National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for megawat thours mwh

  1. ,,,,,,"Capacity MW",,,,,"Customers",,,,,"Energy Sold Back MWh...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Technologies" ,,,,,,"Capacity MW",,,,,"Customers",,,,,"Energy Sold Back MWh",,,,,"Capacity MW",,,,,"Customers",,,,,"Energy Sold Back MWh",,,,,"Capacity MW",,,,,"Customers",,,,,"En...

  2. Property:Ind sales (mwh) | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    property "Ind sales (mwh)" Showing 25 pages using this property. (previous 25) (next 25) 4 4-County Electric Power Assn (Mississippi) EIA Revenue and Sales - April 2008 + 18,637 +...

  3. Property:Res sales (mwh) | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    property "Res sales (mwh)" Showing 25 pages using this property. (previous 25) (next 25) 4 4-County Electric Power Assn (Mississippi) EIA Revenue and Sales - April 2008 + 35,568 +...

  4. Property:Tot sales (mwh) | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    property "Tot sales (mwh)" Showing 25 pages using this property. (previous 25) (next 25) 4 4-County Electric Power Assn (Mississippi) EIA Revenue and Sales - April 2008 + 69,154 +...

  5. Property:Com sales (mwh) | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    property "Com sales (mwh)" Showing 25 pages using this property. (previous 25) (next 25) 4 4-County Electric Power Assn (Mississippi) EIA Revenue and Sales - April 2008 + 14,949 +...

  6. Property:Building/SPPurchasedEngyNrmlYrMwhYrNaturalGas | Open...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    dEngyNrmlYrMwhYrNaturalGas Jump to: navigation, search This is a property of type String. Natural gas Pages using the property "BuildingSPPurchasedEngyNrmlYrMwhYrNaturalGas"...

  7. Property:Building/SPPurchasedEngyForPeriodMwhYrNaturalGas | Open...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    gyForPeriodMwhYrNaturalGas Jump to: navigation, search This is a property of type String. Natural gas Pages using the property "BuildingSPPurchasedEngyForPeriodMwhYrNaturalGas"...

  8. Property:Building/SPPurchasedEngyForPeriodMwhYrOil-FiredBoiler...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    eriodMwhYrOil-FiredBoiler Jump to: navigation, search This is a property of type String. Oil-fired boiler Pages using the property "BuildingSPPurchasedEngyForPeriodMwhYrOil-FiredB...

  9. Property:Building/SPPurchasedEngyNrmlYrMwhYrOil-FiredBoiler ...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    rmlYrMwhYrOil-FiredBoiler Jump to: navigation, search This is a property of type String. Oil-fired boiler Pages using the property "BuildingSPPurchasedEngyNrmlYrMwhYrOil-FiredBoil...

  10. Property:Building/SPPurchasedEngyNrmlYrMwhYrLogs | Open Energy...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Datasets Community Login | Sign Up Search Property Edit with form History Property:BuildingSPPurchasedEngyNrmlYrMwhYrLogs Jump to: navigation, search This is a property of type...

  11. Property:Building/SPPurchasedEngyNrmlYrMwhYrTotal | Open Energy...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    dEngyNrmlYrMwhYrTotal" Showing 25 pages using this property. (previous 25) (next 25) S Sweden Building 05K0001 + 4355.0 + Sweden Building 05K0002 + 1530.1 + Sweden Building 05K0003...

  12. Property:Building/SPPurchasedEngyForPeriodMwhYrDstrtHeating ...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    riodMwhYrDstrtHeating" Showing 25 pages using this property. (previous 25) (next 25) S Sweden Building 05K0001 + 2067.0 + Sweden Building 05K0002 + 492.2 + Sweden Building 05K0003...

  13. Property:Building/SPPurchasedEngyForPeriodMwhYrDstrtColg | Open...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    rPeriodMwhYrDstrtColg" Showing 25 pages using this property. (previous 25) (next 25) S Sweden Building 05K0001 + 762.0 + Sweden Building 05K0002 + 322.0 + Sweden Building 05K0003 +...

  14. Property:Building/SPPurchasedEngyForPeriodMwhYrElctrtyTotal ...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    riodMwhYrElctrtyTotal" Showing 25 pages using this property. (previous 25) (next 25) S Sweden Building 05K0001 + 1399.0 + Sweden Building 05K0002 + 686.9 + Sweden Building 05K0003...

