesy of Sarah Gerrity. Join us for live coverage of the State of the Union, starting at 9PM ET. | Image courtesy of Sarah Gerrity. Pat Adams Pat Adams Digital Content Specialist, Office of Public Affairs How can I participate? Follow along with @Energy on Twitter Starting at 9 p.m. ET tonight. Ask questions and share your thoughts by tweeting at @Energy using #SOTU. Tune in tomorrow at 1 p.m. ET for Big Block of

  18. Innovation and Energy at the State Of The Union | Department of Energy

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

    President Obama will deliver the State of the Union to Congress & to the American people tonight at 9pm ET. | Official White House Photo by Chuck Kennedy. President Obama will deliver the State of the Union to Congress & to the American people tonight at 9pm ET. | Official White House Photo by Chuck Kennedy. April Saylor April Saylor Former Digital Outreach Strategist, Office of Public Affairs How can I participate? President Obama will address the nation Tuesday, Feb. 12 at 9pm EST Tune

  19. July 17, 2008; HSS/Union Working Group Meeting, Safety Standards, 10 CFR 851 - Information Package

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    10 CFR 851 / Safety Standards July 17, 2008 July 17, 2008 ds 06-24-08 Draft HSS/Union Working Group Meeting July 17, 2008 1:00 - 4:00 pm EST FORS 7E-069 Call-in: 301-903-9197 SUBJECT: SAFETY STANDARDS / 10 CFR 851 Core Union Working Groups Safety Standards: Metal Trades Department AFL-CIO - Lead International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Operative Plasterers' & Cement Masons' International Association (OPCMIA) 10 CFR 851: United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing,

  20. DOE - Office of Legacy Management -- Union Mines Development Corp - NY 0-22

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Mines Development Corp - NY 0-22 FUSRAP Considered Sites Site: UNION MINES DEVELOPMENT CORP. (NY.0-22) Eliminated from consideration under FUSRAP Designated Name: Not Designated Alternate Name: Union Carbide NY.0-22-1 Location: New York , New York NY.0-22-1 Evaluation Year: 1987 NY.0-22-1 Site Operations: The company owned uranium mines or reserves located in the western U.S. NY.0-22-1 Site Disposition: Eliminated - No reason to believe radioactive material was used at this site NY.0-22-1

  1. September 8, 2011, HSS/Union Focus Group Work Group Telecom - Agenda

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Focus Group HSS/Union Work Group Telecom September 8, 2011 Call-In: 301-903-0620 PROPOSED AGENDA Work Group Framework 3:00 - 4:00 pm EST Introductory Remarks...................................................Glenn Podonsky Meeting Purpose/Process..........................................Mari-Jo Campagnone Group Discussion Facilitation...............................................Pete Stafford Discussion...................................................................................All (1)

  2. September 16, 2008; HSS/Union Working Group Meeting, Former Worker and Energy Compensation Programs, CAIRS Reporting, Central Worker Data Tracking … Meeting Summary

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    7 10-10-08 Draft HSS/Union Meeting To Address Former Worker and Energy Employee Occupational Illness Compensation Programs, CAIRS Reporting, and Central Worker Data Tracking September 16, 2008 Integrated Executive Summary and Final Action List Background: HSS and the labor unions who participated in the initial 2007 HSS Focus Group meetings agreed to a path forward in which various unions combined to form core working groups to address union identified health and safety issues by topical area.

  3. Short-Term Energy Tests of a Credit Union Building in Idaho (Draft)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Subbarao, K.; Balcomb, J. D.

    1993-01-01

    This report describes tests and results of the energy performance of a credit union building in Idaho. The building is in the Energy Edge Program administered by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA). BPA provided incentives to incorporate innovative features designed to conserve energy use by the building. It is of interest to determine the actual performance of these features. The objective of this project was to evaluate the applicability of the SERI short-term energy monitoring (STEM) method to nonresidential buildings.

  4. #SOTU Roundup: Energy Highlights from the 2014 State of the Union |

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

    Department of Energy On January 28, 2014, President Obama delivered his fifth State of the Union address at the U.S. Capitol Building. Above, check out the energy and climate change highlights from the speech. | Video compilation by Matty Greene, Energy Department. Marissa Newhall Marissa Newhall Director of Digital Strategy & Communications #SOTU 2014 Learn how the Energy Department is fighting climate change and growing the clean energy economy. Energy topics featured prominently in

  5. Visit us at the American Geophysical Union (AGU) Fall Meeting, Booth#1211 |

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

    Dec 14-18th us at the American Geophysical Union (AGU) Fall Meeting, Booth#1211 | Dec 14-18th - Sandia Energy Energy Search Icon Sandia Home Locations Contact Us Employee Locator Energy & Climate Secure & Sustainable Energy Future Stationary Power Energy Conversion Efficiency Solar Energy Wind Energy Water Power Supercritical CO2 Geothermal Natural Gas Safety, Security & Resilience of the Energy Infrastructure Energy Storage Nuclear Power & Engineering Grid Modernization

  6. SF6432-NI Fixed Price Contracts with the Newly Independent States of the Former Soviet Union

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

    Department Release Date: 11/17/15 Page 1 of 15 Printed copies of this document are uncontrolled. Retrieve latest version electronically. SANDIA CORPORATION SF 6432-NI (11/2015) SECTION II STANDARD TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR FIXED PRICE CONTRACTS WITH THE NEWLY INDEPENDENT STATES OF THE FORMER SOVIET UNION THE FOLLOWING CLAUSES APPLY TO REQUESTS FOR QUOTATION AND CONTRACTS AS INDICATED UNLESS SPECIFICALLY DELETED, OR EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT THEY ARE SPECIFICALLY SUPPLEMENTED OR AMENDED IN WRITING IN

  7. SF6432-NI Fixed Price Contracts with the Newly Independent States of the Former Soviet Union

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

    NI (04/2015) SECTION II STANDARD TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR FIXED PRICE CONTRACTS WITH THE NEWLY INDEPENDENT STATES OF THE FORMER SOVIET UNION THE FOLLOWING CLAUSES APPLY TO REQUESTS FOR QUOTATION AND CONTRACTS AS INDICATED UNLESS SPECIFICALLY DELETED, OR EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT THEY ARE SPECIFICALLY SUPPLEMENTED OR AMENDED IN WRITING IN THE SIGNATURE PAGE OR SECTION I. (CTRL+CLICK ON A LINK BELOW TO ADVANCE DIRECTLY TO THAT SECTION) ACCEPTANCE OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS APPLICABLE LAW ASSIGNMENT

  8. I' I OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY OPERATED B Y UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    / I' I OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY OPERATED B Y UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION NUCLEAR DIVISION POST OFFICE BOK X OAK RIDGE, TENNESSEE 37830 August 21, 1979 Department of Energy, Oak Ridge Operations Attention: E. L. Keller, Director for Technical Services Division Post Office Box E Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Gentlemen: Formerly Utilized Site-Remedial Action Program - Post Decontamination Radiological Survey of a portion of the Former Kellex Laboratory Site, Jersey City, New Jersey Decontamination

  9. November 17, 2009 HSS/Union Lead Checkpoint Meeting - Integrated Collaborative Oversight Concept

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Collaborative Oversight (ICO) Concept Evolution - Emerged from Insights HSS Gained through: * Laboratory Sustainability Pilot Studies * Visiting Speaker Program * Union Focus Group Meetings ICO Concept Overview * Goals - Transition DOE into a better balance between oversight and reliable mission execution as a first step toward 21 st century governance - Maintain the health, safety, and security of DOE site workers and facilities - Create a highly competent process through inclusion *

  10. November 17, 2009 HSS/Union Lead Checkpoint Meeting on Integrated Collaborative Oversight - Agenda

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    10:30 - 11:30 pm EST FORS 7E-069 Union Leads: Ron Ault.................. ............... AFL-CIO Metal Trades Department Pete Stafford................................Building and Construction Trades Department Center for Construction Research & Training (BCTD CPWR) Chico McGill/Dennis Phelps...........International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers [IBEW] Tommy Fuller............................Sheet Metal Workers International Association [SMWIA] James Frederick/Doug Stephens........United

