National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for feet driving cycle

  1. Drive Cycle Analysis Tool - DriveCAT | NREL

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Drive Cycle Analysis Tool - DriveCAT National Renewable Energy Laboratory Use the Drive Cycle Analysis Tool (DriveCAT) to find drive cycle data for modeling, simulating, and testing vehicle systems and components, or to understand the real-world benefits of drive cycles for specific vehicle applications. This tool was created by NREL's fleet test and evaluation team, which conducts in-service performance evaluations of advanced medium- and heavy-duty fleet vehicles. Evaluation results help

  2. Light-Duty Reactivity Controlled Compression Ignition Drive Cycle...

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) (indexed site)

    Ignition Drive Cycle Fuel Economy and Emissions Estimates Light-Duty Reactivity Controlled Compression Ignition Drive Cycle Fuel Economy and Emissions Estimates Vehicle ...

  3. DRIVE Analysis Tool Generates Custom Vehicle Drive Cycles Based on Real-World Data (Fact Sheet)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    2013-04-01

    This fact sheet from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory describes the Drive-Cycle Rapid Investigation, Visualization, and Evaluation (DRIVE) analysis tool, which uses GPS and controller area network data to characterize vehicle operation and produce custom vehicle drive cycles, analyzing thousands of hours of data in a matter of minutes.

  4. Drive Cycle Analysis, Measurement of Emissions and Fuel Consumption...

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) (indexed site)

    Drive Cycle Analysis, Measurement of Emissions and Fuel Consumption of a PHEV School Bus ... Measurement of Emissions and Fuel Consumption of a PHEV School Bus Robb Barnitt and ...

  5. A Statistical Characterization of School Bus Drive Cycles Collected...

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    ... Timoney, D., "Examination of Low-cost Systems for the Determination of Kinematic ... of Drive Cycles on the Performance of a PEM Fuel Cell System for Automotive Applications," SAE ...

  6. GPS Data Filtration Method for Drive Cycle Analysis Applications

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Duran, A.; Earleywine, M.

    2013-02-01

    When employing GPS data acquisition systems to capture vehicle drive-cycle information, a number of errors often appear in the raw data samples, such as sudden signal loss, extraneous or outlying data points, speed drifting, and signal white noise, all of which limit the quality of field data for use in downstream applications. Unaddressed, these errors significantly impact the reliability of source data and limit the effectiveness of traditional drive-cycle analysis approaches and vehicle simulation software. Without reliable speed and time information, the validity of derived metrics for drive cycles, such as acceleration, power, and distance, become questionable. This study explores some of the common sources of error present in raw onboard GPS data and presents a detailed filtering process designed to correct for these issues. Test data from both light and medium/heavy duty applications are examined to illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed filtration process across the range of vehicle vocations. Graphical comparisons of raw and filtered cycles are presented, and statistical analyses are performed to determine the effects of the proposed filtration process on raw data. Finally, an evaluation of the overall benefits of data filtration on raw GPS data and present potential areas for continued research is presented.

  7. Statistical Characterization of Medium-Duty Electric Vehicle Drive Cycles

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Prohaska, Robert; Duran, Adam; Ragatz, Adam; Kelly, Kenneth

    2015-05-03

    In an effort to help commercialize technologies for electric vehicles (EVs) through deployment and demonstration projects, the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) provided funding to participating U.S. companies to cover part of the cost of purchasing new EVs. Within the medium- and heavy-duty commercial vehicle segment, both Smith Electric Newton and and Navistar eStar vehicles qualified for such funding opportunities. In an effort to evaluate the performance characteristics of the new technologies deployed in these vehicles operating under real world conditions, data from Smith Electric and Navistar medium-duty EVs were collected, compiled, and analyzed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's (NREL) Fleet Test and Evaluation team over a period of 3 years. More than 430 Smith Newton EVs have provided data representing more than 150,000 days of operation. Similarly, data have been collected from more than 100 Navistar eStar EVs, resulting in a comparative total of more than 16,000 operating days. Combined, NREL has analyzed more than 6 million kilometers of driving and 4 million hours of charging data collected from commercially operating medium-duty electric vehicles in various configurations. In this paper, extensive duty-cycle statistical analyses are performed to examine and characterize common vehicle dynamics trends and relationships based on in-use field data. The results of these analyses statistically define the vehicle dynamic and kinematic requirements for each vehicle, aiding in the selection of representative chassis dynamometer test cycles and the development of custom drive cycles that emulate daily operation. In this paper, the methodology and accompanying results of the duty-cycle statistical analysis are presented and discussed. Results are presented in both graphical and tabular formats illustrating a number of key relationships between parameters observed within the data set that relate to

  8. Development of a Short-Duration Drive Cycle to Represent Long-Term Measured Drive Cycle Data: Evaluation of Truck Efficiency Technologies in Class 8 Tractor Trailers

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    LaClair, Tim; Gao, Zhiming; Fu, Joshua; Calcagno, Jimmy; Yun, Jeongran

    2014-12-01

    Quantifying the fuel savings and emissions reductions that can be achieved from truck fuel efficiency technologies for a fleet's specific usage allows the fleet to select a combination of technologies that will yield the greatest operational efficiency and profitability. An accurate characterization of usage for the fleet is critical for such an evaluation; however, short-term measured drive cycle data do not generally reflect overall usage very effectively. This study presents a detailed analysis of vehicle usage in a commercial vehicle fleet and demonstrates the development of a short-duration synthetic drive cycle with measured drive cycle data collected over an extended period of time. The approach matched statistical measures of the vehicle speed with acceleration history and integrated measured grade data to develop a compressed drive cycle that accurately represents total usage. Drive cycle measurements obtained during a full year from six tractor trailers in normal operations in a less-than-truckload carrier were analyzed to develop a synthetic drive cycle. The vehicle mass was also estimated to account for the variation of loads that the fleet experienced. These drive cycle and mass data were analyzed with a tractive energy analysis to quantify the benefits in terms of fuel efficiency and reduced carbon dioxide emissions that can be achieved on Class 8 tractor trailers by using advanced efficiency technologies, either individually or in combination. Although differences exist between Class 8 tractor trailer fleets, this study provides valuable insight into the energy and emissions reduction potential that various technologies can bring in this important trucking application. Finally, the methodology employed for generating the synthetic drive cycle serves as a rigorous approach to develop an accurate usage characterization that can be used to effectively compress large quantities of drive cycle data.

  9. Development of a Short-Duration Drive Cycle to Represent Long-Term Measured Drive Cycle Data: Evaluation of Truck Efficiency Technologies in Class 8 Tractor Trailers

    DOE PAGES-Beta [OSTI]

    LaClair, Tim; Gao, Zhiming; Fu, Joshua; Calcagno, Jimmy; Yun, Jeongran

    2014-12-01

    Quantifying the fuel savings and emissions reductions that can be achieved from truck fuel efficiency technologies for a fleet's specific usage allows the fleet to select a combination of technologies that will yield the greatest operational efficiency and profitability. An accurate characterization of usage for the fleet is critical for such an evaluation; however, short-term measured drive cycle data do not generally reflect overall usage very effectively. This study presents a detailed analysis of vehicle usage in a commercial vehicle fleet and demonstrates the development of a short-duration synthetic drive cycle with measured drive cycle data collected over an extendedmore » period of time. The approach matched statistical measures of the vehicle speed with acceleration history and integrated measured grade data to develop a compressed drive cycle that accurately represents total usage. Drive cycle measurements obtained during a full year from six tractor trailers in normal operations in a less-than-truckload carrier were analyzed to develop a synthetic drive cycle. The vehicle mass was also estimated to account for the variation of loads that the fleet experienced. These drive cycle and mass data were analyzed with a tractive energy analysis to quantify the benefits in terms of fuel efficiency and reduced carbon dioxide emissions that can be achieved on Class 8 tractor trailers by using advanced efficiency technologies, either individually or in combination. Although differences exist between Class 8 tractor trailer fleets, this study provides valuable insight into the energy and emissions reduction potential that various technologies can bring in this important trucking application. Finally, the methodology employed for generating the synthetic drive cycle serves as a rigorous approach to develop an accurate usage characterization that can be used to effectively compress large quantities of drive cycle data.« less

  10. Response Surface Energy Modeling of an Electric Vehicle over a Reduced Composite Drive Cycle

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jehlik, Forrest; LaClair, Tim J.

    2014-04-01

    Response surface methodology (RSM) techniques were applied to develop a predictive model of electric vehicle (EV) energy consumption over the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) standardized drive cycles. The model is based on measurements from a synthetic composite drive cycle. The synthetic drive cycle is a minimized statistical composite of the standardized urban (UDDS), highway (HWFET), and US06 cycles. The composite synthetic drive cycle is 20 minutes in length thereby reducing testing time of the three standard EPA cycles by over 55%. Vehicle speed and acceleration were used as model inputs for a third order least squared regression model predicting vehicle battery power output as a function of the drive cycle. The approach reduced three cycles and 46 minutes of drive time to a single test of 20 minutes. Application of response surface modeling to the synthetic drive cycle is shown to predict energy consumption of the three EPA cycles within 2.6% of the actual measured values. Additionally, the response model may be used to predict energy consumption of any cycle within the speed/acceleration envelope of the synthetic cycle. This technique results in reducing test time, which additionally provides a model that may be used to expand the analysis and understanding of the vehicle under consideration.

  11. Heavy Duty & Medium Duty Drive Cycle Data Collection for Modeling...

    Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    Program Truck Duty Cycle and Performance Data Collection and Analysis Program Vehicle Technologies Office Merit Review 2014: Powertrain Controls Optimization for Heavy Duty ...

  12. Comparison of Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle Battery Life Across Geographies and Drive-Cycles

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Smith, K.; Warleywine, M.; Wood, E.; Neubauer, J.; Pesaran, A.

    2012-06-01

    In a laboratory environment, it is cost prohibitive to run automotive battery aging experiments across a wide range of possible ambient environment, drive cycle and charging scenarios. Since worst-case scenarios drive the conservative sizing of electric-drive vehicle batteries, it is useful to understand how and why those scenarios arise and what design or control actions might be taken to mitigate them. In an effort to explore this problem, this paper applies a semi-empirical life model of the graphite/nickel-cobalt-aluminum lithium-ion chemistry to investigate impacts of geographic environments under storage and simplified cycling conditions. The model is then applied to analyze complex cycling conditions, using battery charge/discharge profiles generated from simulations of PHEV10 and PHEV40 vehicles across 782 single-day driving cycles taken from Texas travel survey data.

  13. Modeling Heavy/Medium-Duty Fuel Consumption Based on Drive Cycle Properties

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wang, Lijuan; Duran, Adam; Gonder, Jeffrey; Kelly, Kenneth

    2015-10-13

    This paper presents multiple methods for predicting heavy/medium-duty vehicle fuel consumption based on driving cycle information. A polynomial model, a black box artificial neural net model, a polynomial neural network model, and a multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS) model were developed and verified using data collected from chassis testing performed on a parcel delivery diesel truck operating over the Heavy Heavy-Duty Diesel Truck (HHDDT), City Suburban Heavy Vehicle Cycle (CSHVC), New York Composite Cycle (NYCC), and hydraulic hybrid vehicle (HHV) drive cycles. Each model was trained using one of four drive cycles as a training cycle and the other three as testing cycles. By comparing the training and testing results, a representative training cycle was chosen and used to further tune each method. HHDDT as the training cycle gave the best predictive results, because HHDDT contains a variety of drive characteristics, such as high speed, acceleration, idling, and deceleration. Among the four model approaches, MARS gave the best predictive performance, with an average absolute percent error of -1.84% over the four chassis dynamometer drive cycles. To further evaluate the accuracy of the predictive models, the approaches were first applied to real-world data. MARS outperformed the other three approaches, providing an average absolute percent error of -2.2% of four real-world road segments. The MARS model performance was then compared to HHDDT, CSHVC, NYCC, and HHV drive cycles with the performance from Future Automotive System Technology Simulator (FASTSim). The results indicated that the MARS method achieved a comparative predictive performance with FASTSim.

  14. Dynamic driving cycle analyses using electric vehicle time-series data

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Staackmann, M.; Liaw, B.Y.; Yun, D.Y.Y.

    1997-12-31

    Dynamic analyses of time-series data collected from real-world driving-cycle field testing of electric vehicles is providing evidence that certain driving-cycle conditions can significantly impact vehicle performance. In addition, vehicle performance results derived from time-series data show relationships that help to characterize driving cycles. Such findings confirm the advantages of time-series data over statistical data, in allowing correlation of vehicle performance characteristics with driving cycles. The driving-cycle vehicle performance analyses were performed using time-series data collected at the Electric and Hybrid Vehicle (EHV) National Data Center (NDC). A total of 71 EHVs are registered in the NDC and over 4,000 trips files have already been uploaded into the NDC database, as of may 1997. Numerous EHVs on multiple trips have been analyzed over the past two years. This paper presents the results of time-series data collected and analyzed for two specific vehicles of the overall program, to illustrate the value of time-series data. The data were analyzed to establish criteria for defining different driving cycles for the day-to-day trips made by vehicles in the program. The authors examined specific parameters such as average vehicle speed, number of stops during a trip, average distance traveled between stops, vehicle acceleration, and average DC kWh consumed per kilometer. Correlation among various parameters is presented in relationship to three driving cycles (highway, suburban, and urban), along with suggested ranges of parametric values defining the regimes of the different cycles.

  15. Reactivity-controlled compression ignition drive cycle emissions and fuel economy estimations using vehicle system simulations

    DOE PAGES-Beta [OSTI]

    Curran, Scott J.; Gao, Zhiming; Wagner, Robert M.

    2014-12-22

    In-cylinder blending of gasoline and diesel to achieve reactivity-controlled compression ignition has been shown to reduce NOX and soot emissions while maintaining or improving brake thermal efficiency as compared with conventional diesel combustion. The reactivity-controlled compression ignition concept has an advantage over many advanced combustion strategies in that the fuel reactivity can be tailored to the engine speed and load, allowing stable low-temperature combustion to be extended over more of the light-duty drive cycle load range. In this paper, a multi-mode reactivity-controlled compression ignition strategy is employed where the engine switches from reactivity-controlled compression ignition to conventional diesel combustion whenmore » speed and load demand are outside of the experimentally determined reactivity-controlled compression ignition range. The potential for reactivity-controlled compression ignition to reduce drive cycle fuel economy and emissions is not clearly understood and is explored here by simulating the fuel economy and emissions for a multi-mode reactivity-controlled compression ignition–enabled vehicle operating over a variety of US drive cycles using experimental engine maps for multi-mode reactivity-controlled compression ignition, conventional diesel combustion, and a 2009 port-fuel injected gasoline engine. Drive cycle simulations are completed assuming a conventional mid-size passenger vehicle with an automatic transmission. Multi-mode reactivity-controlled compression ignition fuel economy simulation results are compared with the same vehicle powered by a representative 2009 port-fuel injected gasoline engine over multiple drive cycles. Finally, engine-out drive cycle emissions are compared with conventional diesel combustion, and observations regarding relative gasoline and diesel tank sizes needed for the various drive cycles are also summarized.« less

  16. Reactivity-controlled compression ignition drive cycle emissions and fuel economy estimations using vehicle system simulations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Curran, Scott J.; Gao, Zhiming; Wagner, Robert M.