  15. Property:Building/SPPurchasedEngyForPeriodMwhYrTotal | Open Energy...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    gyForPeriodMwhYrTotal" Showing 25 pages using this property. (previous 25) (next 25) S Sweden Building 05K0001 + 4228.0 + Sweden Building 05K0002 + 1501.1 + Sweden Building 05K0003...

  16. Property:Building/SPPurchasedEngyForPeriodMwhYrPellets | Open...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    ForPeriodMwhYrPellets" Showing 25 pages using this property. (previous 25) (next 25) S Sweden Building 05K0001 + 0.0 + Sweden Building 05K0002 + 0.0 + Sweden Building 05K0003 + 0.0...

  17. Property:Building/SPPurchasedEngyNrmlYrMwhYrWoodChips | Open...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    yNrmlYrMwhYrWoodChips" Showing 25 pages using this property. (previous 25) (next 25) S Sweden Building 05K0001 + 0.0 + Sweden Building 05K0002 + 0.0 + Sweden Building 05K0003 + 0.0...

  18. Property:Building/SPPurchasedEngyForPeriodMwhYrOther | Open Energy...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    gyForPeriodMwhYrOther" Showing 25 pages using this property. (previous 25) (next 25) S Sweden Building 05K0001 + 0.0 + Sweden Building 05K0002 + 0.0 + Sweden Building 05K0003 + 0.0...

  19. Property:Building/SPPurchasedEngyForPeriodMwhYrWoodChips | Open...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    rPeriodMwhYrWoodChips" Showing 25 pages using this property. (previous 25) (next 25) S Sweden Building 05K0001 + 0.0 + Sweden Building 05K0002 + 0.0 + Sweden Building 05K0003 + 0.0...

  20. Property:Building/SPPurchasedEngyNrmlYrMwhYrTownGas | Open Energy...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    ngyNrmlYrMwhYrTownGas" Showing 25 pages using this property. (previous 25) (next 25) S Sweden Building 05K0001 + 0.0 + Sweden Building 05K0002 + 0.0 + Sweden Building 05K0003 + 0.0...

  1. QER- Comment of MWH Global

    Energy.gov [DOE]

    Hello, Was looking at the calendar and curious when the “Final Meeting” is in DC for the QER? http://energy.gov/epsa/initiatives/quadrennial-energy-review-qer Thanks,

  2. Property:Oth sales (mwh) | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    2008 + 713 + Central Illinois Pub Serv Co (Illinois) EIA Revenue and Sales - September 2008 + 886 + City of Detroit (Michigan) EIA Revenue and Sales - April 2008 + 400 + City of...

  3. ,,,,,,"Capacity MW",,,,,"Customers",,,,,"Energy Sold Back MWh...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ... 2016,1,"CO",27058,"High West Energy, Inc","Preliminary",".",".",".",".",0,"."... 2016,1,"FL",6455,"Duke Energy Florida, Inc","Preliminary",14.747,10.098...

  4. ,,,,,,"Capacity MW",,,,,"Customers",,,,,"Energy Sold Back MWh...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ... 2014,1,"CO",27058,"High West Energy, Inc","Final",".",".",".",".",0,".",".","... 2014,1,"FL",6455,"Duke Energy Florida, Inc","Final",6.619,6.641,0.284,0...

  5. ,,,,,,"Capacity MW",,,,,"Customers",,,,,"Energy Sold Back MWh...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ... 2015,1,"CO",27058,"High West Energy, Inc","Final",".",".",".",".",0,".",".","... 2015,1,"FL",6455,"Duke Energy Florida, Inc","Final",9.593,7.869,1.151,0...

  6. Property:Building/SPPurchasedEngyNrmlYrMwhYrPellets | Open Energy...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Showing 25 pages using this property. (previous 25) (next 25) S Sweden Building 05K0001 + 0.0 + Sweden Building 05K0002 + 0.0 + Sweden Building 05K0003 + 0.0 + Sweden...

  7. Property:Building/SPPurchasedEngyForPeriodMwhYrTownGas | Open...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Showing 25 pages using this property. (previous 25) (next 25) S Sweden Building 05K0001 + 0.0 + Sweden Building 05K0002 + 0.0 + Sweden Building 05K0003 + 0.0 + Sweden...

  8. Property:Building/SPPurchasedEngyForPeriodMwhYrDigesterLandfillGas...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    YrDigesterLandfillGas" Showing 25 pages using this property. (previous 25) (next 25) S Sweden Building 05K0001 + 0.0 + Sweden Building 05K0002 + 0.0 + Sweden Building 05K0003 + 0.0...