  11. DOE - Office of Legacy Management -- Union Carbide and Carbon Co - TN 10

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Carbide and Carbon Co - TN 10 FUSRAP Considered Sites Site: Union Carbide and Carbon Co (TN.10) Designated Name: Alternate Name: Location: Evaluation Year: Site Operations: Site Disposition: Radioactive Materials Handled: Primary Radioactive Materials Handled: Radiological Survey(s): Site Status: This site is one of a group of 5 FUSRAP considered sites for which records are available that provide a reasonably complete historical account of their operations and relationship, if any, with MED/AEC

  12. OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY OPER*TEO BY UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    ~$ ., . .Y.' ~. : ' : ,,, OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY OPER*TEO BY UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION NUCLEAR DIVISION ' . ' : .m POST OFFICE BOX X OAK RIDGE, TENNESSEE ,X,0 ,. June 20, 1980 .~ ,, M r. Arthur J. 'Whitman Environmental and Safety 'Engineering Division U.S. Department of Energy ,) Washington, Oit. 20545 ., Dear Art: Soil Sample Analysis, City of Woburn Landfill, Woburn, Massachusetts ,,During a.radiological survey of the old.and new city of Woburn landfills (i-e: trip report.to Woburn,

  13. May 19, 2011, HSS/Union Focus Group Meeting - Draft Work Group Matrix

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    06-22-11) WORK GROUPS HSS/ Union/ Stakeholder Leads Work Group Participants Improvement Issues/Goals Initial/Current Tasks Outputs 10 CFR 851 Pat Worthington CPWR USW Collectively work to ensure implementation of health and safety programs (851 Rule) within and among DOE site contractors to eliminate/minimize inconsistent requirements among M&I, M&O, LLC and SBA contractors/subcontractors. - Identify leads and participants - Develop charter - Goals/ Intended Output - Develop Task

  14. Marriage or Civil Unions for Single Cells and Metagenomics (Metagenomics Informatics Challenges Workshop: 10K Genomes at a Time)

    ScienceCinema (OSTI)

    Rusch, Doug [J. Craig Venter Institute

    2013-01-22

    JCVI's Doug Rusch on "Marriage or Civil Unions for Single Cells and Metagenomes" at the Metagenomics Informatics Challenges Workshop held at the DOE JGI on October 12-13, 2011.

  15. In Charlotte, Senior DOE Official to Amplify State of the Union, Call to Give Drivers More Options at the Pump

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Dr. David Danielson will join officials from NASCAR and Sprint Corp. in Charlotte, N.C., to highlight the President’s State of the Union address

  16. Simulation of gross and net erosion of high-Z materials in the DIII-D divertor

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

    Wampler, William R.; Ding, R.; Stangeby, P. C.; Elder, J. D.; Tskhakaya, D.; Kirschner, A.; Guo, H. Y.; Chan, V. S.; McLean, A. G.; Snyder, P. B.; et al

    2015-12-17

    The three-dimensional Monte Carlo code ERO has been used to simulate dedicated DIII-D experiments in which Mo and W samples with different sizes were exposed to controlled and well-diagnosed divertor plasma conditions to measure the gross and net erosion rates. Experimentally, the net erosion rate is significantly reduced due to the high local redeposition probability of eroded high-Z materials, which according to the modelling is mainly controlled by the electric field and plasma density within the Chodura sheath. Similar redeposition ratios were obtained from ERO modelling with three different sheath models for small angles between the magnetic field and themore » material surface, mainly because of their similar mean ionization lengths. The modelled redeposition ratios are close to the measured value. Decreasing the potential drop across the sheath can suppress both gross and net erosion because sputtering yield is decreased due to lower incident energy while the redeposition ratio is not reduced owing to the higher electron density in the Chodura sheath. Taking into account material mixing in the ERO surface model, the net erosion rate of high-Z materials is shown to be strongly dependent on the carbon impurity concentration in the background plasma; higher carbon concentration can suppress net erosion. As a result, the principal experimental results such as net erosion rate and profile and redeposition ratio are well reproduced by the ERO simulations.« less

  17. President Obama Talks Energy at the State of the Union 2013 | Department of

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

    Energy Obama speaks about energy independence, climate change, and investing in renewable energy and technology during the State of the Union on February 12, 2013. Amanda Scott Amanda Scott Former Managing Editor, Energy.gov How can I participate? Got questions about the energy section of last night's speech? Head to WhiteHouse.gov to dig in to speech line-by-line and respond. You can also ask question today at 4pm ET. Visit WhiteHouse.gov/live to chat with Heather Zichal, the Deputy

  18. Chapter 12, Survey Design and Implementation Cross-Cutting Protocols for Estimating Gross Savings: The Uniform Methods Project: Methods for Determining Energy Efficiency Savings for Specific Measures

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

    12: Survey Design and Implementation Cross-Cutting Protocols for Estimating Gross Savings Robert Baumgartner, Tetra Tech Subcontract Report NREL/SR-7A30-53827 April 2013 The Uniform Methods Project: Methods for Determining Energy Efficiency Savings for Specific Measures 12 - 1 Chapter 12 - Table of Contents 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 2 2 The Total Survey Error Framework

  19. How Science, Innovation, and Mikayla Nelson are Changing the State of Our Union

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The faces of America’s future success in science and engineering are everywhere. She might be the friendly employee at a neighborhood store... or be seated with the First Lady at the State of the Union. In the case of Mikayla Nelson, she’s both. Last night, the high school freshman from Billings, Montana was seated next to the First Lady. Mikayla earned her place there – as well as personal recognition from the President – by leading her team to a first place finish at the Department of Energy’s National Science Bowl for the design document of their solar car. During her visit to D.C., Mikayla came by the Department's headquarters and met with Secretary Steven Chu and Director of Science Bill Brinkman. She also answered a few questions about her experiences and inspirations.

  20. Sensitivity of Global Terrestrial Gross Primary Production to Hydrologic States Simulated by the Community Land Model Using Two Runoff Parameterizations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lei, Huimin; Huang, Maoyi; Leung, Lai-Yung R.; Yang, Dawen; Shi, Xiaoying; Mao, Jiafu; Hayes, Daniel J.; Schwalm, C.; Wei, Yaxing; Liu, Shishi

    2014-09-01

    The terrestrial water and carbon cycles interact strongly at various spatio-temporal scales. To elucidate how hydrologic processes may influence carbon cycle processes, differences in terrestrial carbon cycle simulations induced by structural differences in two runoff generation schemes were investigated using the Community Land Model 4 (CLM4). Simulations were performed with runoff generation using the default TOPMODEL-based and the Variable Infiltration Capacity (VIC) model approaches under the same experimental protocol. The comparisons showed that differences in the simulated gross primary production (GPP) are mainly attributed to differences in the simulated leaf area index (LAI) rather than soil moisture availability. More specifically, differences in runoff simulations can influence LAI through changes in soil moisture, soil temperature, and their seasonality that affect the onset of the growing season and the subsequent dynamic feedbacks between terrestrial water, energy, and carbon cycles. As a result of a relative difference of 36% in global mean total runoff between the two models and subsequent changes in soil moisture, soil temperature, and LAI, the simulated global mean GPP differs by 20.4%. However, the relative difference in the global mean net ecosystem exchange between the two models is small (2.1%) due to competing effects on total mean ecosystem respiration and other fluxes, although large regional differences can still be found. Our study highlights the significant interactions among the water, energy, and carbon cycles and the need for reducing uncertainty in the hydrologic parameterization of land surface models to better constrain carbon cycle modeling.

  1. Fixed conditions for achieving the real-valued partition function of one-dimensional Gross-Pitaevskii equation coupled with time-dependent potential

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Prayitno, T. B.

    2014-03-24

    We have imposed the conditions in order to preserve the real-valued partition function in the case of onedimensional Gross-Pitaevskii equation coupled by time-dependent potential. In this case we have solved the Gross-Pitaevskii equation by means of the time-dependent perturbation theory by extending the previous work of Kivshar et al. [Phys. Lett A 278, 225–230 (2001)]. To use the method, we have treated the equation as the macroscopic quantum oscillator and found that the expression of the partition function explicitly has complex values. In fact, we have to choose not only the appropriate functions but also the suitable several values of the potential to keep the real-valued partition function.