    2014-12-22

    In-cylinder blending of gasoline and diesel to achieve reactivity-controlled compression ignition has been shown to reduce NOX and soot emissions while maintaining or improving brake thermal efficiency as compared with conventional diesel combustion. The reactivity-controlled compression ignition concept has an advantage over many advanced combustion strategies in that the fuel reactivity can be tailored to the engine speed and load, allowing stable low-temperature combustion to be extended over more of the light-duty drive cycle load range. In this paper, a multi-mode reactivity-controlled compression ignition strategy is employed where the engine switches from reactivity-controlled compression ignition to conventional diesel combustion when speed and load demand are outside of the experimentally determined reactivity-controlled compression ignition range. The potential for reactivity-controlled compression ignition to reduce drive cycle fuel economy and emissions is not clearly understood and is explored here by simulating the fuel economy and emissions for a multi-mode reactivity-controlled compression ignition–enabled vehicle operating over a variety of US drive cycles using experimental engine maps for multi-mode reactivity-controlled compression ignition, conventional diesel combustion, and a 2009 port-fuel injected gasoline engine. Drive cycle simulations are completed assuming a conventional mid-size passenger vehicle with an automatic transmission. Multi-mode reactivity-controlled compression ignition fuel economy simulation results are compared with the same vehicle powered by a representative 2009 port-fuel injected gasoline engine over multiple drive cycles. Finally, engine-out drive cycle emissions are compared with conventional diesel combustion, and observations regarding relative gasoline and diesel tank sizes needed for the various drive cycles are also summarized.

  17. Drive Cycle Analysis, Measurement of Emissions and Fuel Consumption of a PHEV School Bus: Preprint

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barnitt, R.; Gonder, J.

    2011-04-01

    The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) collected and analyzed real-world school bus drive cycle data and selected similar standard drive cycles for testing on a chassis dynamometer. NREL tested a first-generation plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) school bus equipped with a 6.4L engine and an Enova PHEV drive system comprising a 25-kW/80 kW (continuous/peak) motor and a 370-volt lithium ion battery pack. A Bluebird 7.2L conventional school bus was also tested. Both vehicles were tested over three different drive cycles to capture a range of driving activity. PHEV fuel savings in charge-depleting (CD) mode ranged from slightly more than 30% to a little over 50%. However, the larger fuel savings lasted over a shorter driving distance, as the fully charged PHEV school bus would initially operate in CD mode for some distance, then in a transitional mode, and finally in a charge-sustaining (CS) mode for continued driving. The test results indicate that a PHEV school bus can achieve significant fuel savings during CD operation relative to a conventional bus. In CS mode, the tested bus showed small fuel savings and somewhat higher nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions than the baseline comparison bus.

  18. Hydraulic Hybrid and Conventional Parcel Delivery Vehicles' Measured Laboratory Fuel Economy on Targeted Drive Cycles

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lammert, M. P.; Burton, J.; Sindler, P.; Duran, A.

    2014-10-01

    This research project compares laboratory-measured fuel economy of a medium-duty diesel powered hydraulic hybrid vehicle drivetrain to both a conventional diesel drivetrain and a conventional gasoline drivetrain in a typical commercial parcel delivery application. Vehicles in this study included a model year 2012 Freightliner P100H hybrid compared to a 2012 conventional gasoline P100 and a 2012 conventional diesel parcel delivery van of similar specifications. Drive cycle analysis of 484 days of hybrid parcel delivery van commercial operation from multiple vehicles was used to select three standard laboratory drive cycles as well as to create a custom representative cycle. These four cycles encompass and bracket the range of real world in-use data observed in Baltimore United Parcel Service operations. The NY Composite cycle, the City Suburban Heavy Vehicle Cycle cycle, and the California Air Resources Board Heavy Heavy-Duty Diesel Truck (HHDDT) cycle as well as a custom Baltimore parcel delivery cycle were tested at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's Renewable Fuels and Lubricants Laboratory. Fuel consumption was measured and analyzed for all three vehicles. Vehicle laboratory results are compared on the basis of fuel economy. The hydraulic hybrid parcel delivery van demonstrated 19%-52% better fuel economy than the conventional diesel parcel delivery van and 30%-56% better fuel economy than the conventional gasoline parcel delivery van on cycles other than the highway-oriented HHDDT cycle.

  19. Large Scale Duty Cycle (LSDC) Project: Tractive Energy Analysis Methodology and Results from Long-Haul Truck Drive Cycle Evaluations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    LaClair, Tim J

    2011-05-01

    This report addresses the approach that will be used in the Large Scale Duty Cycle (LSDC) project to evaluate the fuel savings potential of various truck efficiency technologies. The methods and equations used for performing the tractive energy evaluations are presented and the calculation approach is described. Several representative results for individual duty cycle segments are presented to demonstrate the approach and the significance of this analysis for the project. The report is divided into four sections, including an initial brief overview of the LSDC project and its current status. In the second section of the report, the concepts that form the basis of the analysis are presented through a discussion of basic principles pertaining to tractive energy and the role of tractive energy in relation to other losses on the vehicle. In the third section, the approach used for the analysis is formalized and the equations used in the analysis are presented. In the fourth section, results from the analysis for a set of individual duty cycle measurements are presented and different types of drive cycles are discussed relative to the fuel savings potential that specific technologies could bring if these drive cycles were representative of the use of a given vehicle or trucking application. Additionally, the calculation of vehicle mass from measured torque and speed data is presented and the accuracy of the approach is demonstrated.

  20. Greenhouse gas emission impacts of electric vehicles under varying driving cycles in various counties and US cities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wang, M.Q.; Marr, W.W.

    1994-02-10

    Electric vehicles (EVs) can reduce greenhouse gas emissions, relative to emissions from gasoline-fueled vehicles. However, those studies have not considered all aspects that determine greenhouse gas emissions from both gasoline vehicles (GVs) and EVs. Aspects often overlooked include variations in vehicle trip characteristics, inclusion of all greenhouse gases, and vehicle total fuel cycle. In this paper, we estimate greenhouse gas emission reductions for EVs, including these important aspects. We select four US cities (Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Washington, D.C.) and six countries (Australia, France, Japan, Norway, the United Kingdom, and the United States) and analyze greenhouse emission impacts of EVs in each city or country. We also select six driving cycles developed around the world (i.e., the US federal urban driving cycle, the Economic Community of Europe cycle 15, the Japanese 10-mode cycle, the Los Angeles 92 cycle, the New York City cycle, and the Sydney cycle). Note that we have not analyzed EVs in high-speed driving (e.g., highway driving), where the results would be less favorable to EVs; here, EVs are regarded as urban vehicles only. We choose one specific driving cycle for a given city or country and estimate the energy consumption of four-passenger compact electric and gasoline cars in the given city or country. Finally, we estimate total fuel cycle greenhouse gas emissions of both GVs and EVs by accounting for emissions from primary energy recovery, transportation, and processing; energy product transportation; and powerplant and vehicle operations.

  1. Effect of Premixed Charge Compression Ignition on Vehicle Fuel Economy and Emissions Reduction over Transient Driving Cycles

    Energy.gov [DOE]

    In conventional vehicles, most engine operating points over a UDDS driving cycle stay within PCCI operation limits but PCCI in HEVs is limited because of higher loads and many cold/warm starts.

  2. Statistical Characterization of Medium-Duty Electric Vehicle Drive Cycles; NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Prohaska, R.; Duran, A.; Ragatz, A.; Kelly, K.

    2015-05-03

    With funding from the U.S. Department of Energy’s Vehicle Technologies Office, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) conducts real-world performance evaluations of advanced medium- and heavy-duty fleet vehicles. Evaluation results can help vehicle manufacturers fine-tune their designs and assist fleet managers in selecting fuel-efficient, low-emission vehicles that meet their economic and operational goals. In 2011, NREL launched a large-scale performance evaluation of medium-duty electric vehicles. With support from vehicle manufacturers Smith and Navistar, NREL research focused on characterizing vehicle operation and drive cycles for electric delivery vehicles operating in commercial service across the nation.

  3. Statistical Characterization of Medium-Duty Electric Vehicle Drive Cycles: Preprint

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Prohaska, R.; Duran, A.; Ragatz, A.; Kelly, K.

    2015-05-01

    In an effort to help commercialize technologies for electric vehicles (EVs) through deployment and demonstration projects, the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE's) American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) provided funding to participating U.S. companies to cover part of the cost of purchasing new EVs. Within the medium- and heavy-duty commercial vehicle segment, both Smith Electric Newton and and Navistar eStar vehicles qualified for such funding opportunities. In an effort to evaluate the performance characteristics of the new technologies deployed in these vehicles operating under real world conditions, data from Smith Electric and Navistar medium-duty EVs were collected, compiled, and analyzed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's (NREL) Fleet Test and Evaluation team over a period of 3 years. More than 430 Smith Newton EVs have provided data representing more than 150,000 days of operation. Similarly, data have been collected from more than 100 Navistar eStar EVs, resulting in a comparative total of more than 16,000 operating days. Combined, NREL has analyzed more than 6 million kilometers of driving and 4 million hours of charging data collected from commercially operating medium-duty electric vehicles in various configurations. In this paper, extensive duty-cycle statistical analyses are performed to examine and characterize common vehicle dynamics trends and relationships based on in-use field data. The results of these analyses statistically define the vehicle dynamic and kinematic requirements for each vehicle, aiding in the selection of representative chassis dynamometer test cycles and the development of custom drive cycles that emulate daily operation. In this paper, the methodology and accompanying results of the duty-cycle statistical analysis are presented and discussed. Results are presented in both graphical and tabular formats illustrating a number of key relationships between parameters observed within the data set that relate to

  4. Comparison of Battery Life Across Real-World Automotive Drive-Cycles (Presentation)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Smith, K.; Earleywine, M.; Wood, E.; Pesaran, A.

    2011-11-01

    Laboratories run around-the-clock aging tests to try to understand as quickly as possible how long new Li-ion battery designs will last under certain duty cycles. These tests may include factors such as duty cycles, climate, battery power profiles, and battery stress statistics. Such tests are generally accelerated and do not consider possible dwell time at high temperatures and states-of-charge. Battery life-predictive models provide guidance as to how long Li-ion batteries may last under real-world electric-drive vehicle applications. Worst-case aging scenarios are extracted from hundreds of real-world duty cycles developed from vehicle travel surveys. Vehicles examined included PHEV10 and PHEV40 EDVs under fixed (28 degrees C), limited cooling (forced ambient temperature), and aggressive cooling (20 degrees C chilled liquid) scenarios using either nightly charging or opportunity charging. The results show that battery life expectancy is 7.8 - 13.2 years for the PHEV10 using a nightly charge in Phoenix, AZ (hot climate), and that the 'aggressive' cooling scenario can extend battery life by 1-3 years, while the 'limited' cooling scenario shortens battery life by 1-2 years. Frequent (opportunity) charging can reduce battery life by 1 year for the PHEV10, while frequent charging can extend battery life by one-half year.

  5. Drive cycle analysis of butanol/diesel blends in a light-duty vehicle.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Miers, S. A.; Carlson, R. W.; McConnell, S. S.; Ng, H. K.; Wallner, T.; LeFeber, J.; Energy Systems; Esper Images Video & Multimedia

    2008-10-01

    The potential exists to displace a portion of the petroleum diesel demand with butanol and positively impact engine-out particulate matter. As a preliminary investigation, 20% and 40% by volume blends of butanol with ultra low sulfur diesel fuel were operated in a 1999 Mercedes Benz C220 turbo diesel vehicle (Euro III compliant). Cold and hot start urban as well as highway drive cycle tests were performed for the two blends of butanol and compared to diesel fuel. In addition, 35 MPH and 55 MPH steady-state tests were conducted under varying road loads for the two fuel blends. Exhaust gas emissions, fuel consumption, and intake and exhaust temperatures were acquired for each test condition. Filter smoke numbers were also acquired during the steady-state tests.

  6. Evaluating the Impact of Road Grade on Simulated Commercial Vehicle Fuel Economy Using Real-World Drive Cycles

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lopp, Sean; Wood, Eric; Duran, Adam

    2015-10-13

    Commercial vehicle fuel economy is known to vary significantly with both positive and negative road grade. Medium- and heavy-duty vehicles operating at highway speeds require incrementally larger amounts of energy to pull heavy payloads up inclines as road grade increases. Non-hybrid vehicles are then unable to recapture energy on descent and lose energy through friction braking. While the on-road effects of road grade are well understood, the majority of standard commercial vehicle drive cycles feature no climb or descent requirements. Additionally, existing literature offers a limited number of sources that attempt to estimate the on-road energy implications of road grade in the medium- and heavy-duty space. This study uses real-world commercial vehicle drive cycles from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's Fleet DNA database to simulate the effects of road grade on fuel economy across a range of vocations, operating conditions, and locations. Drive-cycles are matched with vocation-specific vehicle models and simulated with and without grade. Fuel use due to grade is presented, and variation in fuel consumption due to drive cycle and vehicle characteristics is explored through graphical and statistical comparison. The results of this study suggest that road grade accounts for 1%-9% of fuel use in commercial vehicles on average and up to 40% on select routes.