  9. Property:Building/SPPurchasedEngyNrmlYrMwhYrDigesterLandfillGas...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    YrDigesterLandfillGas" Showing 25 pages using this property. (previous 25) (next 25) S Sweden Building 05K0001 + 0.0 + Sweden Building 05K0002 + 0.0 + Sweden Building 05K0003 + 0.0...

  10. Total Cost Per MwH for all common large scale power generation...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    out of the stack, toxificaiton of the lakes and streams, plant decommision costs. For nuclear yiou are talking about managing the waste in perpetuity. The plant decomission costs...

  11. Alaska: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 566,822 MWh Gas Power 3,571,101 MWh Petroleum Power 1,191,884 MWh Nuclear Power 0 MWh Other 0 MWh Total Energy Production 6,541,675 MWh Percent of Total...

  12. Oklahoma: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 34,200,892 MWh Gas Power 34,915,888 MWh Petroleum Power 19,609 MWh Nuclear Power 0 MWh Other 0 MWh Total Energy Production 75,245,559 MWh Percent of Total...

  13. Rhode Island: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    158,911 MWh Coal Power 0 MWh Gas Power 7,553,278 MWh Petroleum Power 16,262 MWh Nuclear Power 0 MWh Other 0 MWh Total Energy Production 7,728,451 MWh Percent of Total...

  14. North Dakota: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    4,239,993 MWh Coal Power 29,812,959 MWh Gas Power 757 MWh Petroleum Power 48,076 MWh Nuclear Power 0 MWh Other 838 MWh Total Energy Production 34,102,623 MWh Percent of Total...

  15. Nevada: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 7,507,244 MWh Gas Power 26,080,001 MWh Petroleum Power 17,727 MWh Nuclear Power 0 MWh Other 0 MWh Total Energy Production 37,819,763 MWh Percent of Total...

  16. Idaho: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    10,318,565 MWh Coal Power 72,994 MWh Gas Power 1,549,875 MWh Petroleum Power 124 MWh Nuclear Power 0 MWh Other 0 MWh Total Energy Production 11,941,557 MWh Percent of Total...

  17. Kentucky: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 84,379,768 MWh Gas Power 843,725 MWh Petroleum Power 2,028,175 MWh Nuclear Power 0 MWh Other 12,629 MWh Total Energy Production 90,997,966 MWh Percent of...

  18. Oregon: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 3,196,902 MWh Gas Power 15,776,934 MWh Petroleum Power 5,657 MWh Nuclear Power 0 MWh Other 41,248 MWh Total Energy Production 55,861,820 MWh Percent of...

  19. Arizona: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 39,783,826 MWh Gas Power 34,852,150 MWh Petroleum Power 67,337 MWh Nuclear Power 30,661,851 MWh Other 534 MWh Total Energy Production 112,066,601 MWh Percent...

  20. Tennessee: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 41,634,519 MWh Gas Power 410,411 MWh Petroleum Power 178,151 MWh Nuclear Power 26,962,001 MWh Other 788 MWh Total Energy Production 78,966,504 MWh Percent...

  1. Indiana: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 108,590,677 MWh Gas Power 5,390,611 MWh Petroleum Power 154,666 MWh Nuclear Power 0 MWh Other 344,927 MWh Total Energy Production 116,667,762 MWh Percent of...

  2. New Mexico: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 29,084,699 MWh Gas Power 8,759,510 MWh Petroleum Power 43,480 MWh Nuclear Power 0 MWh Other 4,371 MWh Total Energy Production 39,754,081 MWh Percent of...

  3. Utah: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 35,715,484 MWh Gas Power 6,424,511 MWh Petroleum Power 50,180 MWh Nuclear Power 0 MWh Other 186,748 MWh Total Energy Production 43,446,797 MWh Percent of...

  4. West Virginia: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    2,318,714 MWh Coal Power 68,135,764 MWh Gas Power 149,347 MWh Petroleum Power 170,674 MWh Nuclear Power 0 MWh Other 422 MWh Total Energy Production 70,774,921 MWh Percent of Total...

  5. Delaware: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    138,302 MWh Coal Power 2,910,909 MWh Gas Power 1,686,773 MWh Petroleum Power 268,773 MWh Nuclear Power 0 MWh Other 5,877 MWh Total Energy Production 5,010,634 MWh Percent of Total...