  2. What is Gross Up?

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

    reimbursement amount. You do not see the money in your pocket, but rather it offsets taxes that would have reduced the payment if we had not paid you the additional amount. For...

  3. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet Monthly-Million Cubic Feet per Day Annual-Million Cubic Feet Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes...

  4. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals

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

    Alaska 221,340 204,073 261,150 279,434 289,770 304,048 1991-2015 Arkansas 85,763 83,954 81,546 83,309 79,278 80,492 1991-2015 California 19,225 19,655 18,928 18,868 18,266 18,868 ...

  5. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Period-Unit: Monthly-Million Cubic Feet Monthly-Million Cubic Feet per Day Annual-Million Cubic Feet Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 View History U.S. 2,767,207 2,765,998 2,750,252 2,817,792 2,740,123 2,822,700 1973-2015 Alaska 221,340 204,073 261,150 279,434 289,770 304,048 1991-2015 Arkansas 85,763 83,954 81,546 83,309 79,278 80,492

  6. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History U.S. 26,816,085 28,479,026 29,542,313 29,522,551 31,345,546 32,960,531 1936-2015 U.S. Offshore 2,875,945 2,416,644 2,044,643 1,859,469 1,818,267 1977-2014 U.S. State Offshore 575,601 549,151 489,505 505,318 514,809 1978-2014 Federal Offshore U.S. 2,300,344 1,867,492 1,555,138 1,354,151 1,303,458 1977-2014 Alaska 3,197,100 3,162,922 3,164,791 3,215,358 3,168,566 3,175,163 1967-2015 Alaska Onshore 2,826,952 2,798,220 2,857,485 2,882,956 2,803,429

  7. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Monthly-Million Cubic Feet per Day Annual-Million Cubic Feet Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History U.S. 26,816,085 28,479,026 29,542,313 29,522,551 31,345,546 32,960,531 1936-2015 U.S. Offshore 2,875,945 2,416,644 2,044,643 1,859,469 1,818,267 1977-2014 U.S. State Offshore 575,601 549,151 489,505 505,318 514,809 1978-2014 Federal Offshore U.S.

  8. Sofia Mancheno-Gross

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Sofia specializes in Communications strategies on behalf of the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.

  9. United States-assisted studies on dose reconstruction in the former Soviet Union

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Anspaugh, L.R.; Bouville, A.

    1995-12-01

    Following the Chernobyl accident, the US and the USSR entered into an agreement to work on the safety of civilian nuclear reactors; one aspect of that work was to study the environmental transport and health effects of radionuclides released by the accident. After the break-up of the USSR separate agreements were established between the US and Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia to continue work on dose reconstruction and epidemiologic studies of health effects from exposure to external radiation and the incorporation of radionuclides. Studies in Belarus and Ukraine related to the Chernobyl accident now emphasize epidemiologic: studies of childhood-thyroid cancer and leukemia, and eye-lens-cataract formation in liquidators. Supporting studies on dose reconstruction emphasize a variety of ecological, physical, and biological techniques. Studies being conducted in Russia currently emphasize health effects in the workers and the population around the Mayak Industrial Association. As this production complex is an analogue of the US Hanford Works, advantage is being taken of the US experience in conducting a similar, recently completed dose-reconstruction study. In all cases the primary work on dose reconstruction is being performed by scientists from the former Soviet Union. US assistance is in the form of expert consultation and participation, exchange visits, provision of supplies and equipment, and other forms of local assistance.

  10. Wind Technology, Cost, and Performance Trends in Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Norway, the European Union, and the United States: 2007 - 2012; NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hand, Maureen

    2015-06-15

    This presentation provides a summary of IEA Wind Task 26 report on Wind Technology, Cost, and Performance Trends in Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Norway, the European Union, and the United States: 2007-2012

  11. In Texas, Energy Sec. Moniz to Echo President’s State of the Union Call to Foster Advanced Manufacturing and Innovation

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz will travel to Austin and San Antonio, Texas to highlight the President’s State of the Union Address and the Administration’s efforts to foster innovation and advanced manufacturing

  12. September 16, 2008; HSS/Union Working Group Meeting, Former Worker and Energy Compensation Programs, CAIRS Reporting, Central Worker Data Tracking - Information Package

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    DOE Former Worker/Energy Compensation CAIRS Central Worker Data Tracking September 16, 2008 September 16, 2008 CAIRS Central Worker Data Tracking September 16, 2008 n The information contained in this package is intended to be reference materials pertaining to the September 16, 2008 HSS/Union working group meeting. The informational pieces have been retrieved from the Internet or submitted by HSS and Union representatives for inclusion in the package, and does not necessarily reflect the view,

  13. A Continuous Measure of Gross Primary Production for the Conterminous U.S. Derived from MODIS and AmeriFlux Data

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Xia, Jingfeng; Zhuang, Qianlai; Law, Beverly E.; Chen, Jiquan; Baldocchi, Dennis D.; Cook, David R.; Oren, Ram; Richardson, Andrew D.; Wharton, Sonia; Ma, Siyan; Martin, Timothy A.; Verma, Shashi B.; Suyker, Andrew E.; Scott, Russell L.; Monson, Russell K.; Litvak, Marcy; Hollinger, David Y.; Sun, Ge; Davis, Kenneth J.; Bolstad, Paul V.; Burns, Sean P.; Curtis, Peter S.; Drake, Bert G.; Falk, Matthias; Fischer, Marc L.; Foster, David R.; Gu, Lianhong; Hadley, Julian L.; Katul, Gabriel G.; Matamala, Roser; McNulty, Steve; Meyers, Tilden P.; Munger, J. William; Noormets, Asko; Oechel, Walter C.; U, Kyaw Tha Paw; Schmid, Hans Peter; Starr, Gregory; Torn, Margaret S.; Wofsy, Steven C.

    2009-01-28

    The quantification of carbon fluxes between the terrestrial biosphere and the atmosphere is of scientific importance and also relevant to climate-policy making. Eddy covariance flux towers provide continuous measurements of ecosystem-level exchange of carbon dioxide spanning diurnal, synoptic, seasonal, and interannual time scales. However, these measurements only represent the fluxes at the scale of the tower footprint. Here we used remotely-sensed data from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) to upscale gross primary productivity (GPP) data from eddy covariance flux towers to the continental scale. We first combined GPP and MODIS data for 42 AmeriFlux towers encompassing a wide range of ecosystem and climate types to develop a predictive GPP model using a regression tree approach. The predictive model was trained using observed GPP over the period 2000-2004, and was validated using observed GPP over the period 2005-2006 and leave-one-out cross-validation. Our model predicted GPP fairly well at the site level. We then used the model to estimate GPP for each 1 km x 1 km cell across the U.S. for each 8-day interval over the period from February 2000 to December 2006 using MODIS data. Our GPP estimates provide a spatially and temporally continuous measure of gross primary production for the U.S. that is a highly constrained by eddy covariance flux data. Our study demonstrated that our empirical approach is effective for upscaling eddy flux GPP data to the continental scale and producing continuous GPP estimates across multiple biomes. With these estimates, we then examined the patterns, magnitude, and interannual variability of GPP. We estimated a gross carbon uptake between 6.91 and 7.33 Pg C yr{sup -1} for the conterminous U.S. Drought, fires, and hurricanes reduced annual GPP at regional scales and could have a significant impact on the U.S. net ecosystem carbon exchange. The sources of the interannual variability of U.S. GPP were dominated by these extreme climate events and disturbances.

  14. R A N K I N G S U.S. Energy Information Administration | State Energy Data 2013: Consumption

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7 Table C12. Total Energy Consumption Estimates, Real Gross Domestic Product (GDP), Energy Consumption Estimates per Real Dollar of GDP, Ranked by State, 2013 Rank Total Energy Consumption Real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Energy Consumption per Real Dollar of GDP State Trillion Btu State Billion Chained (2009) Dollars State Thousand Btu per Chained (2009) Dollar 1 Texas 12,944.1 California 2,055.2 Louisiana 18.1 2 California 7,684.1 Texas 1,395.4 Wyoming 15.0 3 Florida 4,077.9 New York 1,248.4

  15. at American Geophysical Union

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

    are often associated with environments that provide excellent support for microbial life. Because of this, the science team agreed to make a rare backtrack to investigate it...