  7. Medium Truck Duty Cycle Data from Real-World Driving Environments: Project Interim Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Franzese, Oscar; Lascurain, Mary Beth; Capps, Gary J

    2011-01-01

    Since the early part of the 20th century, the US trucking industry has provided a safe and economical means of moving commodities across the country. At the present time, nearly 80% of the US domestic freight movement involves the use of trucks. The US Department of Energy (DOE) is spearheading a number of research efforts to improve heavy vehicle fuel efficiencies. This includes research in engine technologies (including hybrid and fuel cell technologies), lightweight materials, advanced fuels, and parasitic loss reductions. In addition, DOE is developing advanced tools and models to support heavy vehicle truck research, and is leading the 21st Century Truck Partnership whose stretch goals involve a reduction by 50% of the fuel consumption of heavy vehicles on a ton-mile basis. This Medium Truck Duty Cycle (MTDC) Project is a critical element in DOE s vision for improved heavy vehicle energy efficiency and is unique in that there is no other national database of characteristic duty cycles for medium trucks. It involves the collection of real-world data for various situational characteristics (rural/urban, freeway/arterial, congested/free-flowing, good/bad weather, etc.) and looks at the unique nature of medium trucks drive cycles (stop-and-go delivery, power takeoff, idle time, short-radius trips), to provide a rich source of data that can contribute to the development of new tools for fuel efficiency and modeling, provide DOE a sound basis upon which to make technology investment decisions, and provide a national archive of real-world-based medium-truck operational data to support heavy vehicle energy efficiency research. The MTDC project involves a two-part field operational test (FOT). For the Part-1 FOT, three vehicles, each from two vocations (urban transit and dry-box delivery) were instrumented for one year of data collection. The Part-2 FOT will involve the towing/recovery and utility vocations. The vehicles participating in the MTDC project are doing so

  8. Medium Truck Duty Cycle Data from Real-World Driving Environments: Final Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lascurain, Mary Beth; Franzese, Oscar; Capps, Gary J; Siekmann, Adam; Thomas, Neil; LaClair, Tim J; Barker, Alan M; Knee, Helmut E

    2012-11-01

    Since the early part of the 20th century, the US trucking industry has provided a safe and economical means of moving commodities across the country. At present, nearly 80% of US domestic freight movement involves the use of trucks. The US Department of Energy (DOE) is spearheading a number of research efforts to improve heavy vehicle fuel efficiencies. This includes research in engine technologies (including hybrid and fuel cell technologies), lightweight materials, advanced fuels, and parasitic loss reductions. In addition, DOE is developing advanced tools and models to support heavy vehicle research and is leading the 21st Century Truck Partnership and the SuperTruck development effort. Both of these efforts have the common goal of decreasing the fuel consumption of heavy vehicles. In the case of SuperTruck, a goal of improving the overall freight efficiency of a combination tractor-trailer has been established. This Medium Truck Duty Cycle (MTDC) project is a critical element in DOE s vision for improved heavy vehicle energy efficiency; it is unique in that there is no other existing national database of characteristic duty cycles for medium trucks based on collecting data from Class 6 and 7 vehicles. It involves the collection of real-world data on medium trucks for various situational characteristics (e.g., rural/urban, freeway/arterial, congested/free-flowing, good/bad weather) and looks at the unique nature of medium trucks drive cycles (stop-and-go delivery, power takeoff, idle time, short-radius trips). This research provides a rich source of data that can contribute to the development of new tools for FE and modeling, provide DOE a sound basis upon which to make technology investment decisions, and provide a national archive of real-world-based medium-truck operational data to support energy efficiency research. The MTDC project involved a two-part field operational test (FOT). For the Part-1 FOT, three vehicles each from two vocations (urban transit and

  9. Hydraulic Hybrid and Conventional Parcel Delivery Vehicles' Measured Laboratory Fuel Economy on Targeted Drive Cycles

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Hybrid drivetrains have shown signifcant promise as part of an overall petroleum reduction feet strategy [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]. Hybrid drivetrains consist of an energy storage device and a motor integrated into a traditional powertrain and offer the potential fuel savings by capturing energy normally lost during deceleration through the application of regenerative braking. Because hybrid technologies, especially hydraulic hybrids, have low adoption rates in the medium-duty vehicle segment and

  10. Battery Wear from Disparate Duty-Cycles: Opportunities for Electric-Drive Vehicle Battery Health Management; Preprint

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Smith, K.; Earleywine, M.; Wood, E.; Pesaran, A.

    2012-10-01

    Electric-drive vehicles utilizing lithium-ion batteries experience wholly different degradation patterns than do conventional vehicles, depending on geographic ambient conditions and consumer driving and charging patterns. A semi-empirical life-predictive model for the lithium-ion graphite/nickel-cobalt-aluminum chemistry is presented that accounts for physically justified calendar and cycling fade mechanisms. An analysis of battery life for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles considers 782 duty-cycles from travel survey data superimposed with climate data from multiple geographic locations around the United States. Based on predicted wear distributions, opportunities for extending battery life including modification of battery operating limits, thermal and charge control are discussed.

  11. Light-Duty Drive Cycle Simulations of Diesel Engine-Out Exhaust Properties for an RCCI-Enabled Vehicle

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gao, Zhiming; Curran, Scott; Daw, C Stuart; Wagner, Robert M

    2013-01-01

    In-cylinder blending of gasoline and diesel fuels to achieve low-temperature reactivity controlled compression ignition (RCCI) can reduce NOx and PM emissions while maintaining or improving brake thermal efficiency compared to conventional diesel combustion (CDC). Moreover, the dual-fueling RCCI is able to achieve these benefits by tailoring combustion reactivity over a wider range of engine operation than is possible with a single fuel. However, the currently demonstrated range of stable RCCI combustion just covers a portion of the engine speed-load range required in several light-duty drive cycles. This means that engines must switch from RCCI to CDC when speed and load fall outside of the stable RCCI range. In this study we investigated the impact of RCCI as it has recently been demonstrated on practical engine-out exhaust temperature and emissions by simulating a multi-mode RCCI-enabled vehicle operating over two urban and two highway driving cycles. To implement our simulations, we employed experimental engine maps for a multi-mode RCCI/CDC engine combined with a standard mid-size, automatic transmission, passenger vehicle in the Autonomie vehicle simulation platform. Our results include both detailed transient and cycle-averaged engine exhaust temperature and emissions for each case, and we note the potential implications of the modified exhaust properties on catalytic emissions control and utilization of waste heat recovery on future RCCI-enabled vehicles.

  12. Requirements for Defining Utility Drive Cycles: An Exploratory Analysis of Grid Frequency Regulation Data for Establishing Battery Performance Testing Standards

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hafen, Ryan P.; Vishwanathan, Vilanyur V.; Subbarao, Krishnappa; Kintner-Meyer, Michael CW

    2011-10-19

    Battery testing procedures are important for understanding battery performance, including degradation over the life of the battery. Standards are important to provide clear rules and uniformity to an industry. The work described in this report addresses the need for standard battery testing procedures that reflect real-world applications of energy storage systems to provide regulation services to grid operators. This work was motivated by the need to develop Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G) testing procedures, or V2G drive cycles. Likewise, the stationary energy storage community is equally interested in standardized testing protocols that reflect real-world grid applications for providing regulation services. As the first of several steps toward standardizing battery testing cycles, this work focused on a statistical analysis of frequency regulation signals from the Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland Interconnect with the goal to identify patterns in the regulation signal that would be representative of the entire signal as a typical regulation data set. Results from an extensive time-series analysis are discussed, and the results are explained from both the statistical and the battery-testing perspectives. The results then are interpreted in the context of defining a small set of V2G drive cycles for standardization, offering some recommendations for the next steps toward standardizing testing protocols.

  13. Statistical Characterization of School Bus Drive Cycles Collected via Onboard Logging Systems

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Duran, A.; Walkowicz, K.

    2013-10-01

    In an effort to characterize the dynamics typical of school bus operation, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) researchers set out to gather in-use duty cycle data from school bus fleets operating across the country. Employing a combination of Isaac Instruments GPS/CAN data loggers in conjunction with existing onboard telemetric systems resulted in the capture of operating information for more than 200 individual vehicles in three geographically unique domestic locations. In total, over 1,500 individual operational route shifts from Washington, New York, and Colorado were collected. Upon completing the collection of in-use field data using either NREL-installed data acquisition devices or existing onboard telemetry systems, large-scale duty-cycle statistical analyses were performed to examine underlying vehicle dynamics trends within the data and to explore vehicle operation variations between fleet locations. Based on the results of these analyses, high, low, and average vehicle dynamics requirements were determined, resulting in the selection of representative standard chassis dynamometer test cycles for each condition. In this paper, the methodology and accompanying results of the large-scale duty-cycle statistical analysis are presented, including graphical and tabular representations of a number of relationships between key duty-cycle metrics observed within the larger data set. In addition to presenting the results of this analysis, conclusions are drawn and presented regarding potential applications of advanced vehicle technology as it relates specifically to school buses.

  14. Application of a Tractive Energy Analysis to Quantify the Benefits of Advanced Efficiency Technologies Using Characteristic Drive Cycle Data

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    LaClair, Tim J

    2012-01-01

    Accurately predicting the fuel savings that can be achieved with the implementation of various technologies developed for fuel efficiency can be very challenging, particularly when considering combinations of technologies. Differences in the usage of highway vehicles can strongly influence the benefits realized with any given technology, which makes generalizations about fuel savings inappropriate for different vehicle applications. A model has been developed to estimate the potential for reducing fuel consumption when advanced efficiency technologies, or combinations of these technologies, are employed on highway vehicles, particularly medium- and heavy-duty trucks. The approach is based on a tractive energy analysis applied to drive cycles representative of the vehicle usage, and the analysis specifically accounts for individual energy loss factors that characterize the technologies of interest. This tractive energy evaluation is demonstrated by analyzing measured drive cycles from a long-haul trucking fleet and the results of an assessment of the fuel savings potential for combinations of technologies are presented. The results of this research will enable more reliable estimates of the fuel savings benefits that can be realized with particular technologies and technology combinations for individual trucking applications so that decision makers can make informed investment decisions for the implementation of advanced efficiency technologies.

  15. Numerical evaluation of mechanisms driving Early Jurassic changes in global carbon cycling

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Beerling, D.J.; Brentnall, S.J.

    2007-03-15

    The Early Jurassic (early Toarcian, ca. 183 Ma) carbon cycle perturbation is characterized by aabout -5 parts per thousand {delta} {sup 13}C excursion in the exogenic carbon reservoirs, a 1000 ppm rise in atmospheric CO{sub 2}, and a 6-7 degrees warming. Two proposed explanations for this presumed global carbon cycle perturbation are the liberation of massive amounts of isotopically light CH4 from (1) Gondwanan coals by heating during the intrusive eruption of the Karoo-Ferrar large igneous province (LIP) or (2) the thermal dissociation of gas hydrates. Carbon cycle modeling indicates that the release of CH4 from Gondwanan coals synchronous with the eruption of the Karoo-Ferrar LIP fails to reproduce the magnitude or timing of the CO{sub 2} and {delta} {sup 13}C excursions. However, sensitivity analyses constrained by a marine cyclostratigraphically dated {delta}{sup 13}C record indicate that both features of geologic record can be explained with the huge input of about 15,340-24,750 Gt C over about 220 k.y., a result possibly pointing to the involvement of hydrothermal vent complexes in the Karoo Basin. The simulated release of > 6000 Gt C from gas hydrates also reproduces aspects of the early Toarcian rock record, but the large mass involved raises fundamental questions about its formation, storage, and release.

  16. Comparative urban drive cycle simulations of light-duty hybrid vehicles with gasoline or diesel engines and emissions controls

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gao, Zhiming; Daw, C Stuart; Smith, David E

    2013-01-01

    Electric hybridization is a very effective approach for reducing fuel consumption in light-duty vehicles. Lean combustion engines (including diesels) have also been shown to be significantly more fuel efficient than stoichiometric gasoline engines. Ideally, the combination of these two technologies would result in even more fuel efficient vehicles. However, one major barrier to achieving this goal is the implementation of lean-exhaust aftertreatment that can meet increasingly stringent emissions regulations without heavily penalizing fuel efficiency. We summarize results from comparative simulations of hybrid electric vehicles with either stoichiometric gasoline or diesel engines that include state-of-the-art aftertreatment emissions controls for both stoichiometric and lean exhaust. Fuel consumption and emissions for comparable gasoline and diesel light-duty hybrid electric vehicles were compared over a standard urban drive cycle and potential benefits for utilizing diesel hybrids were identified. Technical barriers and opportunities for improving the efficiency of diesel hybrids were identified.

  17. Drive Cycle Powertrain Efficiencies and Trends Derived from EPA Vehicle Dynamometer Results

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thomas, John

    2014-10-13

    Vehicle manufacturers among others are putting great emphasis on improving fuel economy (FE) of light-duty vehicles in the U.S. market, with significant FE gains being realized in recent years. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) data indicates that the aggregate FE of vehicles produced for the U.S. market has improved by over 20% from model year (MY) 2005 to 2013. This steep climb in FE includes changes in vehicle choice, improvements in engine and transmission technology, and reducing aerodynamic drag, rolling resistance, and parasitic losses. The powertrain related improvements focus on optimizing in-use efficiency of the transmission and engine as a system, and may make use of what is termed downsizing and/or downspeeding. This study explores quantifying recent improvements in powertrain efficiency, viewed separately from other vehicle alterations and attributes (noting that most vehicle changes are not completely independent). A methodology is outlined to estimate powertrain efficiency for the U.S city and highway cycle tests using data from the EPA vehicle database. Comparisons of common conventional gasoline powertrains for similar MY 2005 and 2013 vehicles are presented, along with results for late-model hybrid electric vehicles, the Nissan Leaf, Chevy Volt and other selected vehicles.

  18. Drive Cycle Powertrain Efficiencies and Trends Derived from EPA Vehicle Dynamometer Results

    DOE PAGES-Beta [OSTI]

    Thomas, John

    2014-10-13

    Vehicle manufacturers among others are putting great emphasis on improving fuel economy (FE) of light-duty vehicles in the U.S. market, with significant FE gains being realized in recent years. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) data indicates that the aggregate FE of vehicles produced for the U.S. market has improved by over 20% from model year (MY) 2005 to 2013. This steep climb in FE includes changes in vehicle choice, improvements in engine and transmission technology, and reducing aerodynamic drag, rolling resistance, and parasitic losses. The powertrain related improvements focus on optimizing in-use efficiency of the transmission and engine asmore » a system, and may make use of what is termed downsizing and/or downspeeding. This study explores quantifying recent improvements in powertrain efficiency, viewed separately from other vehicle alterations and attributes (noting that most vehicle changes are not completely independent). A methodology is outlined to estimate powertrain efficiency for the U.S city and highway cycle tests using data from the EPA vehicle database. Comparisons of common conventional gasoline powertrains for similar MY 2005 and 2013 vehicles are presented, along with results for late-model hybrid electric vehicles, the Nissan Leaf, Chevy Volt and other selected vehicles.« less

  19. Drive Cycle Powertrain Efficiencies and Trends Derived From EPA Vehicle Dynamometer Results

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thomas, John F

    2014-01-01

    Vehicle manufacturers among others are putting great emphasis on improving fuel economy (FE) of light-duty vehicles in the U.S. market, with significant FE gains being realized in recent years. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) data indicates that the aggregate FE of vehicles produced for the U.S. market has improved by over 20% from model year (MY) 2005 to 2013. This steep climb in FE includes changes in vehicle choice, improvements in engine and transmission technology, and reducing aerodynamic drag, rolling resistance, and parasitic losses. The powertrain related improvements focus on optimizing in-use efficiency of the transmission and engine as a system, and may make use of what is termed downsizing and/or downspeeding. This study explores quantifying recent improvements in powertrain efficiency, viewed separately from other vehicle alterations and attributes (noting that most vehicle changes are not completely independent). A methodology is outlined to estimate powertrain efficiency for the U.S city and highway cycle tests using data from the EPA vehicle database. Comparisons of common conventional gasoline powertrains for similar MY 2005 and 2013 vehicles are presented, along with results for late-model hybrid electric vehicles, the Nissan Leaf, Chevy Volt and other selected vehicles.

  20. EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF TRUCK EFFICIENCY TECHNOLOGIES IN CLASS 8 TRACTOR-TRAILERS BASED ON A TRACTIVE ENERGY ANALYSIS USING MEASURED DRIVE CYCLE DATA

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    LaClair, Tim J; Gao, Zhiming; Fu, Joshua S.; Calcagno, Jimmy; Yun, Jeongran

    2014-01-01

    Quantifying the fuel savings that can be achieved from different truck fuel efficiency technologies for a fleet s specific usage allows the fleet to select the combination of technologies that will yield the greatest operational efficiency and profitability. This paper presents an analysis of vehicle usage in a commercial vehicle fleet and an assessment of advanced efficiency technologies using an analysis of measured drive cycle data for a class 8 regional commercial shipping fleet. Drive cycle measurements during a period of a full year from six tractor-trailers in normal operations in a less-than-truckload (LTL) carrier were analyzed to develop a characteristic drive cycle that is highly representative of the fleet s usage. The vehicle mass was also estimated to account for the variation of loads that the fleet experienced. The drive cycle and mass data were analyzed using a tractive energy analysis to quantify the fuel efficiency and CO2 emissions benefits that can be achieved on class 8 tractor-trailers when using advanced efficiency technologies, either individually or in combination. Although differences exist among class 8 tractor-trailer fleets, this study provides valuable insight into the energy and emissions reduction potential that various technologies can bring in this important trucking application.

  1. Measured Laboratory and In-Use Fuel Economy Observed over Targeted Drive Cycles for Comparable Hybrid and Conventional Package Delivery Vehicles

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    2-01-2049 Measured Laboratory and In-Use Fuel Economy Published Observed over Targeted Drive Cycles for 09/24/2012 Comparable Hybrid and Conventional Package Delivery Vehicles Michael P. Lammert, Kevin Walkowicz, Adam Duran and Petr Sindler National Renewable Energy Laboratory ABSTRACT This research project compares the in-use and laboratory- derived fuel economy of a medium-duty hybrid electric drivetrain with "engine off at idle" capability to a conventional drivetrain in a typical

  2. Measured Laboratory and In-Use Fuel Economy Observed over Targeted Drive Cycles for Comparable Hybrid and Conventional Package Delivery Vehicles

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) (indexed site)

    2-01-2049 Measured Laboratory and In-Use Fuel Economy Published Observed over Targeted Drive Cycles for 09/24/2012 Comparable Hybrid and Conventional Package Delivery Vehicles Michael P. Lammert, Kevin Walkowicz, Adam Duran and Petr Sindler National Renewable Energy Laboratory ABSTRACT This research project compares the in-use and laboratory- derived fuel economy of a medium-duty hybrid electric drivetrain with "engine off at idle" capability to a conventional drivetrain in a typical

  3. NNSA team members move their feet and reduce their footprint | National

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Nuclear Security Administration | (NNSA) team members move their feet and reduce their footprint Thursday, September 22, 2016 - 2:16pm Today is Car Free Day, and cities across the globe encourage greener travel by finding ways to get around other than driving alone in a car. Car Free Day brings awareness to the benefits of available travel options like walking, public transit, and cycling. On Car Free Day and every day, NNSA team members reap the benefits of more sustainable commuting around

  4. Effect of B20 and Low Aromatic Diesel on Transit Bus NOx Emissions Over Driving Cycles with a Range of Kinetic Intensity

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lammert, M. P.; McCormick, R. L.; Sindler, P.; Williams, A.

    2012-10-01

    Oxides of nitrogen (NOx) emissions for transit buses for up to five different fuels and three standard transit duty cycles were compared to establish whether there is a real-world biodiesel NOx increase for transit bus duty cycles and engine calibrations. Six buses representing the majority of the current national transit fleet and including hybrid and selective catalyst reduction systems were tested on a heavy-duty chassis dynamometer with certification diesel, certification B20 blend, low aromatic (California Air Resources Board) diesel, low aromatic B20 blend, and B100 fuels over the Manhattan, Orange County and UDDS test cycles. Engine emissions certification level had the dominant effect on NOx; kinetic intensity was the secondary driving factor. The biodiesel effect on NOx emissions was not statistically significant for most buses and duty cycles for blends with certification diesel, except for a 2008 model year bus. CARB fuel had many more instances of a statistically significant effect of reducing NOx. SCR systems proved effective at reducing NOx to near the detection limit on all duty cycles and fuels, including B100. While offering a fuel economy benefit, a hybrid system significantly increased NOx emissions over a same year bus with a conventional drivetrain and the same engine.

  5. Contribution of Road Grade to the Energy Use of Modern Automobiles Across Large Datasets of Real-World Drive Cycles: Preprint

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Contribution of Road Grade to the Energy Use of Modern Automobiles Across Large Datasets of Real-World Drive Cycles Preprint Eric Wood, Evan Burton, Adam Duran, and Jeff Gonder To be presented at the SAE World Congress 2014 Detroit, Michigan April 8-10, 2014 Conference Paper NREL/CP-5400-61108 January 2014 NOTICE The submitted manuscript has been offered by an employee of the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC (Alliance), a contractor of the US Government under Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308.

  6. Measured Laboratory and In-Use Fuel Economy Observed over Targeted Drive Cycles for Comparable Hybrid and Conventional Package Delivery Vehicles

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lammert, M. P.; Walkowicz, K.; Duran, A.; Sindler, P.

    2012-10-01

    In-use and laboratory-derived fuel economies were analyzed for a medium-duty hybrid electric drivetrain with 'engine off at idle' capability and a conventional drivetrain in a typical commercial package delivery application. Vehicles studied included eleven 2010 Freightliner P100H hybrids in service at a United Parcel Service facility in Minneapolis during the first half of 2010. The hybrids were evaluated for 18 months against eleven 2010 Freightliner P100D diesels at the same facility. Both vehicle groups use the same 2009 Cummins ISB 200-HP engine. In-use fuel economy was evaluated using UPS's fueling and mileage records, periodic ECM image downloads, and J1939 CAN bus recordings during the periods of duty cycle study. Analysis of the in-use fuel economy showed 13%-29% hybrid advantage depending on measurement method, and a delivery route assignment analysis showed 13%-26% hybrid advantage on the less kinetically intense original diesel route assignments and 20%-33% hybrid advantage on the more kinetically intense original hybrid route assignments. Three standardized laboratory drive cycles were selected that encompassed the range of real-world in-use data. The hybrid vehicle demonstrated improvements in ton-mi./gal fuel economy of 39%, 45%, and 21% on the NYC Comp, HTUF Class 4, and CARB HHDDT test cycles, respectively.

  7. DRIVE CYCLE EFFICIENCY AND EMISSIONS ESTIMATES FOR REACTIVITY CONTROLLED COMPRESSION IGNITION IN A MULTI-CYLINDER LIGHT-DUTY DIESEL ENGINE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Curran, Scott; Briggs, Thomas E; Cho, Kukwon; Wagner, Robert M

    2011-01-01

    In-cylinder blending of gasoline and diesel to achieve Reactivity Controlled Compression Ignition (RCCI) has been shown to reduce NOx and PM emissions while maintaining or improving brake thermal efficiency as compared to conventional diesel combustion (CDC). The RCCI concept has an advantage over many advanced combustion strategies in that by varying both the percent of premixed gasoline and EGR rate, stable combustion can be extended over more of the light-duty drive cycle load range. Changing the percent premixed gasoline changes the fuel reactivity stratification in the cylinder providing further control of combustion phasing and pressure rise rate than the use of EGR alone. This paper examines the combustion and emissions performance of light-duty diesel engine using direct injected diesel fuel and port injected gasoline to carry out RCCI for steady-state engine conditions which are consistent with a light-duty drive cycle. A GM 1.9L four-cylinder engine with the stock compression ratio of 17.5:1, common rail diesel injection system, high-pressure EGR system and variable geometry turbocharger was modified to allow for port fuel injection with gasoline. Engine-out emissions, engine performance and combustion behavior for RCCI operation is compared against both CDC and a premixed charge compression ignition (PCCI) strategy which relies on high levels of EGR dilution. The effect of percent of premixed gasoline, EGR rate, boost level, intake mixture temperature, combustion phasing and pressure rise rate is investigated for RCCI combustion for the light-duty modal points. Engine-out emissions of NOx and PM were found to be considerably lower for RCCI operation as compared to CDC and PCCI, while HC and CO emissions were higher. Brake thermal efficiency was similar or higher for many of the modal conditions for RCCI operation. The emissions results are used to estimate hot-start FTP-75 emissions levels with RCCI and are compared against CDC and PCCI modes.

  8. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: ...

  9. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: -1,159,080 - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total ...

  10. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: 0 Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: ...

  11. Drive Diagnostic Filter Wheel Control

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2007-07-17

    DrD Filter Wheel Control is National Instrument's Labview software that drives a Drive Diagnostic filter wheel. The software can drive the filter wheel between each end limit, detect the positive and negative limit and each home position and post the stepper motot values to an Excel spreadsheet. The software can also be used to cycle the assembly between the end limits.

  12. Florida Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Florida Natural Gas Plant Processing Natural Gas ...

  13. Oklahoma Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) ... Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Oklahoma Coalbed Methane Proved ...

  14. Oklahoma Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade ... Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production Oklahoma Shale Gas Proved ...

  15. Oklahoma Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Used for Repressuring Oklahoma Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals ...

  16. Kansas Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Kansas Natural Gas Plant Processing Natural Gas ...

  17. New Mexico Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) ... Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production New Mexico Shale Gas Proved ...

  18. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    0 New Hampshire - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle ...

  19. iDriving (Intelligent Driving)

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2012-09-17

    iDriving identifies the driving style factors that have a major impact on fuel economy. An optimization framework is used with the aim of optimizing a driving style with respect to these driving factors. A set of polynomial metamodels is constructed to reflect the responses produced in fuel economy by changing the driving factors. The optimization framework is used to develop a real-time feedback system, including visual instructions, to enable drivers to alter their driving stylesmore » in responses to actual driving conditions to improve fuel efficiency.« less

  20. Fuel Cycle Technologies | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Initiatives Fuel Cycle Technologies Fuel Cycle Technologies Fuel Cycle Technologies Preparing for Tomorrow's Energy Demands Powerful imperatives drive the continued need for...

  1. Off-Cycle Benchmarking of PHEVs; Wide Range of Temperatures...

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) (indexed site)

    Off-Cycle Benchmarking of PHEVs; Wide Range of Temperatures and Aggressive Driving Cycles Off-Cycle Benchmarking of PHEVs; Wide Range of Temperatures and Aggressive Driving ...

  2. Utah Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Utah Coalbed Methane Production (Billion 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 74 83 103...

  3. Montana Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Coalbed Methane Production (Billion 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 12 12 13...

  4. Virginia Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Virginia Coalbed Methane Production (Billion 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 56 81...

  5. Pennsylvania Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Coalbed Methane Production (Billion 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 3 5...

  6. Wyoming Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Wyoming Coalbed Methane Production (Billion 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 133 278...

  7. Oklahoma Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 81,755 ...

  8. Nebraska Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 1,629 ...

  9. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 375 ...

  10. Arizona Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Arizona Natural Gas Repressuring (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 103 ...

  11. Tennessee Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) 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 ...

  12. Ohio Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) 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 ...

  13. Virginia Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Virginia Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 3 3 3 - No Data...

  14. Eastern States Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Eastern States Shale Production (Billion 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 2 2 -...

  15. Pennsylvania Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Shale Production (Billion 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 1 1 65...

  16. Colorado Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Colorado Shale Proved Reserves (Billion 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...

  17. Arkansas Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Arkansas Shale Production (Billion 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 94 279 527 2010's...

  18. Michigan Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Michigan Shale Production (Billion 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 148 122 132...

  19. North Dakota Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) North Dakota Shale Production (Billion 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 3 3 25...

  20. Michigan Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Michigan Shale Proved Reserves (Billion 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...

  1. Kentucky Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Kentucky Shale Proved Reserves (Billion 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 21 20...

  2. Arkansas Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Arkansas Shale Proved Reserves (Billion 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 1,460...

  3. Kansas Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Kansas Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 1 3 1 - No Data...

  4. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    4 Delaware - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S8. Summary statistics for natural gas - Delaware, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals

  5. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    4 Massachusetts - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S23. Summary statistics for natural gas - Massachusetts, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross

  6. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: ...

  7. NREL: Transportation Research - DRIVE: Drive-Cycle Rapid Investigation...

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Additional output results range from simple tabulated summary statistics to Google Earth route maps, providing information that has enough depth for scientific applications but is ...

  8. Ohio Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Ohio Shale Production (Billion 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 14...

  9. Arizona - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    4 Arizona - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: ...

  10. Florida Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Florida Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) ... Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales Florida Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves ...

  11. West Virginia Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) West Virginia Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed West Virginia Natural Gas Plant Processing Natural ...

  12. Virginia Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Virginia Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) ... Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales Virginia Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves ...

  13. Oklahoma Natural Gas Processed in Kansas (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Kansas (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Processed in Kansas (Million Cubic Feet) ...2016 Next Release Date: 04292016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Oklahoma-Kansas

  14. Oklahoma Natural Gas Processed in Texas (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Processed in Texas (Million Cubic Feet) ...2016 Next Release Date: 04292016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Oklahoma-Texas

  15. Kansas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Kansas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) ... Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales Kansas Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves Dry ...

  16. New York Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) New York Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) ... Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales New York Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves ...

  17. New Mexico Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) ... Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production New Mexico Coalbed Methane Proved ...

  18. New Mexico Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) ... Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 New Mexico Shale Gas Proved Reserves, ...

  19. New Mexico Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed New Mexico Natural Gas Plant Processing Natural ...

  20. New Mexico Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) ... Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales New Mexico Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves ...

  1. New Mexico Natural Gas Processed in Texas (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Texas (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas Processed in Texas (Million Cubic Feet) ...2016 Next Release Date: 8312016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed New Mexico-Texas

  2. U.S. Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) U.S. Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) ... Release Date: 11192015 Next Release Date: 12312016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane ...

  3. U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Billion Cubic Feet) U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade ... Release Date: 11192015 Next Release Date: 12312016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane ...

  4. North Dakota Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) North Dakota Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed North Dakota Natural Gas Plant Processing Natural ...

  5. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    4 Hawaii - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S13. Summary statistics for natural gas - Hawaii, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From

  6. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    6 Idaho - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S14. Summary statistics for natural gas - Idaho, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From

  7. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    20 Maine - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S21. Summary statistics for natural gas - Maine, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From

  8. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    6 Oregon - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S39. Summary statistics for natural gas - Oregon, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Gas Wells R 28 R 24 R 24 R 12 14 Production (million cubic feet) Gross

  9. Ohio Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Coalbed Methane Production (Billion 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 2010's 0 - No Data Reported; -- ...

  10. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Table S42. Summary statistics for natural gas - South Carolina, 2010-2014 - continued * Volume is less than 500,000 cubic feet. -- Not applicable. R Revised data. W Withheld. a ...

  11. ,"Michigan Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...cekey","RESEPG0R5301SMIBCF" "Date","Michigan Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" 39263,3281 39629,2894 39994,2499 40359,2306 40724,1947 41090,1345 41455,1418 41820,1432

  12. Kansas Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Billion Cubic Feet) Kansas Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 2 3 4 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31

  13. Indiana Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas Processed (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 191 102 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 10/31/2016 Next Release Date: 11/30/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed

  14. Virginia Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Billion Cubic Feet) Virginia Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 135 126 84 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31

  15. Truck Duty Cycle and Performance Data Collection and Analysis...

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) (indexed site)

    More Documents & Publications Heavy Duty & Medium Duty Drive Cycle Data Collection for Modeling Expansion Truck Duty Cycle and Performance Data Collection and Analysis Program 2010 ...