  16. IEA Wind Task 26. Wind Technology, Cost, and Performance Trends in Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Norway, the European Union, and the United States: 2007–2012

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Vitina, Aisma; LĂŒers, Silke; Wallasch, Anna-Kathrin; Berkhout, Volker; Duffy, Aidan; Cleary, Brendan; HusabĂž, Lief I.; Weir, David E.; Lacal-ArĂĄntegui, Roberto; Hand, Maureen; Lantz, Eric; Belyeu, Kathy; Wiser, Ryan H; Bolinger, Mark; Hoen, Ben

    2015-06-01

    The International Energy Agency Implementing Agreement for cooperation in Research, Development, and Deployment of Wind Energy Systems (IEA Wind) Task 26—The Cost of Wind Energy represents an international collaboration dedicated to exploring past, present and future cost of wind energy. This report provides an overview of recent trends in wind plant technology, cost, and performance in those countries that are currently represented by participating organizations in IEA Wind Task 26: Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Norway, and the United States as well as the European Union.

  17. Target Allocation Methodology for China's Provinces: Energy Intensity in the 12th FIve-Year Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ohshita, Stephanie; Price, Lynn

    2011-03-21

    Experience with China's 20% energy intensity improvement target during the 11th Five-Year Plan (FYP) (2006-2010) has shown the challenges of rapidly setting targets and implementing measures to meet them. For the 12th FYP (2011-2015), there is an urgent need for a more scientific methodology to allocate targets among the provinces and to track physical and economic indicators of energy and carbon saving progress. This report provides a sectoral methodology for allocating a national energy intensity target - expressed as percent change in energy per unit gross domestic product (GDP) - among China's provinces in the 12th FYP. Drawing on international experience - especially the European Union (EU) Triptych approach for allocating Kyoto carbon targets among EU member states - the methodology here makes important modifications to the EU approach to address an energy intensity rather than a CO{sub 2} emissions target, and for the wider variation in provincial energy and economic structure in China. The methodology combines top-down national target projections and bottom-up provincial and sectoral projections of energy and GDP to determine target allocation of energy intensity targets. Total primary energy consumption is separated into three end-use sectors - industrial, residential, and other energy. Sectoral indicators are used to differentiate the potential for energy saving among the provinces. This sectoral methodology is utilized to allocate provincial-level targets for a national target of 20% energy intensity improvement during the 12th FYP; the official target is determined by the National Development and Reform Commission. Energy and GDP projections used in the allocations were compared with other models, and several allocation scenarios were run to test sensitivity. The resulting allocations for the 12th FYP offer insight on past performance and offer somewhat different distributions of provincial targets compared to the 11th FYP. Recommendations for reporting and monitoring progress on the targets, and methodology improvements, are included.

  18. Allocation of resources in the Soviet Union and China - 1985. Hearing before the Subcommittee on Economic Resources, Competitiveness, and Security Economics of the Joint Economic Committee, Congress of the United States, Ninety-Ninth Congress, Second Session, March 19, 1986

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1986-01-01

    Part II of the hearing record covers a March 19 Executive session, with statements by Douglas MacEachin of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), submissions for the record by MacEachin and Admiral Robert Schmitt, and supporting documentation. The purpose of the hearings was to examine economic indicators of the Soviet Union and China in the context of military and national security interests. The study and report represent a cooperative effort on the part of the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency. The report focuses on Gorbachev's modernization program, its potential for success, and the military implications if it should fail. The witnesses felt that unlike the Soviets, the Chinese probably understate military expenditures; and the military triangle involving the US, Soviet Union, and China has benefited both the US and China. Submissions for the record make up most of the document.

  19. Total Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Summary)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Pipeline and Distribution Use Price Citygate Price Residential Price Commercial Price Industrial Price Vehicle Fuel Price Electric Power Price Proved Reserves as of 1231 Reserves...

  20. Solar Energy Gross Receipts Tax Deduction

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The seller must have a signed copy of Form RPD-41341 to claim the deduction or other evidence acceptable to EMNRD that the service or equipment was purchased for the sole use of the sale and...

  1. Advanced Energy Gross Receipts Tax Deduction

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    To qualify for the exemption, the owner of a qualified generating facility must first obtain a certificate of eligibility from the Department of Environment. The owner must then present the...

  2. Property:GrossGen | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    B Blundell 1 Geothermal Facility + 213,599 + Blundell 2 Geothermal Facility + 85,633 + G Gumuskoy Geothermal Power Plant + 104,000 + L Las Tres Virgenes Geothermal Plant + 19 +...

  3. Mississippi Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2-2015 Repressuring NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Vented and Flared NA NA NA NA NA NA 1996-2015 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Marketed Production NA NA NA NA NA NA 1989-2015 Dry Production 2006

  4. Missouri Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7-2015 Repressuring NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Vented and Flared NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Marketed Production NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Dry Production 2007

  5. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2002-2015 Alaska NA NA NA NA NA NA 2002-2015 Arkansas NA NA NA NA NA NA 2006-2015 California NA NA NA NA NA NA 2002-2015 Colorado NA NA NA NA NA NA 2002-2015 Federal Offshore Gulf of Mexico NA NA NA NA NA NA 2002-2015 Kansas NA NA NA NA NA NA 2002-2015 Louisiana NA NA NA NA NA NA 2002-2015 Montana NA NA NA NA NA NA 2002-2015 New Mexico NA NA NA NA NA NA 2002-2015 North Dakota NA NA NA NA NA NA 2002-2015 Ohio NA NA NA NA NA NA 2006-2015 Oklahoma NA NA NA NA NA NA 2002-2015 Pennsylvania NA NA NA

  6. Nebraska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Oil Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Shale Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 From Coalbed Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2006-2015 Repressuring NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Vented and Flared NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Marketed Production NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991

  7. Nevada Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

  8. Alabama Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    U.S. Offshore U.S. State Offshore Federal Offshore U.S. Alaska Alaska Onshore Alaska Offshore Alaska State Offshore Arkansas California California Onshore California Offshore California State Offshore Federal Offshore California Colorado Federal Offshore Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore Alabama Federal Offshore Louisiana Federal Offshore Texas Kansas Louisiana Louisiana Onshore Louisiana Offshore Louisiana State Offshore Montana New Mexico North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Pennsylvania Texas Texas

  9. Alabama Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Alaska Arkansas California Colorado Federal Offshore Gulf of Mexico Kansas Louisiana Montana New Mexico North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Pennsylvania Texas Utah West Virginia Wyoming Other States Total Alabama Arizona Florida Illinois Indiana Kentucky Maryland Michigan Mississippi Missouri Nebraska Nevada New York Oregon South Dakota Tennessee Virginia Period-Unit: Monthly-Million Cubic Feet Monthly-Million Cubic Feet per Day Annual-Million Cubic Feet Download Series History Download Series History

  10. Alaska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    U.S. Offshore U.S. State Offshore Federal Offshore U.S. Alaska Alaska Onshore Alaska Offshore Alaska State Offshore Arkansas California California Onshore California Offshore California State Offshore Federal Offshore California Colorado Federal Offshore Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore Alabama Federal Offshore Louisiana Federal Offshore Texas Kansas Louisiana Louisiana Onshore Louisiana Offshore Louisiana State Offshore Montana New Mexico North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Pennsylvania Texas Texas

  11. Alaska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Alaska Arkansas California Colorado Federal Offshore Gulf of Mexico Kansas Louisiana Montana New Mexico North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Pennsylvania Texas Utah West Virginia Wyoming Other States Total Alabama Arizona Florida Illinois Indiana Kentucky Maryland Michigan Mississippi Missouri Nebraska Nevada New York Oregon South Dakota Tennessee Virginia Period-Unit: Monthly-Million Cubic Feet Monthly-Million Cubic Feet per Day Annual-Million Cubic Feet Download Series History Download Series History

  12. Arizona Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    U.S. Offshore U.S. State Offshore Federal Offshore U.S. Alaska Alaska Onshore Alaska Offshore Alaska State Offshore Arkansas California California Onshore California Offshore California State Offshore Federal Offshore California Colorado Federal Offshore Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore Alabama Federal Offshore Louisiana Federal Offshore Texas Kansas Louisiana Louisiana Onshore Louisiana Offshore Louisiana State Offshore Montana New Mexico North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Pennsylvania Texas Texas