  16. Tennessee Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas Processed (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 11 1990's 19 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 6,146 6,200 6,304 5,721 5,000 4,612 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 10/31/2016 Next Release Date: 11/30/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Tennessee Natural Gas Plant Processing

  17. Montana Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Shale Production (Billion 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 12 13 7 2010's 13 13 16 19 42 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production Montana Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Shale

  18. Alabama Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Alabama Coalbed Methane Production (Billion 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 23 1990's 36 68 89 103 108 109 98 111 123 108 2000's 109 111 117 98 121 113 114 114 107 105 2010's 102 98 91 62 78 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane

  19. Arkansas Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Arkansas Coalbed Methane Production (Billion 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 2 3 3 3 3 2010's 3 4 2 2 2 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Arkansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and

  20. Colorado Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Colorado Coalbed Methane Production (Billion 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 12 1990's 26 48 82 125 179 226 274 312 401 432 2000's 451 490 520 488 520 515 477 519 497 498 2010's 533 516 486 444 412 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed

  1. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    0 Alabama - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S1. Summary statistics for natural gas - Alabama, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 346 367 402 436 414 Gas Wells R 6,243 R 6,203 R 6,174 R 6,117 6,044 Production

  2. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    2 Alaska - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S2. Summary statistics for natural gas - Alaska, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 2,040 1,981 2,006 2,042 2,096 Gas Wells R 274 R 281 R 300 R 338 329 Production

  3. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    0 Colorado - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S6. Summary statistics for natural gas - Colorado, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 5,963 6,456 6,799 7,771 7,733 Gas Wells R 43,792 R 46,141 R 46,883 R 46,876

  4. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    6 District of Columbia - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S9. Summary statistics for natural gas - District of Columbia, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic

  5. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    0 Mississippi - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S26. Summary statistics for natural gas - Mississippi, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 561 618 581 540 501 Gas Wells R 1,703 R 1,666 R 1,632 R 1,594 1,560

  6. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    4 Montana - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S28. Summary statistics for natural gas - Montana, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 1,956 2,147 2,268 2,377 2,277 Gas Wells R 6,615 R 6,366 R 5,870 R 5,682 5,655

  7. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    4 New Mexico - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S33. Summary statistics for natural gas - New Mexico, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 12,887 13,791 14,171 14,814 14,580 Gas Wells R 40,231 R 40,441 R 40,119 R

  8. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    6 New York - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S34. Summary statistics for natural gas - New York, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 988 1,170 1,589 1,731 1,697 Gas Wells R 7,372 R 7,731 R 7,553 R 7,619 7,605

  9. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    0 North Dakota - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S36. Summary statistics for natural gas - North Dakota, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 5,561 7,379 9,363 11,532 12,799 Gas Wells R 526 R 451 R 423 R 398 462

  10. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    2 Ohio - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S37. Summary statistics for natural gas - Ohio, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 6,775 6,745 7,038 7,257 5,941 Gas Wells R 31,966 R 31,647 R 30,804 R 31,060 26,599

  11. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    4 Oklahoma - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S38. Summary statistics for natural gas - Oklahoma, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 6,723 7,360 8,744 7,105 8,368 Gas Wells R 51,712 R 51,472 R 50,606 R 50,044

  12. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    8 Pennsylvania - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S40. Summary statistics for natural gas - Pennsylvania, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 7,046 7,627 7,164 8,481 7,557 Gas Wells R 61,815 R 62,922 R 61,838 R

  13. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    6 Tennessee - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S44. Summary statistics for natural gas - Tennessee, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 52 75 NA NA NA Gas Wells R 1,027 R 1,027 1,089 NA NA Production (million cubic

  14. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    8 Texas - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S45. Summary statistics for natural gas - Texas, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 85,030 94,203 96,949 104,205 105,159 Gas Wells R 139,368 R 140,087 R 140,964 R 142,292

  15. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    0 Utah - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S46. Summary statistics for natural gas - Utah, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 3,119 3,520 3,946 4,249 3,966 Gas Wells R 7,603 R 8,121 R 8,300 R 8,537 8,739 Production

  16. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    4 Virginia - Natural Gas 2015 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S48. Summary statistics for natural gas - Virginia, 2011-2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Wells Producing Natural Gas at End of Year Oil Wells 2 1 1 2 2 Gas Wells R 7,781 R 7,874 7,956 R 8,061 8,111 Production (million

  17. Montana Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Shale Proved Reserves (Billion 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 140 125 137 2010's 186 192 216 229 482 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31

  18. Ohio Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Billion Cubic Feet) Ohio Shale Proved Reserves (Billion 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 0 483 2,319 6,384 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31

  19. Oklahoma Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Billion Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Shale Proved Reserves (Billion 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 944 3,845 6,389 2010's 9,670 10,733 12,572 12,675 16,653 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31

  20. Pennsylvania Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Billion Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Shale Proved Reserves (Billion 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 96 88 3,790 2010's 10,708 23,581 32,681 44,325 56,210 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31

  1. West Virginia Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) West Virginia Shale Production (Billion 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 11 2010's 80 192 345 498 869 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production West Virginia Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes,

  2. Mississippi Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) 218,840 126,859 6,865 4,527 5,633 5,770 1967-2015 Total Liquids Extracted (Thousand Barrels) 12,618 7,732 377 359 365 257 1983-2015 NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent (Million Cubic Feet) 18,405 11,221 486 466 495 348 1967

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Wellhead Price 4.17 1967-2010 Imports Price -- 12.93 -- -- -- -- 2007-2015 Pipeline and Distribution Use Price 1967-2005 Citygate Price 5.73

  3. Colorado Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Colorado Shale Production (Billion 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 1 2010's 1 3 9 18 236 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production Colorado Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Shale

  4. Kansas Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Kansas Coalbed Methane Production (Billion 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 17 25 38 47 43 2010's 41 37 34 30 27 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Kansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes,

  5. Kentucky Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Kentucky Shale Production (Billion 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 2 2 5 2010's 4 4 4 4 2 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production Kentucky Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Sha

  6. Wyoming Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Wyoming Shale Production (Billion 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 7 102 29 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production Wyoming Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Shale Gas

  7. Wyoming Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Billion Cubic Feet) Wyoming Shale Proved Reserves (Billion 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 1 0 216 856 380 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31

  8. Stirling cycle machine

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Burnett, S.C.; Purcell, J.R.; Creedon, W.P.; Joshi, C.H.

    1990-06-05

    This patent describes an improvement in a Stirling cycle machine including first and second variable-volume, compression-expansion chambers containing a gas a regenerator interconnecting the chambers and for conducting the gas therebetween, and eccentric drive means for driving the first and second chambers. It comprises: the eccentric drive means comprising a pair of rotatably mounted shafts, at least one pair of eccentric disks fixed on the shafts in phase with each other, and means for causing the shafts and thereby the eccentric disks to rotate in opposite directions.

  9. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 17,182 16,459 R 43 69 From Oil Wells 17,129 1,500 1,551 R 3,135 5,720 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas ...

  10. Lower 48 States Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Lower 48 States Coalbed Methane Production (Billion 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...

  11. West Virginia Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) West Virginia Coalbed Methane Production (Billion 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 30...

  12. Louisiana--North Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana--North Coalbed Methane Production (Billion 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...

  13. Maine Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Maine Natural Gas Total Consumption (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...

  14. Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

  15. Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 456,385 ...

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

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Michigan Natural Gas 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 ...

  17. Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 228,019 ...

  18. Arizona Natural Gas Vented and Flared (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Vented and Flared (Million Cubic Feet) Arizona Natural Gas Vented and Flared (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 ...

  19. Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 439,384 ...

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

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Maryland Natural Gas 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 ...

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

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Indiana Natural Gas 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 ...

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

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Colorado Natural Gas 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 ...

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

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Louisiana Natural Gas 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 ...

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

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Kansas Natural Gas 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 ...

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

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Montana Natural Gas 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 ...

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

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Oregon Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Oregon Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1996 159 ...

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

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Nevada Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 3 3 5 ...

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

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

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

  9. Ohio Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Ohio Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 13,138 ...

  10. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Pennsylvania Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec ...

  11. Mississippi Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Mississippi Natural Gas 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 ...

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

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Nebraska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 57 ...

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

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Oklahoma Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 ...

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

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Florida Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 562 ...

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

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Missouri Natural Gas 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 ...

  16. Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 ...

  17. Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 59,806 ...

  18. Florida Natural Gas Vented and Flared (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Vented and Flared (Million Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Vented and Flared (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 ...

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

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Illinois Natural Gas 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 ...

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

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Kentucky Natural Gas 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 ...

  1. Florida Natural Gas Processed in Florida (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Processed in Florida (Million Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Processed in Florida (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 ...

  2. Washington Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Washington Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  3. Washington Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Washington Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (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 ...

  4. Wisconsin Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Wisconsin Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (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 ...

  5. Iowa Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

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

  6. Idaho Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Idaho Natural Gas LNG Storage 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 ...

  7. Indiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (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 ...

  8. Delaware Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas LNG Storage 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 ...

  9. Georgia Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Georgia Natural Gas LNG Storage 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 ...

  10. Idaho Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Idaho Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (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 110 ...

  11. Georgia Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Georgia Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (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 ...

  12. Indiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas LNG Storage 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 ...

  13. Delaware Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (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 ...

  14. Virginia Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (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 ...

  15. Virginia Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Natural Gas LNG Storage 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 ...

  16. Texas--RRC District 1 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 1 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 ...

  17. Texas--RRC District 8 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 8 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 ...

  18. Texas--RRC District 5 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 5 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 ...

  19. Texas--RRC District 9 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 9 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 ...

  20. Texas Onshore Natural Gas Processed in Texas (Million Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Onshore Natural Gas Processed in Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's ...

  1. Texas--RRC District 10 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 10 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 ...

  2. Texas--RRC District 6 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 6 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 ...

  3. Indiana Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Plant Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 ...

  4. Wyoming Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 ...

  5. Indiana Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 ...

  6. Oregon Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Oregon Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 ...

  7. Iowa Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Iowa Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 ...

  8. Arizona Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Arizona Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 ...

  9. Georgia Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Georgia Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 ...

  10. Ohio Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 ...

  11. Alabama Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 ...

  12. Hawaii Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Hawaii Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 ...

  13. Vermont Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Vermont Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 ...

  14. Virginia Natural Gas Vented and Flared (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Vented and Flared (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Natural Gas Vented and Flared (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  15. Louisiana--North Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana--North Shale Production (Billion 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 1...

  16. Louisiana--South Onshore Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana--South Onshore Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  17. Lower 48 States Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Lower 48 States Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  18. Oklahoma Natural Gas Processed in Oklahoma (Million Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Oklahoma (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Processed in Oklahoma (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's ...

  19. Nevada Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 ...

  20. New Mexico--West Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico--West Shale Production (Billion 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 1 ...

  1. New Mexico--West Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico--West Coalbed Methane Production (Billion 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 ...

  2. New Mexico--West Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico--West Shale Proved Reserves (Billion 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 ...

  3. New Mexico--East Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico--East Shale Proved Reserves (Billion 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 ...

  4. New Mexico--East Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico--East Shale Production (Billion 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 2 0 1 ...

  5. New Mexico--East Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico--East Coalbed Methane Production (Billion 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 ...

  6. Ohio Natural Gas Withdrawals from Gas Wells (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Gas Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Withdrawals from Gas Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 13,138 11,794 12,855 ...

  7. Ohio Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Ohio Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 ...

  8. Colorado Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Colorado Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 ...

  9. Oklahoma Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 ...

  10. Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 ...

  11. Montana Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 ...

  12. Pennsylvania Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 ...

  13. Kentucky Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Kentucky Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 ...

  14. Kansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Kansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 ...

  15. Wyoming Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Wyoming Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 ...

  16. Utah Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Utah Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 ...

  17. Arkansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Arkansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 ...

  18. Alabama Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Alabama Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 ...

  19. Connecticut Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Connecticut Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  20. Kansas Natural Gas Processed in Kansas (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Kansas (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Processed in Kansas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 256,268...

  1. Colorado Natural Gas Processed in Kansas (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Kansas (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas Processed in Kansas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 178...

  2. Kansas Natural Gas Processed in Texas (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Processed in Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 142 141...

  3. Arizona Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Arizona Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  4. Arizona Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Arizona Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  5. Portal, ND Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet) Portal, ND Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2015 2 2016 2 ...

  6. New Hampshire Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New Hampshire Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 ...

  7. New Hampshire Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Exports (Million Cubic Feet) New Hampshire Natural Gas Exports (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 64 0 ...

  8. Holiday Food Drive 2016

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Food Drive 2016 Holiday Food Drive 2016 Helping feed Northern New Mexico families...reaching out to Northern New Mexico communities. September 16, 2013 LANL employees organize food for the Holiday Food Drive. Contacts Annual Food & Holiday Gift Drives Mike Martinez (505) 699-3388 Community Partnerships Office (505) 665-4400 Email Participate in Laboratory's annual food collection drive-through Nov. 17 Laboratory employees can continue to make a difference in the lives of others in local

  9. Nebraska Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 13,130 9,437 6,415 1970's 3,697 2,848 2,890 33,369 34,243 34,463 35,351 32,226 29,828 1980's 1,648 1,281 1,154 1,256 1,097 707 987 690 381 1990's 31 136 65 586 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 10/31/2016 Next Release Date:

  10. Ohio Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Processed (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 207 670 1,713 2,263 2,591 2,555 3,036 2,812 2,608 1990's 3,081 2,615 2,730 2,989 2,930 2,257 2,477 2,553 2,895 2,933 2000's 3,285 4,336 4,098 3,609 3,883 2,657 2,397 1,456 2010's 2,211 33,031 344,073 745,715 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.

  11. California Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) California Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 505,063 476,596 455,692 1970's 444,700 431,605 386,664 359,841 252,402 213,079 216,667 206,981 204,693 1980's 169,812 261,725 263,475 276,209 281,389 263,823 276,969 270,191 254,286 1990's 263,667 246,335 243,692 246,283 228,346 226,548 240,566 243,054 235,558 259,518 2000's 260,049 258,271 249,671 238,743 236,465 226,230 223,580

  12. Colorado Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 112,440 96,397 85,171 1970's 82,736 97,420 104,116 110,662 118,686 136,090 175,624 171,233 167,959 1980's 201,637 220,108 173,894 181,150 191,625 163,614 180,290 178,048 196,682 1990's 208,069 234,851 256,019 307,250 353,855 345,441 493,963 374,728 425,083 444,978 2000's 494,581 497,385 534,295 555,544 703,804 730,948 751,036 888,705

  13. Utah Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Utah Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) 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 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's 68,211 95,670 93,934 98,598 99,233 241,904 274,470 286,592 286,929 1990's 334,067 333,591 319,017 348,010 368,585 308,174 265,546 249,930 242,070 211,514 2000's 169,553 166,505 136,843 161,275 193,093 187,524 193,836 195,701 202,380 412,639 2010's 454,832 490,233 535,365 448,687 419,773 386,823 - = No Data

  14. Wyoming Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 261,478 259,227 269,921 1970's 276,926 292,434 298,439 303,519 263,684 215,104 251,846 262,801 255,760 1980's 366,530 393,027 432,313 579,479 624,619 506,241 512,579 560,603 591,472 1990's 635,922 681,266 728,113 750,853 821,689 895,129 845,253 863,052 870,518 902,889 2000's 993,702 988,595 1,083,860 1,101,425 1,249,309 1,278,087 1,288,124

  15. Michigan Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) 22,405 21,518 21,243 21,416 18,654 16,288 1967-2015 Total Liquids Extracted (Thousand Barrels) 2,207 2,132 2,046 2,005 1,593 1,565 1983-2015 NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent (Million Cubic Feet) 2,943 2,465 2,480 2,345 1,922 1,793 1967

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Wellhead Price 3.79 1967-2010 Imports Price 4.73 4.38 2.88 4.02 8.34 2.87 1989-2015 Exports Price 4.85 4.44 3.12 4.07 6.26 3.19

  16. Montana Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) 12,391 11,185 12,727 14,575 14,751 15,146 1967-2015 Total Liquids Extracted (Thousand Barrels) 989 927 1,115 1,235 1,254 1,311 1983-2015 NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent (Million Cubic Feet) 1,367 1,252 1,491 1,645 1,670 1,730 1967

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Wellhead Price 3.64 1967-2010 Imports Price 4.13 3.75 2.45 3.23 4.39 2.40 1989-2015 Exports Price 4.05 3.82 2.40 3.43 5.38 12.54

  17. Oklahoma Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) 1,110,236 1,218,855 1,310,331 1,377,119 1,696,107 1,717,757 1967-2015 Total Liquids Extracted (Thousand Barrels) 83,174 91,963 96,237 98,976 117,057 118,229 1983-2015 NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent (Million Cubic Feet) 120,631 134,032 139,928 142,595 169,864 163,365 1967

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Wellhead Price 4.71 1967-2010 Pipeline and Distribution Use Price 1967-2005 Citygate Price

  18. Utah Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) 454,832 490,233 535,365 448,687 419,773 386,823 1967-2015 Total Liquids Extracted (Thousand Barrels) 7,648 10,805 11,441 11,279 13,343 11,165 1983-2015 NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent (Million Cubic Feet) 9,978 14,910 15,637 15,409 18,652 15,298 1967

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Wellhead Price 4.23 1967-2010 Pipeline and Distribution Use Price 1967-2005 Citygate Price 5.53 5.68 5.50 5.70

  19. Wyoming Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) 1,642,190 1,634,364 1,614,320 1,517,876 1,526,746 1,352,224 1967-2015 Total Liquids Extracted (Thousand Barrels) 63,857 66,839 70,737 52,999 54,933 35,418 1983-2015 NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent (Million Cubic Feet) 92,777 97,588 102,549 74,409 76,943 48,552 1967

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Wellhead Price 4.30 1967-2010 Pipeline and Distribution Use Price 1967-2005 Citygate Price 5.04

  20. Illinois Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 483,902 483,336 478,291 1970's 429,691 341,750 376,310 358,142 342,046 322,393 305,441 275,060 327,451 1980's 150,214 152,645 166,568 156,791 153,419 146,463 106,547 757 509 1990's 607 951 942 809 685 727 578 500 468 358 2000's 271 233 299 306 328 280 242 235 233 164 2010's 5,393 294 320 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  1. Colorado Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) 1,434,003 1,507,467 1,464,261 1,373,046 1,495,360 1,663,095 1967-2015 Total Liquids Extracted (Thousand Barrels) 57,924 63,075 57,379 51,978 60,850 73,980 1983-2015 NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent (Million Cubic Feet) 82,637 90,801 82,042 87,513 85,198 104,633 1967

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Wellhead Price 3.96 1967-2010 Pipeline and Distribution Use Price 1967-2005 Citygate Price 5.26

  2. Florida Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) 2,915 5,526 1967-2015 Total Liquids Extracted (Thousand Barrels) 173 173 1983-2015 NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent (Million Cubic Feet) 0 0 0 0 233 235 1968

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Wellhead Price NA 1967-2010 Pipeline and Distribution Use Price 1967-2005 Citygate Price 5.49 5.07 3.93 4.44 5.05 4.75 1984-2015 Residential Price 17.89 18.16 18.34 18.46 19.02 19.55 1967-2015 Percentage of

  3. Kansas Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) 341,778 322,944 259,565 190,503 191,034 163,788 1967-2015 Total Liquids Extracted (Thousand Barrels) 18,424 18,098 14,844 10,900 11,611 10,347 1983-2015 NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent (Million Cubic Feet) 26,251 25,804 21,220 15,446 16,515 15,056 1967

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Wellhead Price 4.23 1967-2010 Pipeline and Distribution Use Price 1967-2005 Citygate Price 6.08 5.53 4.74 4.98

  4. Western States Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Western States Shale Production (Billion 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 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Gas Production

  5. Texas Onshore Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) (Million Cubic

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) (Million Cubic Feet) (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Onshore Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 6,019 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 10/31/2016 Next Release Date: 11/30/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed (Summary) Louisiana Natural Gas Summary

  6. Kentucky Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Production (Billion 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 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: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Kentucky Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Coalbed Methane Production

  7. Oscillatory nonhmic current drive for maintaining a plasma current

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Fisch, Nathaniel J.

    1986-01-01

    Apparatus and method of the invention maintain a plasma current with an oscillatory nonohmic current drive. Each cycle of operation has a generation period in which current driving energy is applied to the plasma, and a relaxation period in which current driving energy is removed. Plasma parameters, such as plasma temperature or plasma average ionic charge state, are modified during the generation period so as to oscillate plasma resistivity in synchronism with the application of current driving energy. The invention improves overall current drive efficiencies.

  8. Oscillatory nonohomic current drive for maintaining a plasma current

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Fisch, N.J.

    1984-01-01

    Apparatus and methods are described for maintaining a plasma current with an oscillatory nonohmic current drive. Each cycle of operation has a generation period in which current driving energy is applied to the plasma, and a relaxation period in which current driving energy is removed. Plasma parameters, such as plasma temperature or plasma average ionic charge state, are modified during the generation period so as to oscillate plasma resistivity in synchronism with the application of current driving energy. The invention improves overall current drive efficiencies.

  9. Drill drive mechanism

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Dressel, Michael O.

    1979-01-01

    A drill drive mechanism is especially adapted to provide both rotational drive and axial feed for a drill of substantial diameter such as may be used for drilling holes for roof bolts in mine shafts. The drill shaft is made with a helical pattern of scroll-like projections on its surface for removal of cuttings. The drill drive mechanism includes a plurality of sprockets carrying two chains of drive links which are arranged to interlock around the drill shaft with each drive link having depressions which mate with the scroll-like projections. As the chain links move upwardly or downwardly the surfaces of the depressions in the links mate with the scroll projections to move the shaft axially. Tangs on the drive links mate with notch surfaces between scroll projections to provide a means for rotating the shaft. Projections on the drive links mate together at the center to hold the drive links tightly around the drill shaft. The entire chain drive mechanism is rotated around the drill shaft axis by means of a hydraulic motor and gear drive to cause rotation of the drill shaft. This gear drive also connects with a differential gearset which is interconnected with a second gear. A second motor is connected to the spider shaft of the differential gearset to produce differential movement (speeds) at the output gears of the differential gearset. This differential in speed is utilized to drive said second gear at a speed different from the speed of said gear drive, this speed differential being utilized to drive said sprockets for axial movement of said drill shaft.

  10. Texas Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 7,018,237 7,239,621 7,613,234 1970's 7,808,476 7,938,550 8,139,408 7,683,830 7,194,453 6,509,132 6,253,159 6,030,131 5,621,419 1980's 4,563,931 4,507,771 4,258,852 4,377,799 4,164,382 4,199,501 3,997,226 3,813,727 3,842,395 1990's 3,860,388 4,874,718 4,231,145 4,301,504 4,160,551 4,132,491 4,180,062 4,171,967 4,073,739 3,903,351

  11. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 2,247 2,390 1,708 1970's 1,418 1,112 1,711 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's 2,001 2,393 5,432 6,115 5,407 6,356 6,459 6,126 6,518 1990's 6,613 10,244 11,540 10,263 7,133 10,106 10,341 11,661 11,366 11,261 2000's 7,758 9,928 7,033 9,441 9,423 11,462 12,386 13,367 18,046 22,364 2010's 56,162 131,959 236,817 396,726 301,514 405,787 - = No Data Reported;

  12. Michigan Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Michigan Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 171,531 156,996 143,802 1970's 139,571 141,784 94,738 37,384 45,106 79,154 151,318 172,578 199,347 1980's 155,984 151,560 137,364 148,076 151,393 142,255 137,687 125,183 123,578 1990's 134,550 170,574 186,144 201,985 196,000 179,678 117,119 86,564 83,052 67,514 2000's 58,482 50,734 47,292 41,619 37,977 34,545 33,213 29,436 30,008 23,819

  13. Mississippi Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Mississippi Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 46,068 44,510 0 1970's 50,509 44,732 29,538 29,081 24,568 29,694 0 0 0 1980's 34,337 38,315 29,416 29,705 23,428 21,955 12,131 9,565 8,353 1990's 7,887 7,649 4,822 4,892 5,052 4,869 4,521 4,372 3,668 135,773 2000's 205,106 239,830 263,456 283,675 283,763 292,023 278,436 224,596 174,573 215,951 2010's 218,840 126,859 6,865 4,527 5,633

  14. Montana Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 60,500 59,058 57,793 1970's 59,193 57,105 61,757 56,960 146,907 156,203 0 0 0 1980's 11,825 13,169 15,093 16,349 19,793 16,212 14,177 15,230 15,475 1990's 14,629 14,864 12,697 11,010 10,418 9,413 10,141 8,859 8,715 5,211 2000's 5,495 5,691 6,030 6,263 6,720 10,057 12,685 13,646 13,137 12,415 2010's 12,391 11,185 12,727 14,575 14,751 15,146 -

  15. Oklahoma Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 1,038,103 1,122,692 1,167,150 1970's 1,183,273 1,123,614 1,116,872 1,175,548 1,092,487 1,033,003 1,072,992 1,057,326 1,069,293 1980's 1,063,256 1,112,740 1,023,057 1,118,403 1,137,463 1,103,062 1,127,780 1,301,673 1,145,688 1990's 1,102,301 1,100,812 1,071,426 1,082,452 1,092,734 1,015,965 1,054,123 1,014,008 947,177 892,396 2000's 963,464

  16. Alabama Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 57,208 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 25,517 31,610 32,806 1980's 38,572 41,914 38,810 42,181 45,662 48,382 49,341 52,511 55,939 1990's 58,136 76,739 126,910 132,222 136,195 118,688 112,868 114,411 107,334 309,492 2000's 372,136 285,953 290,164 237,377 263,426 255,157 287,278 257,443 253,028 248,232 2010's 242,444 230,546 87,269 89,258 80,590

  17. Alaska Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 149,865 151,669 147,954 1980's 111,512 115,394 42,115 62,144 66,062 58,732 134,945 76,805 75,703 1990's 1,571,438 1,873,279 2,121,838 2,295,499 2,667,254 2,980,557 2,987,364 2,964,734 2,966,461 2,950,502 2000's 3,123,599 2,984,807 2,997,824 2,447,017 2,680,859 3,089,229 2,665,742 2,965,956 2,901,760 2,830,034

  18. Arkansas Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 93,452 88,011 56,190 1970's 37,816 31,387 17,946 26,135 19,784 17,918 20,370 18,630 18,480 1980's 29,003 31,530 33,753 34,572 258,648 174,872 197,781 213,558 228,157 1990's 272,278 224,625 156,573 198,074 218,710 100,720 219,477 185,244 198,148 179,524 2000's 207,045 207,352 12,635 13,725 10,139 16,756 13,702 11,532 6,531 2,352 2010's 9,599

  19. Kentucky Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Kentucky Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) 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 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's 237,759 230,940 241,558 256,522 253,652 150,627 26,888 26,673 18,707 1990's 28,379 40,966 47,425 45,782 42,877 44,734 46,015 43,352 37,929 44,064 2000's 36,734 36,901 41,078 42,758 38,208 38,792 39,559 38,158 58,899 60,167 2010's 66,579 60,941 92,883 85,549 79,985 75,162 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  20. High-Temperature Components for Rankine-Cycle-Based Waste Heat Recovery Systems on Combustion Engines

    Energy.gov [DOE]

    This poster reports on recent developments, achievements, and capabilities within a virtual environment to predict the dynamic behavior of the Rankine cycle within real driving cycles.

  1. Florida Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Florida Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic ... Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions Florida Dry Natural Gas Proved ...

  2. Florida Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption Florida Natural Gas Consumption by End ...

  3. Florida Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Florida Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion ... Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments Florida Dry Natural Gas Proved ...

  4. Florida Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Consumption Florida Natural Gas Consumption by End Use Total ...

  5. Florida Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Plant Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production ... Referring Pages: NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent Florida Natural Gas Plant Processing ...

  6. Florida Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption Florida Natural Gas Consumption by End ...

  7. Florida Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels ... Total Supplemental Supply of Natural Gas Florida Supplemental Supplies of Natural Gas ...

  8. West Virginia Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) West Virginia Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Used for Repressuring West Virginia Natural Gas Gross ...

  9. West Virginia Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) West Virginia Natural Gas Total Consumption ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Consumption West Virginia Natural Gas Consumption by End Use ...

  10. Virginia Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Virginia Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion ... Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions Virginia Dry Natural Gas Proved ...

  11. Virginia Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption Virginia Natural Gas Consumption by ...

  12. West Virginia Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) West Virginia Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic ... Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales West Virginia Dry Natural Gas Proved ...

  13. Virginia Natural Gas Vented and Flared (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Vented and Flared (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Natural Gas Vented and Flared (Million ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Vented and Flared Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and ...

  14. Virginia Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Consumption Virginia Natural Gas Consumption by End Use ...

  15. Nevada Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption Nevada Natural Gas Consumption by End ...

  16. Nevada Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Consumption Nevada Natural Gas Consumption by End Use ...

  17. Nevada Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Dry Natural Gas Production (Million ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Dry Production Nevada Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and ...

  18. Nevada Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels ... Referring Pages: Total Supplemental Supply of Natural Gas Nevada Supplemental Supplies of ...

  19. Texas--Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet) Texas--Onshore Natural Gas Dry ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Dry Production Texas Onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals ...

  20. Texas (with State Offshore) Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas (with State Offshore) Shale Production (Billion ... Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production Texas Shale Gas Proved Reserves, ...

  1. Utah Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet) Utah Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production (Million ... NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent Utah Natural Gas Plant Processing NGPL Production, ...

  2. Kentucky Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kentucky Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million ... Release Date: 06302016 Next Release Date: 07292016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Plant ...

  3. Utah Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Utah Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million ... Release Date: 06302016 Next Release Date: 07292016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Plant ...

  4. Kansas Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production ... NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent Kansas Natural Gas Plant Processing NGPL Production, ...

  5. Wyoming Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million ... Release Date: 06302016 Next Release Date: 07292016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Plant ...

  6. Kansas Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million ... Release Date: 06302016 Next Release Date: 07292016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Plant ...

  7. Wyoming Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production ... NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent Wyoming Natural Gas Plant Processing NGPL Production, ...

  8. Idaho Natural Gas Imports Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Idaho Natural Gas Imports Price (Dollars per ... Release Date: 4292016 Next Release Date: 5312016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Imports ...

  9. Alaska Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 ... of Natural Gas Supplies of Natural Gas Supplemental Fuels (Annual Supply & Disposition)

  10. Oklahoma Natural Gas Vented and Flared (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Vented and Flared (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Vented and Flared (Million ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Vented and Flared Oklahoma Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and ...

  11. Kansas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Kansas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic ... Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions Kansas Dry Natural Gas Proved ...

  12. Kansas Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Consumption Kansas Natural Gas Consumption by End Use Natural ...

  13. Kansas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Kansas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion ... Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions Kansas Dry Natural Gas Proved ...

  14. Kansas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Kansas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion ... Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments Kansas Dry Natural Gas Proved ...

  15. New York Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New York Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption New York Natural Gas Consumption by ...

  16. New Mexico Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion ... Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 New Mexico Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, ...

  17. New Jersey Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New Jersey Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Consumption New Jersey Natural Gas Consumption by End Use ...

  18. New York Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New York Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Consumption New York Natural Gas Consumption by End Use ...

  19. New Mexico Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Consumption New Mexico Natural Gas Consumption by End Use ...

  20. New York Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) New York Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion ... Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions New York Dry Natural Gas Proved ...