  13. Arkansas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    U.S. Offshore U.S. State Offshore Federal Offshore U.S. Alaska Alaska Onshore Alaska Offshore Alaska State Offshore Arkansas California California Onshore California Offshore California State Offshore Federal Offshore California Colorado Federal Offshore Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore Alabama Federal Offshore Louisiana Federal Offshore Texas Kansas Louisiana Louisiana Onshore Louisiana Offshore Louisiana State Offshore Montana New Mexico North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Pennsylvania Texas Texas

  14. Arkansas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Alaska Arkansas California Colorado Federal Offshore Gulf of Mexico Kansas Louisiana Montana New Mexico North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Pennsylvania Texas Utah West Virginia Wyoming Other States Total Alabama Arizona Florida Illinois Indiana Kentucky Maryland Michigan Mississippi Missouri Nebraska Nevada New York Oregon South Dakota Tennessee Virginia Period-Unit: Monthly-Million Cubic Feet Monthly-Million Cubic Feet per Day Annual-Million Cubic Feet Download Series History Download Series History

  15. Indiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

  16. Kentucky Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Oil Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Shale Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 From Coalbed Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2006-2015 Repressuring NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Vented and Flared NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Marketed Production NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991

  17. Maryland Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6-2015 Repressuring NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Vented and Flared NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Marketed Production NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991

  18. Tennessee Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

  19. Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    159,456 166,570 164,270 166,973 161,280 163,799 1991-2015 From Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Oil Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Shale Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA ...

  20. ,"Arizona Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Monthly","122015","1151991" ,"Release Date:","2292016" ,"Next Release Date:","3312016" ,"Excel File Name:","ngprodsumdcsazmmcfm.xls" ,"Available from Web ...

  1. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Oil Wells

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

    1-2015 Illinois NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Indiana NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Kentucky NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Maryland NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Michigan NA NA NA NA NA NA ...

  2. Michigan Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Oil Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Shale Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 From Coalbed ...

  3. Colorado Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    39,822 143,397 138,325 144,845 139,698 141,947 1991-2015 From Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Oil Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Shale Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA ...

  4. ,"Arkansas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    Monthly","122015","1151991" ,"Release Date:","2292016" ,"Next Release Date:","331...14,19600,16058,3542,,,156,21,0,18960 35445,19915,16196,3719,,,208,5,0,19147 ...

  5. Kansas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    24,842 24,864 23,819 23,559 22,371 22,744 1991-2015 From Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Oil Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Shale Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA ...

  6. Arizona Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    NA NA NA NA NA NA 1996-2015 From Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Oil Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Shale Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 From Coalbed ...

  7. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Gas Wells

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

    6-2015 Illinois NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Indiana NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Kentucky NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Maryland NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Michigan NA NA NA NA NA NA ...

  8. Florida Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    6-2015 From Oil Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Shale Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 From Coalbed Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2002-2015 Repressuring NA NA NA NA NA NA ...

  9. Montana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    4,941 4,756 4,573 4,827 4,568 4,681 1991-2015 From Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Oil Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Shale Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 ...

  10. California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    9,225 19,655 18,928 18,868 18,266 18,868 1991-2015 From Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Oil Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Shale Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA ...

  11. Illinois Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Shale Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 From Coalbed Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2006-2015 Repressuring NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Vented and ...

  12. Monthly Natural Gas Gross Production Report

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

  13. Michigan Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    159,400 136,782 143,826 129,333 123,622 114,946 1967-2014 From Gas Wells 20,867 7,345 18,470 17,041 17,502 13,799 1967-2014 From Oil Wells 12,919 9,453 11,620 4,470 4,912 5,507 1967-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 125,614 119,984 113,736 107,822 101,208 95,640 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002-2014 Repressuring 2,340 2,340 2,340 0 NA NA 1967-2014 Vented and Flared 3,324 3,324 3,324 0 NA NA 1967-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996-2014 Marketed Production 153,736 131,118

  14. Mississippi Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    352,888 401,660 443,351 452,915 59,272 54,440 1967-2014 From Gas Wells 337,168 387,026 429,829 404,457 47,385 43,091 1967-2014 From Oil Wells 8,934 8,714 8,159 43,421 7,256 7,150 1967-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 6,785 5,921 5,363 5,036 4,630 4,199 2002-2014 Repressuring 3,039 3,480 3,788 0 NA NA 1967-2014 Vented and Flared 7,875 8,685 9,593 0 NA NA 1967-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 253,817 315,775 348,482 389,072 0 0 1980-2014 Marketed Production

  15. Missouri Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    NA NA NA NA 9 9 1967-2014 From Gas Wells NA NA NA NA 8 8 1967-2014 From Oil Wells NA NA NA NA 1 * 2007-2014 From Shale Gas Wells NA NA NA NA 0 0 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells NA NA NA NA 0 0 2007-2014 Repressuring NA NA NA NA 0 0 2007-2014 Vented and Flared NA NA NA NA 0 0 2007-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed NA NA NA NA 0 0 2007-2014 Marketed Production NA NA NA NA 9 9 1967-2014 Dry Production NA NA NA NA 9 9

  16. Montana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    93,266 79,506 66,954 63,242 59,930 57,296 1967-2015 From Gas Wells 51,117 37,937 27,518 19,831 11,796 1967-2014 From Oil Wells 19,292 21,777 20,085 23,152 23,479 1967-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 12,937 13,101 15,619 18,636 18,890 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 9,920 6,691 3,731 1,623 5,766 2002-2014 Repressuring 5 4 0 NA NA 1967-2014 Vented and Flared 5,722 4,878 0 NA NA 1967-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed NA NA 0 NA NA 1996-2014 Marketed Production 87,539 74,624 66,954 63,242 59,930 57,296

  17. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells

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

    2,010,171 1,916,762 1,779,055 1,539,395 1,425,783 1,285,189 2002-2014 Alaska 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002-2014 Alaska Onshore 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007-2014 Arkansas 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 California 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002-2014 Colorado 544,215 529,891 514,531 376,543 449,281 419,132 2002-2014 Federal Offshore Gulf of Mexico 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002-2014 Kansas 43,661 38,869 35,924 31,689 28,244 25,365 2002-2014 Louisiana 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002-2014 Louisiana Onshore 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007-2014 Montana 12,376 9,920 6,691 3,731 1,623 5,766

  18. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Gas Wells

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

    14,414,287 13,247,498 12,291,070 12,504,227 10,759,545 10,384,119 1967-2014 U.S. State Offshore 259,848 234,236 208,970 204,667 186,887 159,337 1978-2014 Federal Offshore U.S. 1,878,928 1,701,665 1,355,489 1,028,474 831,636 720,400 1977-2014 Alaska 137,639 127,417 112,268 107,873 91,686 104,219 1967-2014 Alaska Onshore 96,685 85,383 76,066 74,998 64,537 81,565 1992-2014 Alaska State Offshore 40,954 42,034 36,202 32,875 27,149 22,654 1978-2014 Arkansas 164,316 152,108 132,230 121,684 107,666

  19. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Oil Wells

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

    5,674,120 5,834,703 5,907,919 4,965,833 5,404,699 5,922,088 1967-2014 U.S. State Offshore 327,105 341,365 340,182 284,838 318,431 355,472 1978-2014 Federal Offshore U.S. 606,403 598,679 512,003 526,664 522,515 583,058 1977-2014 Alaska 3,174,747 3,069,683 3,050,654 3,056,918 3,123,671 3,064,346 1967-2014 Alaska Onshore 2,858,211 2,741,569 2,722,154 2,782,486 2,818,418 2,721,864 1992-2014 Alaska State Offshore 316,537 328,114 328,500 274,431 305,253 342,482 1978-2014 Arkansas 5,743 5,691 9,291

  20. Nevada Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    4 3 4 3 3 1991-2014 From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 3 2006-2014 From Oil Wells 4 4 3 4 3 * 1991-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 Repressuring 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 Vented and Flared 0 0 0 0 0 0 1991-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 Marketed Production 4 4 3 4 3 3 1991-2014 Dry Production 4 4 3 4 3 3 1991

  1. Ohio Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    78,122 78,858 84,482 166,017 518,767 1,014,600 1967-2015 From Gas Wells 73,459 30,655 65,025 55,583 78,204 1967-2014 From Oil Wells 4,651 45,663 6,684 10,317 13,037 1967-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 11 2,540 12,773 100,117 427,525 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 Repressuring 0 0 0 0 0 1967-2014 Vented and Flared 0 0 0 0 0 1967-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 Marketed Production 78,122 78,858 84,482 166,017 518,767 1,014,600 1967-2015 Dry Production 78,122

  2. Oklahoma Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    1,827,328 1,888,870 2,023,461 1,993,754 2,310,114 2,497,569 1967-2015 From Gas Wells 1,140,111 1,281,794 1,394,859 1,210,315 1,456,519 1967-2014 From Oil Wells 210,492 104,703 53,720 71,515 106,520 1967-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 406,143 449,167 503,329 663,507 706,837 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 70,581 53,206 71,553 48,417 40,238 2002-2014 Repressuring 0 0 0 0 0 1967-2014 Vented and Flared 0 0 0 0 0 1967-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 0 0 0 0 0 1996-2014 Marketed Production 1,827,328

  3. Tennessee Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    5,478 5,144 4,851 5,825 5,400 5,294 1967-2014 From Gas Wells 5,478 5,144 4,851 5,825 5,400 5,294 1967-2014 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 1967-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 Repressuring 0 0 0 0 0 0 1967-2014 Vented and Flared 0 0 0 0 0 0 1967-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 0 0 0 0 0 0 1997-2014 Marketed Production 5,478 5,144 4,851 5,825 5,400 5,294 1967-2014 Dry Production 5,478 4,638 4,335 5,324 4,912 4,912

  4. Texas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    7,593,697 7,934,689 8,143,510 8,299,472 8,663,333 8,765,412 1967-2015 From Gas Wells 4,441,188 3,794,952 3,619,901 3,115,409 2,734,153 1967-2014 From Oil Wells 849,560 1,073,301 860,675 1,166,810 1,520,200 1967-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 2,302,950 3,066,435 3,662,933 4,017,253 4,408,980 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 2002-2014 Repressuring 558,854 502,020 437,367 423,413 452,150 1967-2014 Vented and Flared 39,569 35,248 47,530 76,113 81,755 1967-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 279,981

  5. Utah Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    436,885 461,507 490,393 470,863 453,207 422,353 1967-2015 From Gas Wells 328,135 351,168 402,899 383,216 360,587 1967-2014 From Oil Wells 42,526 49,947 31,440 36,737 44,996 1967-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 1,333 992 1,003 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 66,223 60,392 54,722 49,918 46,622 2002-2014 Repressuring 1,187 1,449 0 NA NA 1967-2014 Vented and Flared 2,080 1,755 0 NA NA 1967-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 1,573 778 0 NA NA 1996-2014 Marketed Production 432,045 457,525 490,393 470,863

  6. Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Oil Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Shale Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 From Coalbed Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2006-2015 Repressuring NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Vented and Flared NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Marketed Production NA NA NA NA NA NA

  7. Texas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    752,341 754,086 731,049 739,603 714,788 720,593 1991-2015 From Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Oil Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Shale Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 From Coalbed Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2002-2015 Repressuring NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Vented and Flared NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Marketed Production 675,828 677,396 656,702 664,386 642,094 647,308

  8. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas

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

    Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 View History Federal Offshore 121,847 124,795 122,038 116,075 103,357 109,286 1997-2015 From Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1997-2015 From Oil Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1997-2015

  9. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas

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

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History U.S. Total Offshore 2,875,945 2,416,644 2,044,643 1,859,469 1,818,267 1977-2014 State Offshore 575,601 549,151 489,505 505,318 514,809 1978-2014 From Gas Wells 234,236 208,970 204,667 186,887 159,337 1978-2014 From Oil Wells 341,365 340,182 284,838 318,431 355,472 1978-2014 Federal Offshore 2,300,344 1,867,492 1,555,138 1,354,151 1,303,458 1977-2014 From Gas Wells 1,701,665 1,355,489 1,028,474 831,636 720,400 1977-2014 From Oil Wells 598,679 512,003

  10. Ohio Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    88,406 87,904 89,371 104,127 104,572 113,096 1991-2015 From Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Oil Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Shale Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 From Coalbed Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2006-2015 Repressuring NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Vented and Flared NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Marketed Production 88,406 87,904 89,371 104,127 104,572 113,096 1991

  11. Oklahoma Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    217,883 213,529 204,298 209,342 200,704 206,487 1991-2015 From Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Oil Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Shale Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 From Coalbed Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2002-2015 Repressuring NA NA NA NA NA NA 1996-2015 Vented and Flared NA NA NA NA NA NA 1996-2015 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed NA NA NA NA NA NA 1996-2015 Marketed Production 217,883 213,529 204,298 209,342 200,704 206,487 1989

  12. Oregon Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    NA NA NA NA NA NA 1996-2015 From Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Oil Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1996-2015 From Shale Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 From Coalbed Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2002-2015 Repressuring NA NA NA NA NA NA 1996-2015 Vented and Flared NA NA NA NA NA NA 1996-2015 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed NA NA NA NA NA NA 1996-2015 Marketed Production NA NA NA NA NA NA

  13. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    398,737 408,325 396,931 404,431 403,683 429,251 1991-2015 From Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Oil Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Shale Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 From Coalbed Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2006-2015 Repressuring NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Vented and Flared NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Marketed Production 398,737 408,325 396,931 404,431 403,683 429,251

  14. Wyoming Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    68,548 167,539 162,880 167,555 163,345 165,658 1991-2015 From Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Oil Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Shale Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 From Coalbed Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2002-2015 Repressuring NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Vented and Flared NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Marketed Production 150,260 149,361 145,208 149,375 145,622 147,684 1989

  15. California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    319,891 279,130 246,822 252,310 252,718 222,803 1967-2015 From Gas Wells 73,017 63,902 91,904 88,203 75,684 1967-2014 From Oil Wells 151,369 120,880 67,065 69,839 69,521 1967-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 95,505 94,349 87,854 94,268 107,513 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 2002-2014 Repressuring 27,240 23,905 0 NA NA 1967-2014 Vented and Flared 2,790 2,424 0 NA NA 1967-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 3,019 2,624 0 NA NA 1980-2014 Marketed Production 286,841 250,177 246,822 252,310 252,718

  16. Colorado Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    1,589,664 1,649,306 1,709,376 1,604,860 1,631,390 1,671,511 1967-2015 From Gas Wells 526,077 563,750 1,036,572 801,749 779,042 1967-2014 From Oil Wells 338,565 359,537 67,466 106,784 177,305 1967-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 195,131 211,488 228,796 247,046 255,911 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 529,891 514,531 376,543 449,281 419,132 2002-2014 Repressuring 10,043 10,439 0 NA NA 1967-2014 Vented and Flared 1,242 1,291 0 NA NA 1967-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 0 0 0 0 0 1980-2014 Marketed

  17. Florida Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    290 13,938 17,129 18,681 18,011 21,259 1971-2014 From Gas Wells 0 0 0 17,182 16,459 19,742 1996-2014 From Oil Wells 290 13,938 17,129 1,500 1,551 1,517 1971-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002-2014 Repressuring 0 0 0 17,909 17,718 20,890 1976-2014 Vented and Flared 0 0 0 0 0 0 1971-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 32 1,529 2,004 0 NA NA 1980-2014 Marketed Production 257 12,409 15,125 773 292 369 1967-2014 Dry Production 257 12,409 15,125 773 292

  18. Illinois Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    1,443 1,702 2,121 2,125 2,887 2,626 1967-2014 From Gas Wells 1,438 1,697 2,114 2,125 2,887 2,626 1967-2014 From Oil Wells 5 5 7 0 0 0 1967-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 Repressuring 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 Vented and Flared 0 0 0 0 0 0 1967-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 Marketed Production 1,443 1,702 2,121 2,125 2,887 2,626 1967-2014 Dry Production 1,412 1,357 1,078 2,125 2,887 2,579