  1. ,"Alabama Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at ... Data for" ,"Data 1","Alabama Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic ...

  2. ,"Wyoming Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at ... Data for" ,"Data 1","Wyoming Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic ...

  3. Michigan Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Michigan Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 ... Release Date: 11192015 Next Release Date: 12312016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane ...

  4. ,"Utah Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at ... Data for" ,"Data 1","Utah Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic ...

  5. ,"Colorado Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at ... Data for" ,"Data 1","Colorado Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic ...

  6. North Dakota Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) North Dakota Shale Proved Reserves (Billion ... Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 North Dakota Shale Gas Proved Reserves, ...

  7. North Carolina Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) North Carolina Natural Gas Total Consumption ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Consumption North Carolina Natural Gas Consumption by End Use ...

  8. North Dakota Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) North Dakota Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic ... Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales North Dakota Dry Natural Gas Proved ...

  9. North Dakota Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    North Dakota Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 ... Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 North Dakota Coalbed Methane Proved ...

  10. Louisiana--North Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana--North Shale Proved Reserves (Billion ... Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 North Louisiana Shale Gas Proved Reserves, ...

  11. North Dakota Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) North Dakota Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Consumption North Dakota Natural Gas Consumption by End Use ...

  12. Minnesota Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million ... Referring Pages: Natural Gas Consumption Minnesota Natural Gas Consumption by End Use ...

  13. Climate Control Load Reduction Strategies for Electric Drive...

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    ... Drive Cycle Simulations The vehicle simulation tool Autonomie was used to calculate ... The Focus Electric uses a 23-kWh capacity lithium-ion battery pack. The battery utilization ...

  14. Holiday Gift Drive

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Gift Drive Holiday Gift Drive Every year, Laboratory employees help fulfill the holiday wishes of children and seniors in our communities. In 2015, our employees donated more than 1,200 gifts to 23 nonprofit organizations to help Northern New Mexico citizens have a brighter holiday season. May 7, 2015 Every holiday season, employees of Los Alamos National Laboratory donate and distribute gifts to families in need throughout Northern New Mexico. Contacts Annual Food & Holiday Gift Drives Mike

  15. Driving/Idling Resources

    Energy.gov [DOE]

    While transportation efficiency policies are often implemented under local governments, national and state programs can play supportive roles in reducing vehicle miles traveled. Find driving/idling...

  16. Holiday Food Drive

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Community Programs Office (505) 665-4400 Email Get Expertise Helping feed Northern New Mexico families During the Laboratory's 2015 Annual Food Drive, employees and subcontract...

  17. Variable Frequency Drives

    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) all webpages (Extended Search)

    Marketing Toolkit The Benefits of Variable Frequency Drives (VFDs) VFDs help adjust motor speeds to match loads and improve efficiency while conserving energy. The benefits...

  18. Texas Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    4,534,403 4,785,388 5,452,574 6,085,121 6,834,017 6,857,885 1967-2015 Total Liquids Extracted (Thousand Barrels) 304,093 334,219 401,728 474,441 557,798 567,505 1983-2015 NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent (Million Cubic Feet) 433,622 481,308 579,410 689,887 806,794 809,327 196

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Wellhead Price 4.70 1967-2010 Imports Price 6.72 6.78 10.09 12.94 11.79 13.31 1993-2015 Exports Price 4.68 4.44 3.14 3.94 4.67 2.97 1989-2015 Pipeline and Distribution Use

  19. California Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    204,327 180,648 169,203 164,401 162,794 150,561 1967-2015 Total Liquids Extracted (Thousand Barrels) 10,400 9,831 9,923 10,641 9,605 9,086 1983-2015 NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent (Million Cubic Feet) 13,244 12,095 12,755 14,298 13,201 12,470

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Wellhead Price 4.87 1967-2010 Imports Price 4.76 3.57 -- 3.59 -- -- 2007-2015 Exports Price 4.51 4.18 2.90 3.89 4.56 2.76 1997-2015 Pipeline and Distribution Use Price 1967-2005 Citygate Price 4.86 4.47

  20. Kentucky Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    66,579 60,941 92,883 85,549 79,985 75,162 1967-2015 Total Liquids Extracted (Thousand Barrels) 3,317 3,398 4,740 4,651 4,668 4,363 1983-2015 NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent (Million Cubic Feet) 4,576 4,684 6,571 6,443 6,471 6,076

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Wellhead Price 4.47 1967-2010 Pipeline and Distribution Use Price 1967-2005 Citygate Price 5.69 5.18 4.17 4.47 5.16 3.96 1984-2015 Residential Price 10.02 10.44 10.19 9.80 10.62 10.87 1967-2015 Percentage of Total

  1. Louisiana Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    2,207,760 2,048,175 978,100 923,772 823,742 930,816 1967-2015 Total Liquids Extracted (Thousand Barrels) 71,231 66,426 24,181 28,496 26,177 29,275 1983-2015 NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent (Million Cubic Feet) 102,448 95,630 34,684 40,357 37,645 41,680

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Wellhead Price 4.23 1967-2010 Imports Price 4.84 7.57 7.98 14.40 14.59 8.32 1989-2015 Exports Price 7.07 9.63 11.80 -- -- -- 2007-2015 Pipeline and Distribution Use Price 1967-2005 Citygate Price

  2. Port Huron, MI Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Port Huron, MI Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013 1 2014 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2015 1 1...

  3. Piezoelectric drive circuit

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Treu, C.A. Jr.

    1999-08-31

    A piezoelectric motor drive circuit is provided which utilizes the piezoelectric elements as oscillators and a Meacham half-bridge approach to develop feedback from the motor ground circuit to produce a signal to drive amplifiers to power the motor. The circuit automatically compensates for shifts in harmonic frequency of the piezoelectric elements due to pressure and temperature changes. 7 figs.

  4. Piezoelectric drive circuit

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Treu, Jr., Charles A.

    1999-08-31

    A piezoelectric motor drive circuit is provided which utilizes the piezoelectric elements as oscillators and a Meacham half-bridge approach to develop feedback from the motor ground circuit to produce a signal to drive amplifiers to power the motor. The circuit automatically compensates for shifts in harmonic frequency of the piezoelectric elements due to pressure and temperature changes.

  5. Truck Duty Cycle and Performance Data Collection and Analysis...

    Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    Collection and Analysis Program Heavy Duty & Medium Duty Drive Cycle Data Collection for Modeling Expansion Roadmap and Technical White Papers for 21st Century Truck Partnership

  6. U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) ... Release Date: 11192015 Next Release Date: 12312016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane ...

  7. Control rod drive

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Hawke, Basil C.

    1986-01-01

    A control rod drive uses gravitational forces to insert one or more control rods upwardly into a reactor core from beneath the reactor core under emergency conditions. The preferred control rod drive includes a vertically movable weight and a mechanism operatively associating the weight with the control rod so that downward movement of the weight is translated into upward movement of the control rod. The preferred control rod drive further includes an electric motor for driving the control rods under normal conditions, an electrically actuated clutch which automatically disengages the motor during a power failure and a decelerator for bringing the control rod to a controlled stop when it is inserted under emergency conditions into a reactor core.

  8. Ride and Drive Webinar

    Energy.gov [DOE]

    Listen to this webinar and follow along using the slides below to learn how on-site plug-in electric vehicle (PEV) Ride and Drives can create value for your organization, your employees, and your...

  9. Traction Drive Systems Breakout

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) (indexed site)

    Traction Drive Systems Breakout John M. Miller, PhD, PE, F.IEEE, F.SAE Oak Ridge National Laboratory Facilitator July 24, 2012 EV Everywhere Grand Challenge Vehicle Technologies ...

  10. US DRIVE Driving Research and Innovation for Vehicle Efficiency...

    Energy Savers

    US DRIVE Driving Research and Innovation for Vehicle Efficiency and Energy Sustainability Partnership Plan This document describes the vision, mission, scope, and governing ...

  11. Tennessee Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1992 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1993 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1995 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1997 0 0 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 0 0 2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 0

  12. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1992 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1993 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1995 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1997 0 0 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 0 0 2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 0

  13. Nebraska Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1992 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1993 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1995 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1997 0 0 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 0 0 2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 0

  14. Ohio Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1992 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1993 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1995 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1997 0 0 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 0 0 2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 0

  15. Oklahoma Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1996 - - - - - - - - - - - - 1997 0 0 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 0 0 2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 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

  16. Ohio Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1992 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1993 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1995 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1997 0 0 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 0 0 2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 0

  17. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1992 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1993 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1995 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1997 0 0 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 0 0 2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 0

  18. Tennessee Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1992 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1993 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1995 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1997 0 0 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 0 0 2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 0

  19. Direct drive wind turbine

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Bywaters, Garrett; Danforth, William; Bevington, Christopher; Stowell, Jesse; Costin, Daniel

    2006-07-11

    A wind turbine is provided that minimizes the size of the drive train and nacelle while maintaining the power electronics and transformer at the top of the tower. The turbine includes a direct drive generator having an integrated disk brake positioned radially inside the stator while minimizing the potential for contamination. The turbine further includes a means for mounting a transformer below the nacelle within the tower.

  20. Direct drive wind turbine

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Bywaters, Garrett; Danforth, William; Bevington, Christopher; Jesse, Stowell; Costin, Daniel

    2006-10-10

    A wind turbine is provided that minimizes the size of the drive train and nacelle while maintaining the power electronics and transformer at the top of the tower. The turbine includes a direct drive generator having an integrated disk brake positioned radially inside the stator while minimizing the potential for contamination. The turbine further includes a means for mounting a transformer below the nacelle within the tower.

  1. Direct drive wind turbine

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Bywaters, Garrett; Danforth, William; Bevington, Christopher; Jesse, Stowell; Costin, Daniel

    2007-02-27

    A wind turbine is provided that minimizes the size of the drive train and nacelle while maintaining the power electronics and transformer at the top of the tower. The turbine includes a direct drive generator having an integrated disk brake positioned radially inside the stator while minimizing the potential for contamination. The turbine further includes a means for mounting a transformer below the nacelle within the tower.

  2. Direct drive wind turbine

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Bywaters, Garrett Lee; Danforth, William; Bevington, Christopher; Stowell, Jesse; Costin, Daniel

    2006-09-19

    A wind turbine is provided that minimizes the size of the drive train and nacelle while maintaining the power electronics and transformer at the top of the tower. The turbine includes a direct drive generator having an integrated disk brake positioned radially inside the stator while minimizing the potential for contamination. The turbine further includes a means for mounting a transformer below the nacelle within the tower.

  3. CONTROL ROD DRIVE

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Chapellier, R.A.

    1960-05-24

    BS>A drive mechanism was invented for the control rod of a nuclear reactor. Power is provided by an electric motor and an outside source of fluid pressure is utilized in conjunction with the fluid pressure within the reactor to balance the loadings on the motor. The force exerted on the drive mechanism in the direction of scramming the rod is derived from the reactor fluid pressure so that failure of the outside pressure source will cause prompt scramming of the rod.

  4. Nevada Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Neptune Deepwater Port Natural Gas Liquefied Natural Gas Imports (price) (Dollars per Thousand 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 -- -- -- 2010's 6.41 -- -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 10/31/2016 Next Release Date: 11/30/2016 Referring Pages: U.S.

  5. Kansas Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Kansas Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion 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 167 1980's 185 139 112 132 110 115 132 115 103 101 1990's 114 115 94 93 75 67 82 51 60 52 2000's 40 105 66 85 80 83 82 83 85 83 2010's 79 127 326 433 657 - = No Data Reported;

  6. Missouri Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    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 0

    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 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 10/31/2016

  7. New York Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) New York Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion 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 0 1980's 0 2 3 0 2 2 0 0 0 4 1990's 0 0 0 0 2 2 3 1 1 9 2000's 2 7 0 0 0 3 2 10 29 0 2010's 10 8 6 6 5 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W

  8. North Dakota Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) North Dakota Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion 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 201 1980's 239 253 248 257 267 331 293 276 266 313 1990's 334 243 266 274 275 263 255 257 261 250 2000's 264 270 315 316 320 343 357 417 484 1,070 2010's 1,717

  9. Utah Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Utah Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion 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 367 1980's 414 335 325 360 341 391 410 471 475 442 1990's 455 469 309 289 286 277 301 310 209 321 2000's 348 303 359 299 290 308 317 368 321 601 2010's 631 909 1,001 895 872 - =

  10. West Virginia Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) West Virginia Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion 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 76 1980's 122 63 83 86 73 73 65 150 141 98 1990's 86 159 198 190 133 74 71 59 43 88 2000's 98 48 21 23 20 19 16 16 23 24 2010's 29 52 21 70 32 - = No Data

  11. Combined cycle power plant incorporating coal gasification

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Liljedahl, Gregory N.; Moffat, Bruce K.

    1981-01-01

    A combined cycle power plant incorporating a coal gasifier as the energy source. The gases leaving the coal gasifier pass through a liquid couplant heat exchanger before being used to drive a gas turbine. The exhaust gases of the gas turbine are used to generate both high pressure and low pressure steam for driving a steam turbine, before being exhausted to the atmosphere.

  12. Traction Drive Systems Breakout Group

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) (indexed site)

    profit motive in value chain * 4 - Today's HEV systems drive EV traction drive systems ... replacing the traditional rechargeable battery with a flow battery that can be ...

  13. ,"Florida Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    7:59:39 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Florida Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)" "Sourcekey","NA1160SFL2" "Date","Florida Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic ...

  14. Sumas, WA Liquefied Natural Gas Imports (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Sumas, WA Liquefied Natural Gas Imports (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun ... Referring Pages: U.S. Liquefied Natural Gas Imports by Point of Entry Sumas, WA LNG ...

  15. Babb, MT Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2015 5 - No Data Reported; -- Not Applicable; NA Not Available; W Withheld...

  16. Buffalo, NY Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2015 1 1 1 1 - No Data Reported; -- Not Applicable; NA Not Available; W ...

  17. ,"U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic ... "Back to Contents","Data 1: U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ...

  18. ,"Arizona Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"01042016 7:36:54 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Arizona Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)" "Sourcekey","NA1160SAZ2"...