  19. Indiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    4,927 6,802 9,075 8,814 7,938 6,616 1967-2014 From Gas Wells 4,927 6,802 9,075 8,814 7,938 6,616 1967-2014 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 1967-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 Repressuring 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003-2014 Vented and Flared 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 0 0 0 0 0 0 1997-2014 Marketed Production 4,927 6,802 9,075 8,814 7,938 6,616 1967-2014 Dry Production 4,927 6,802 9,075 8,814 7,938 6,616

  20. Maryland Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    43 43 34 44 32 20 1967-2014 From Gas Wells 43 43 34 44 32 20 1967-2014 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 Repressuring 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 Vented and Flared 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 Marketed Production 43 43 34 44 32 20 1967-2014 Dry Production 43 43 34 44 32 20

  1. Utah Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    35,984 33,029 30,933 31,404 30,891 34,204 1991-2015 From Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Oil Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 From Shale Gas Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 From Coalbed Wells NA NA NA NA NA NA 2002-2015 Repressuring NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Vented and Flared NA NA NA NA NA NA 1994-2015 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed NA NA NA NA NA NA 1996-2015 Marketed Production 35,984 33,029 30,933 31,404 30,891 34,204

  2. Wyoming Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

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

    ,514,657 2,375,301 2,225,622 2,047,757 1,997,666 1,983,188 1967-2015 From Gas Wells 1,787,599 1,709,218 1,762,095 1,673,667 1,671,442 1967-2014 From Oil Wells 151,871 152,589 24,544 29,134 38,974 1967-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 5,519 4,755 9,252 16,175 25,387 2007-2014 From Coalbed Wells 569,667 508,739 429,731 328,780 261,863 2002-2014 Repressuring 2,810 5,747 6,630 2,124 5,210 1967-2014 Vented and Flared 42,101 57,711 45,429 34,622 29,641 1967-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 164,221 152,421

  3. ,"Wyoming Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production"

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

    ... 37695,159737,143763,15974,,0,10880,1965,13536,133356 37726,151054,135949,15105,,0,11144,1639,12903,125368 37756,143494,129144,14349,,0,10300,1461,5571,126161 ...

  4. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Oil Wells

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    5,674,120 5,834,703 5,907,919 4,965,833 5,404,699 5,922,088 1967-2014 U.S. State Offshore 327,105 341,365 340,182 284,838 318,431 355,472 1978-2014 Federal Offshore U.S. 606,403...

  5. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2002-2015 Alaska NA NA NA NA NA NA 2002-2015 Arkansas NA NA NA NA NA NA 2006-2015 California NA NA NA NA NA NA 2002-2015 Colorado NA NA NA NA NA NA 2002-2015 Federal Offshore Gulf...

  6. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells

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

    2,010,171 1,916,762 1,779,055 1,539,395 1,425,783 1,285,189 2002-2014 Alaska 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002-2014 Alaska Onshore 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007-2014 Arkansas 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 California 0...

  7. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Gas Wells

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

    6-2015 Illinois NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Indiana NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Kentucky NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Maryland NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Michigan NA NA NA NA NA NA...

  8. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Oil Wells

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    1-2015 Illinois NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Indiana NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Kentucky NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Maryland NA NA NA NA NA NA 1991-2015 Michigan NA NA NA NA NA NA...

  9. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Gas Wells

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

    14,414,287 13,247,498 12,291,070 12,504,227 10,759,545 10,384,119 1967-2014 U.S. State Offshore 259,848 234,236 208,970 204,667 186,887 159,337 1978-2014 Federal Offshore U.S....

  10. Yixing Union | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Jiangsu Province, China Zip: 214203 Sector: Biomass Product: Yixing-based biomass CHP project developer. Coordinates: 31.36261, 119.816643 Show Map Loading map......

  11. VPP EXPANDING THROUGHOUT EUROPEAN UNION

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    WASHINGTON – Recently, the Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) made an important announcement regarding OSHA's Voluntary Protection Program (VPP). He announced that General Electric's (GE) Infrastructure-Security facility in Dublin, Ireland, was the first site accepted into Ireland's VPP Program.

  12. Buildings Energy Data Book: 1.3 Value of Construction and Research

    Buildings Energy Data Book [EERE]

    1 Estimated Value of All U.S. Construction Relative to the GDP ($2010) - 2007 estimated value of all U.S. construction was $1.82 trillion (including renovation; heavy construction; public works; residential, commercial, and industrial new construction; and non-contract work). - Compared to the $14.6 trillion 2007 U.S. gross domestic product (GDP), all construction held a 12.4% share. - In 2007, residential and commercial building renovation (valued at $496 billion) and new building construction

  13. U.S. Energy Information Administration | State Energy Data 2013: Consumption

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7 The real gross domestic product (GDP) data used in the U.S. Energy Information Administration State Energy Data System (SEDS) to calculate total energy consumed per chained (2009) dollar of output are shown in Tables D1 and D2. The data are the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), real GDP estimates by state, beginning in 1997. The estimates are released in June of each year. For the United States, the national real GDP series from the National In- come and Product

  14. U.S. Energy Information Administration | State Energy Data 2013: Prices and Expenditures

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    3 The current-dollar gross domestic product (GDP) data used in the U.S. Energy Information Administration State Energy Data System (SEDS) to calculate total energy consumed per current dollar of output are shown in Tables B1 and B2. The data are the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, current-dollar GDP estimates by state, beginning in 1997. The estimates are released June of each year. For the United States, the national current-dollar GDP series from the National Income

  15. Microsoft Word - Highlights.doc

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

    May 2010 1 May 2010 Short-Term Energy Outlook May 11, 2010 Release Highlights  EIA projects U.S. real gross domestic product (GDP) will grow by 3.0 percent and world real oil-consumption-weighted GDP will increase by 3.6 percent in 2010, both of which are 0.2 percent higher than in the previous Outlook. The 2011 forecast for real GDP growth is at 2.9 percent and 3.7 percent for the United States and the world, respectively.  The more optimistic economic growth forecasts lead to an increase

  16. Rate Of Oxidation Of Plasma Polymer (GDP or CH) (Technical Report...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Based on this result we believe the NIF capsule specification for O can safely be lowered to 0.2 atom %, and this level should be used in future design calculations. Authors: Cook, ...

  17. Global Energy Futures Model

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2004-01-01

    The Global Energy Futures Model (GEFM) is a demand-based, gross domestic product (GDP)-driven, dynamic simulation tool that provides an integrated framework to model key aspects of energy, nuclear-materials storage and disposition, environmental effluents from fossil and non fossil energy and global nuclear-materials management. Based entirely on public source data, it links oil, natural gas, coal, nuclear and renewable energy dynamically to greenhouse-gas emissions and 13 other measures of environmental impact. It includes historical data frommore » 1990 to 2000, is benchmarked to the DOE/EIA/IEO 2002 [5] Reference Case for 2000 to 2020, and extrapolates energy demand through the year 2050. The GEFM is globally integrated, and breaks out five regions of the world: United States of America (USA), the Peoples Republic of China (China), the former Soviet Union (FSU), the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) nations excluding the USA (other industrialized countries), and the rest of the world (ROW) (essentially the developing world). The GEFM allows the user to examine a very wide range of what ir scenarios through 2050 and to view the potential effects across widely dispersed, but interrelated areas. The authors believe that this high-level learning tool will help to stimulate public policy debate on energy, environment, economic and national security issues.« less

  18. Economic Effects of High Oil Prices (released in AEO2006)

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2006-01-01

    The Annual Energy Outlook 2006 projections of future energy market conditions reflect the effects of oil prices on the macroeconomic variables that affect oil demand, in particular, and energy demand in general. The variables include real gross domestic product (GDP) growth, inflation, employment, exports and imports, and interest rates.

  19. Union, Maine: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    in Knox County, Maine.1 References US Census Bureau Incorporated place and minor civil division population dataset (All States, all geography) Retrieved from "http:...

  20. Union Training Future Electricians in Solar Power

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Electricians in Indiana believe solar power is the future, and they are preparing for it. The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 725 (IBEW 725) in Terre Haute, Ind., purchased 60 solar panels and plans to train its members in solar installation.

  1. Professional Division Laborers' International Union of North...

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

    LOCAL 335 PDL BANNER Welcome Representing the professional employees of the Bonneville Power Administration Ball Image What is PDL? Ball Image PDL History Ball Image...

  2. Microsoft Word - Highlights.doc

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

    9 1 February 2009 Short-Term Energy Outlook February 10, 2009 Release Highlights U.S. real gross domestic product (GDP) is expected to decline by 2.7 percent in 2009, triggering decreases in domestic energy consumption for all major fuels. Economic recovery is projected to begin in 2010, with 2.2 percent year-over- year growth in GDP. Accompanying the projected economic recovery should be a mild rebound in energy consumption for all the major fuels in 2010. Over the past 6 months, the monthly

  3. Microsoft Word - Highlights.doc

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

    11 1 February 2011 Short-Term Energy Outlook February 8, 2011 Release Highlights  EIA expects the price of WTI crude oil to average about $93 per barrel in 2011, $14 higher than the average price last year. For 2012, EIA projects that WTI prices will continue to rise, averaging $98 per barrel. EIA's forecast assumes U.S. real gross domestic product (GDP) grows 3.0 percent in 2011 and 2.8 percent in 2012, while world real GDP (weighted by oil consumption) grows by 3.9 percent and 4.0 percent,

  4. Microsoft Word - Highlights.doc

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

    September 2010 1 September 2010 Short-Term Energy Outlook September 8, 2010 Release Highlights  These projections reflect updated expectations for economic activity, with forecasted U.S. real gross domestic product (GDP) growth of 2.8 percent in 2010 and 2.3 percent in 2011, down from the previous Outlook's growth projections of 3.1 and 2.7 percent for 2010 and 2011, respectively. The 2011 world oil-consumption-weighted real GDP growth rate is also lowered, to 3.3 percent from the 3.6 percent

  5. Property:GrossProdCapacity | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    1000 kW,kWe,KW,kilowatt,KiloWatt,KILOWATT,kilowatts,KiloWatts,KILOWATT,KILOWATTS 1000000 W,We,watt,watts,Watt,Watts,WATT,WATTS 1000000000 mW,milliwatt,milliwatts,MILLIWATT,MILLIWA...

  6. Montana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 31,610 32,229 68,064 1970's 48,302 38,136 38,137 60,931 59,524 44,547 45,097 48,181 48,497...

  7. California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 861,320 816,925 767,342 1970's 727,245 679,244 555,392 513,586 426,974 367,653 427,640 387,497...

  8. South Dakota Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0

  9. Tennessee Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0

  10. Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0

  11. Maryland Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2006 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2008 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2012 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2014 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 2015 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

  12. Michigan Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0

  13. Mississippi Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 7,673 7,250 6,785 2010's 5,921 5,363 5,036 4,630 4,199

  14. Mississippi Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Oil Wells (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 41,701 34,645 35,609 1970's 33,283 28,809 25,377 26,985 22,700 18,133 16,776 17,162 13,199 12,023 1980's 12,394 12,597 11,822 13,216 13,881 11,685 15,132 14,463 14,640 15,856 1990's 19,983 22,155 20,384 15,631 9,597 6,051 6,210 7,276 8,628 5,750 2000's 5,339 5,132 5,344 4,950 4,414 4,966 4,511 6,203 7,542 8,934 2010's 8,714 8,159 43,421 7,256 7,150

  15. Mississippi Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0

  16. Missouri Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 NA NA 2010's NA NA NA 0 0

  17. Montana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 7,230 12,241 11,630 11,721 13,154 14,496 12,376 2010's 9,920 6,691 3,731 1,623 5,766

  18. Wyoming Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per...

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

    Feet per Day) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2006 5,624 5,636 5,666 5,613 5,495 5,656 5,823 5,730 5,658 6,063 6,164 6,284 2007 6,196 6,040 6,149 6,093...

  19. Alaska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8,040 8,606 8,120 8,476 8,943 9,380 9,577 9,668 2010 9,389 9,849 9,966 9,107 8,009 7,666 6,641 6,593 8,809 9,442 9,534 10,214 2011 7,663 9,761 9,800 9,519 8,688 8,282 6,032...

  20. Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 81,624 86,275 101,567 106,408 2010's 107,736 112,219 107,383 99,542 92,599

  1. Wyoming Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 445,665 563,274 590,205 2010's 569,667 508,739 429,731 328,780 261,863

  2. Nebraska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2006 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2008 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2012 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2014 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 2015 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

  3. Nevada Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0

  4. North Dakota Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0

  5. Oklahoma Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 82,125 76,860 67,525 2010's 70,581 53,206 71,553 48,417 40,238

  6. Oregon Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0

  7. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0

  8. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 9,757 89,074 2010's 399,452 1,068,288 2,042,632 3,048,182 4,036,504

  9. Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 3,818 3,389 2,846 1970's 2,805 2,619 2,787 5,101 7,096 6,723 6,937 8,220 8,492 8,544 1980's...

  10. New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    State Offshore Federal Offshore California Colorado Federal Offshore Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore Alabama Federal Offshore Louisiana Federal Offshore Texas Kansas...

  11. New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Alaska Arkansas California Colorado Federal Offshore Gulf of Mexico Kansas Louisiana Montana New Mexico North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Pennsylvania Texas Utah West Virginia Wyoming...

  12. U.S. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1973 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1974 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1975 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1976 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1977 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1978 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1979 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1980 1,960,000 1,840,000 1,971,000 1,806,000 1,840,000 1,725,000 1,756,000 1,716,000 1,723,000 1,790,000 1,790,000 1,949,000 1981 1,890,000 1,702,000 1,871,000

  13. Federal Offshore--Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 5,242,169 5,110,327 5,052,936 2000's 4,967,694 5,066,015 4,547,627 4,447,348 4,000,685 3,150,818...

  14. Quantification of the Potential Gross Economic Impacts of Five...

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

    ... as having any special scientific ... are feasible. 3 This report is available at no cost ... Methodology All cost and emissions abatement scenarios in this study are ...

  15. Mississippi Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 181,309 171,617 168,714 1970's 157,020 136,536 119,697 117,761 98,995 92,500 89,914 102,155 148,482 192,376 1980's 215,105 232,870 221,696 201,984 209,268 191,898 210,086 224,983 237,180 199,856 1990's 200,592 180,772 165,538 145,026 121,802 119,452 123,622 126,623 129,216 126,755 2000's 114,380 136,740 147,415 161,676 176,329 189,371 212,081 272,878 346,465 352,888 2010's 401,660 443,351 452,915 59,272 54,440

  16. Missouri Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 22 9 33 33 30 29 20 1980's 4 4 4 4 4 4 1990's 7 15 27 14 8 16 25 5 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA NA 2010's NA NA NA 9 9

  17. Montana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 31,610 32,229 68,064 1970's 48,302 38,136 38,137 60,931 59,524 44,547 45,097 48,181 48,497 56,094 1980's 53,802 58,502 58,184 53,516 52,930 54,151 48,246 47,845 53,014 52,583 1990's 51,537 53,002 54,810 55,517 51,072 50,763 51,668 53,621 59,506 61,545 2000's 70,424 81,802 86,424 86,431 97,838 108,555 114,037 120,575 119,399 105,251 2010's 93,266 79,506 66,954 63,242 59,930 57,296

  18. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas Wells

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2007-2015 Arkansas NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 California NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 Colorado NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 Federal Offshore Gulf of Mexico NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 Kansas NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 Louisiana NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 Montana NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 New Mexico NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 North Dakota NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 Ohio NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 Oklahoma NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 Pennsylvania NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 Texas NA NA NA NA

  19. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas Wells

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2007-2015 Arkansas NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 California NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 Colorado NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 Federal Offshore Gulf of Mexico NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 Kansas NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 Louisiana NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 Montana NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 New Mexico NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 North Dakota NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 Ohio NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 Oklahoma NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 Pennsylvania NA NA NA NA NA NA 2007-2015 Texas NA NA NA NA

  20. Nebraska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 10,082 9,329 7,416 1970's 6,309 5,054 4,741 4,670 4,675 3,963 3,308 2,849 2,882 3,208 1980's 2,550 2,713 2,280 2,091 2,300 1,944 1,403 1,261 910 878 1990's 793 784 1,177 2,114 2,898 2,240 1,876 1,670 1,695 1,395 2000's 1,218 1,208 1,193 1,466 1,499 1,201 1,217 1,560 3,083 2,916 2010's 2,255 1,980 1,328 1,032 402