  19. South Dakota Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) South Dakota Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 113 86 71 62 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 10/31/2016 Next Release Date: 11/30/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed South Dakota Natural Gas Plant Processing Natural Gas Processed

  20. Michigan Shale Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Michigan Shale Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion 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 16 2010's 333 409 0 11 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions

  1. Michigan Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Michigan Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion 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 -167 2010's 305 31 -98 -74 -41 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments

  2. Michigan Shale Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Michigan Shale Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion 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 15 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: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Extensions

  3. Michigan Shale Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Michigan Shale Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion 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 276 2010's 325 151 916 103 57 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases

  4. Michigan Shale Proved Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Michigan Shale Proved Reserves Revision Increases (Billion 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 149 2010's 165 140 520 351 209 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases

  5. Michigan Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Michigan Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion 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 2010's 553 682 0 11 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Sales

  6. Miscellaneous States Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Miscellaneous States Coalbed Methane Production (Billion 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 1 1 1 1 1 2010's 1 1 1 3 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production

  7. Miscellaneous States Shale Gas Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Miscellaneous States Shale Gas Production (Billion 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 2 2 4 2010's 5 3 3 2 6 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production

  8. Miscellaneous States Shale Gas Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Miscellaneous States Shale Gas Proved Reserves Sales (Billion 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 2010's 11 89 14 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Sales

  9. Montana Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion 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 2010's 11 -30 17 10 -3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Adjustments

  10. Montana Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion 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 3 2010's 3 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Extensions

  11. Montana Natural Gas Processed in Wyoming (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Wyoming (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Processed in Wyoming (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 785 656 622 631 637 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 10/31/2016 Next Release Date: 11/30/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Montana-Wyoming

  12. Montana Shale Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Shale Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion 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 2 2010's 0 41 3 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions

  13. Montana Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion 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 8 2010's 40 14 -7 -4 196 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments

  14. Montana Shale Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Shale Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion 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 3 2010's 25 5 31 33 87 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Extensions

  15. Montana Shale Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Shale Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion 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 34 2010's 16 14 2 28 51 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases

  16. Montana Shale Proved Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Shale Proved Reserves Revision Increases (Billion 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 42 2010's 14 14 18 31 64 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases

  17. Montana Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion 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 2 2010's 1 42 3 0 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Sales

  18. New Mexico Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion 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 -9 2010's 261 -170 56 41 701 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Adjustments

  19. New Mexico Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion 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 37 2010's 42 80 60 22 68 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Extensions

  20. Arkansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Arkansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion 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 22 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: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Acquisitions

  1. Arkansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Arkansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion 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 2010's 1 0 0 0 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Adjustments

  2. Arkansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Arkansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion 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 31 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: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Sales

  3. Arkansas Shale Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Arkansas Shale Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion 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 2010's 774 6,220 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions

  4. Arkansas Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Arkansas Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion 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 2 2010's 63 655 -754 7 -21 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments

  5. Arkansas Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Arkansas Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion 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 3 2010's 336 6,087 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Sales

  6. Colorado Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Colorado Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion 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 2010's 0 1,021 0 0 60 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Acquisitions

  7. Colorado Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Colorado Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion 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 2010's 106 73 181 75 66 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Adjustments

  8. Colorado Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Colorado Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion 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 48 2010's 184 220 22 2 34 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Extensions

  9. Colorado Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Colorado Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion 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 2010's 0 1,034 0 82 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Sales

  10. California (with State off) Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Billion Cubic Feet) California (with State off) Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 855 777 756 44 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31

  11. Mississippi (with State off) Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Billion Cubic Feet) Mississippi (with State off) Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 19 37 19 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31

  12. Wyoming Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Wyoming Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion 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 2010's 59 123 36 0 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Acquisitions

  13. Wyoming Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Wyoming Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion 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 -4 2010's 329 98 -32 -84 -50 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Adjustments

  14. Wyoming Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Wyoming Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion 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 226 2010's 180 370 80 182 67 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Extensions

  15. Wyoming Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Wyoming Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion 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 111 2010's 82 194 162 0 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Sales

  16. Wyoming Natural Gas Processed in Colorado (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Colorado (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming Natural Gas Processed in Colorado (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 69,827 75,855 136,964 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 10/31/2016 Next Release Date: 11/30/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Wyoming-Colorado

  17. New Mexico Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion 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 33 2010's 12 221 0 440 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Sales

  18. New Mexico Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion 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 10 2010's 3 69 45 18 113 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments

  19. New Mexico Shale Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico Shale Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion 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 28 2010's 100 68 38 67 297 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Extensions

  20. New Mexico Shale Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico Shale Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion 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 2 2010's 11 190 56 45 100 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases

  1. New Mexico Shale Proved Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico Shale Proved Reserves Revision Increases (Billion 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 2 2010's 1 83 18 58 105 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases

  2. North Dakota Shale Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) North Dakota Shale Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion 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 1 2010's 87 161 142 273 304 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions

  3. North Dakota Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) North Dakota Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion 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 101 2010's 235 20 253 -72 719 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments

  4. North Dakota Shale Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) North Dakota Shale Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion 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 17 2010's 343 290 199 554 823 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases

  5. North Dakota Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) North Dakota Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion 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 1 2010's 28 115 181 1 593 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Sales

  6. Ohio Natural Gas Processed in West Virginia (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    West Virginia (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Processed in West Virginia (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 271 142,003 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 10/31/2016 Next Release Date: 11/30/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Ohio-West Virginia

  7. Ohio Shale Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Ohio Shale Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion 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 2010's 0 0 42 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions

  8. Ohio Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Ohio Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion 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 2010's 0 16 53 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments

  9. Ohio Shale Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Ohio Shale Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion 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 2010's 0 1,497 3,224 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Extensions

  10. Ohio Shale Proved Reserves New Field Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Field Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet) Ohio Shale Proved Reserves New Field Discoveries (Billion 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 2010's 0 16 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas New Field Discoveries

  11. Ohio Shale Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Ohio Shale Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion 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 2010's 0 98 1,446 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases

  12. Ohio Shale Proved Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Ohio Shale Proved Reserves Revision Increases (Billion 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 2010's 0 272 1,468 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases

  13. Ohio Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Ohio Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion 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 2010's 0 0 21 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Sales

  14. Oklahoma Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion 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 2010's 11 1 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Acquisitions

  15. Oklahoma Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion 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 1 2010's 27 27 764 -200 160 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Adjustments

  16. Oklahoma Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion 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 22 2010's 2 1 1 1 21 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Extensions

  17. Oklahoma Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion 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 6 2010's 6 40 21 3 4 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Sales

  18. Oklahoma Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion 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 1 2010's 713 216 393 -253 1,619 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments

  19. Oklahoma Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion 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 2010's 0 1,591 586 0 339 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Sales

  20. Pennsylvania Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion 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 17 2010's 0 1 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Sales

  1. Pennsylvania Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion 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 450 2010's 235 253 -63 953 3,760 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments

  2. Pennsylvania Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion 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 2010's 163 209 5 88 494 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Sales

  3. Sabine Pass, LA Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Sabine Pass, LA Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2016 3,284 10,052 10,010 9,840 16,421 15,703 26,727 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 10/31/2016 Next Release Date: 11/30/2016 Referring Pages: U.S.

  4. Utah Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Utah Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion 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 2010's 0 125 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Acquisitions

  5. Utah Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Utah Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion 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 2010's 8 9 7 -3 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Adjustments

  6. Utah Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Utah Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion 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 2010's 4 2 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Extensions

  7. Utah Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Utah Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion 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 2010's 0 130 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Sales

  8. Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion 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 2010's 0 0 0 0 534 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Acquisitions

  9. Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion 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 2010's 1 26 49 -12 341 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Adjustments

  10. Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion 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 302 2010's 30 57 3 71 179 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Extensions

  11. Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion 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 2010's 0 0 0 0 334 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Sales

  12. Virginia Shale Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Virginia Shale Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 0 0 18 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions

  13. Virginia Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Virginia Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's -1 3 14 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments

  14. Virginia Shale Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Virginia Shale Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 139 0 5 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Extensions

  15. Virginia Shale Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Virginia Shale Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 0 12 76 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases

  16. Virginia Shale Proved Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Virginia Shale Proved Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 0 3 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases

  17. West Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) West Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion 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 2010's 0 50 17 0 99 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Sales

  18. West Virginia Shale Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) West Virginia Shale Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion 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 2010's 324 507 0 0 2,305 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions

  19. West Virginia Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) West Virginia Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion 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 2010's 2 126 219 3 1,616 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Sales

  20. Colorado Shale Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Colorado Shale Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion 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 2010's 0 0 0 0 6 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions

  1. Colorado Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Colorado Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion 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 1 2010's -1 0 31 49 3,649 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments

  2. Colorado Shale Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Colorado Shale Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion 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 2010's 3 5 4 0 158 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Extensions

  3. Colorado Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Colorado Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion 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 2010's 0 0 1 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Sales

  4. Freeport, TX Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Freeport, TX Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013 2,725 2014 2,664 2015 2,805 2,728 2,947 3,145 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 10/31/2016 Next Release Date: 11/30/2016 Referring Pages: U.S.

  5. Freeport, TX Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Freeport, TX Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2016 2 2 3 1 2 8 11 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 10/31/2016 Next Release Date: 11/30/2016 Referring Pages: U.S.

  6. Kansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Kansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion 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 -3 2010's -22 -6 53 -35 -24 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Adjustments

  7. Kansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Kansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion 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 7 2010's 1 3 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Extensions

  8. Kansas Natural Gas Processed in Oklahoma (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Oklahoma (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Processed in Oklahoma (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 804 775 703 248 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 10/31/2016 Next Release Date: 11/30/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Kansas-Oklahoma

  9. Kansas Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Kansas Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 0 0 8 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments

  10. Kansas Shale Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Kansas Shale Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 0 4 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Extensions

  11. Kansas Shale Proved Reserves New Field Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    New Field Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet) Kansas Shale Proved Reserves New Field Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 3 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas New Field Discoveries

  12. Kansas Shale Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Kansas Shale Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 0 0 6 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases

  13. Kansas Shale Proved Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Kansas Shale Proved Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 0 0 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases

  14. Kansas Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Kansas Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 0 0 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Sales

  15. Kentucky Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Kentucky Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion 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 2010's 0 0 0 0 6 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Adjustments

  16. Kentucky Shale Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Kentucky Shale Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion 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 2010's 0 45 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions

  17. Kentucky Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Kentucky Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion 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 -1 2010's -1 0 0 0 2 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments

  18. Kentucky Shale Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Kentucky Shale Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion 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 2010's 0 2 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Extensions

  19. Kentucky Shale Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Kentucky Shale Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion 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 3 2010's 43 11 4 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases

  20. Kentucky Shale Proved Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Kentucky Shale Proved Reserves Revision Increases (Billion 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 44 2010's 3 44 1 16 4 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases

  1. Kentucky Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Kentucky Shale Proved Reserves Sales (Billion 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 2010's 0 45 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Sales

  2. Laredo, TX Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Laredo, TX Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2015 1 0 2016 3 7 8 18 12 21 23 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 10/31/2016 Next Release Date: 11/30/2016 Referring Pages: U.S.

  3. Wyoming Shale Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Wyoming Shale Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion 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 2010's 4 0 0 2 47 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions

  4. Wyoming Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Wyoming Shale Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion 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 1 2010's -1 0 0 1,167 -645 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments

  5. Wyoming Shale Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Wyoming Shale Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion 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 2010's 0 0 219 106 246 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Extensions

  6. Wyoming Shale Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Wyoming Shale Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion 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 1 2010's 2 1 0 536 98 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases

  7. Wyoming Shale Proved Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Wyoming Shale Proved Reserves Revision Increases (Billion 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 2010's 0 0 4 0 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases

  8. Western States Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Western States Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Western States Coalbed Methane Production (Billion 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 4 14 33 51 77 89 108 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Production

  9. U.S. DRIVE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-03-16

    U.S. DRIVE, which stands for United States Driving Research and Innovation for Vehicle efficiency and Energy sustainability, is an expanded government-industry partnership among the U.S. Department of Energy; USCAR, representing Chrysler Group LLC, Ford Motor Company and General Motors; Tesla Motors; five energy companies – BP America, Chevron Corporation, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil Corporation, and Shell Oil Products US; two utilities – Southern California Edison and Michigan-based DTE Energy; and the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). The U.S. DRIVE mission is to accelerate the development of pre-competitive and innovative technologies to enable a full range of affordable and clean advanced light-duty vehicles, as well as related energy infrastructure.

  10. Ceramic vane drive joint

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Smale, Charles H.

    1981-01-01

    A variable geometry gas turbine has an array of ceramic composition vanes positioned by an actuating ring coupled through a plurality of circumferentially spaced turbine vane levers to the outer end of a metallic vane drive shaft at each of the ceramic vanes. Each of the ceramic vanes has an end slot of bow tie configuration including flared end segments and a center slot therebetween. Each of the vane drive shafts has a cross head with ends thereof spaced with respect to the sides of the end slot to define clearance for free expansion of the cross head with respect to the vane and the cross head being configured to uniformly distribute drive loads across bearing surfaces of the vane slot.

  11. CONTROL ROD DRIVE

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Chapellier, R.A.; Rogers, I.

    1961-06-27

    Accurate and controlled drive for the control rod is from an electric motor. A hydraulic arrangement is provided to balance a piston against which a control rod is urged by the application of fluid pressure. The electric motor drive of the control rod for normal operation is made through the aforementioned piston. In the event scramming is required, the fluid pressure urging the control rod against the piston is relieved and an opposite fluid pressure is applied. The lack of mechanical connection between the electric motor and control rod facilitates the scramming operation.

  12. DrivePy

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2014-08-30

    DrivePy is physics-based drivetrain model that sizes drivetrain components based on aerodynamic and operational loads for use in a systems engineering model. It also calculates costs based on empirical data collected by NREL's National Wind Technology Center.

  13. Fuel Cycle Technologies | Department of Energy

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) (indexed site)

    Fuel Cycle Technologies Fuel Cycle Technologies Fuel Cycle Technologies Preparing for Tomorrow's Energy Demands Powerful imperatives drive the continued need for nuclear power, among them the need for reliable, baseload electricity and the threat of global climate change. As the only large-scale source of nearly greenhouse gas-free energy, nuclear power is an essential part of our all-of-the-above energy strategy, generating about 20 percent of our nation's electricity and more than 60 percent

  14. South Dakota Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Cubic Feet) Base Gas) (Million Cubic Feet) South Central Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013 1,050,521 1,050,280 1,049,800 1,049,335 1,051,606 1,051,264 1,051,428 1,048,886 1,049,936 1,052,825 1,054,003 1,053,370 2014 1,050,691 1,049,083 1,049,047 1,049,443 1,049,496 1,053,249 1,054,073 1,058,479 1,060,363 1,060,181 1,060,298 1,059,866 2015 1,057,760 1,057,807 1,054,816 1,054,786 1,057,044

  15. Lower 48 Federal Offshore Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Cubic Feet) Gas Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana--State Offshore Natural Gas 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 1970's 468,612 461,073 1980's 394,347 359,785 342,892 296,078 289,539 226,832 173,812 196,901 190,695 181,332 1990's 161,292 128,891 116,470 133,261 137,823 79,515 173,114 164,847 170,213 147,014 2000's 124,478 140,358 125,481 123,939 117,946 99,290 88,657 63,357 82,061 72,278 2010's

  16. Maryland Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    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 0

    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 0

    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 0

    Cubic Feet)

    Price All Countries (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Maryland Natural Gas Imports Price All Countries (Dollars per Thousand

  17. New Mexico Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico - East Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion 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 1,672 1980's 1,533 1,499 1,374 1,323 1,375 1,309 1,232 1,232 1,194 1,200 1990's 1,251 1,398 1,470 1,478 1,544 1,559 1,585 1,314 1,345 1,486 2000's

  18. New York Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    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 0

    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 0

    (No intransit Receipts) (Million Cubic Feet) New York Natural Gas Imports (No intransit Receipts) (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 24,139 22,348 29,326 47,677 35,720 52,013 70,993 67,956

  19. Illinois Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 44,712 56,555 53,775 2000's 47,189 46,801 81,867 32,168 30,624 58,418 42,729 62,567 34,586 33,214 2010's 45,900 47,510 89,300 52,266 42,538 83,570

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Illinois Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2006 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 4 5 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 2008 4 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3

  20. Kentucky Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    (Million Cubic Feet) Kenai, AK Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 1,886 2,809 2,846 2,886 2,884 2015 2,748 2,754 2,753 2,753 2,755 2,755 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 10/31/2016 Next Release Date: 11/30/2016 Referring Pages: U.S. Feet)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8