  6. Missouri: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 71,848,215 MWh Gas Power 3,400,527 MWh Petroleum Power 86,777 MWh Nuclear Power 10,247,116 MWh Other 27,422 MWh Total Energy Production 88,646,870 MWh...

  7. New York: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 13,152,552 MWh Gas Power 42,954,141 MWh Petroleum Power 2,717,386 MWh Nuclear Power 43,484,614 MWh Other 989,616 MWh Total Energy Production 135,475,849 MWh...

  8. Wisconsin: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 38,330,917 MWh Gas Power 5,601,116 MWh Petroleum Power 730,117 MWh Nuclear Power 12,683,151 MWh Other 72,992 MWh Total Energy Production 61,334,663 MWh...

  9. South Carolina: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 35,157,227 MWh Gas Power 9,402,119 MWh Petroleum Power 523,380 MWh Nuclear Power 52,149,734 MWh Other 105,354 MWh Total Energy Production 100,197,178 MWh...

  10. Georgia: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 69,524,670 MWh Gas Power 20,301,025 MWh Petroleum Power 644,996 MWh Nuclear Power 31,682,579 MWh Other 26,648 MWh Total Energy Production 128,438,721 MWh...

  11. Kansas: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 32,242,988 MWh Gas Power 2,611,084 MWh Petroleum Power 124,354 MWh Nuclear Power 8,768,548 MWh Other 0 MWh Total Energy Production 46,144,448 MWh Percent of...

  12. Ohio: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 113,824,221 MWh Gas Power 4,747,936 MWh Petroleum Power 1,311,952 MWh Nuclear Power 14,937,336 MWh Other 14,388 MWh Total Energy Production 135,949,118 MWh...

  13. North Carolina: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 65,853,978 MWh Gas Power 4,926,167 MWh Petroleum Power 287,979 MWh Nuclear Power 40,847,711 MWh Other 90,997 MWh Total Energy Production 118,993,695 MWh...

  14. Arkansas: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 25,075,250 MWh Gas Power 11,368,417 MWh Petroleum Power 87,674 MWh Nuclear Power 15,169,966 MWh Other 24,019 MWh Total Energy Production 57,499,169 MWh...

  15. New Hampshire: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 2,885,668 MWh Gas Power 5,352,728 MWh Petroleum Power 171,818 MWh Nuclear Power 8,816,673 MWh Other 59,854 MWh Total Energy Production 19,985,757 MWh...

  16. Montana: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    10,053,139 MWh Coal Power 15,164,571 MWh Gas Power 81,800 MWh Petroleum Power 489,689 MWh Nuclear Power 0 MWh Other 110,308 MWh Total Energy Production 25,899,507 MWh Percent of...

  17. Florida: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 54,052,312 MWh Gas Power 117,733,704 MWh Petroleum Power 8,962,843 MWh Nuclear Power 29,336,059 MWh Other 2,576,795 MWh Total Energy Production 217,154,227 MWh...

  18. Minnesota: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 30,091,455 MWh Gas Power 2,559,675 MWh Petroleum Power 60,295 MWh Nuclear Power 12,393,425 MWh Other 340,463 MWh Total Energy Production 52,641,549 MWh...

  19. Mississippi: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 12,970,797 MWh Gas Power 23,380,703 MWh Petroleum Power 17,028 MWh Nuclear Power 10,998,515 MWh Other 5,206 MWh Total Energy Production 48,769,367 MWh...

  20. Illinois: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 90,949,011 MWh Gas Power 4,364,445 MWh Petroleum Power 110,882 MWh Nuclear Power 94,050,482 MWh Other 64,293 MWh Total Energy Production 193,214,345 MWh...

  1. Michigan: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 67,822,266 MWh Gas Power 8,244,775 MWh Petroleum Power 379,469 MWh Nuclear Power 21,851,009 MWh Other 341,304 MWh Total Energy Production 101,641,950 MWh...

  2. Maine: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    8,486,637 MWh Coal Power 72,386 MWh Gas Power 7,481,945 MWh Petroleum Power 480,670 MWh Nuclear Power 0 MWh Other 352,154 MWh Total Energy Production 16,873,792 MWh Percent of...

  3. Pennsylvania: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 104,927,415 MWh Gas Power 29,623,748 MWh Petroleum Power 930,953 MWh Nuclear Power 76,727,686 MWh Other 842,542 MWh Total Energy Production 218,376,989 MWh...

  4. New Jersey: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    973,234 MWh Coal Power 5,345,449 MWh Gas Power 21,037,564 MWh Petroleum Power 304,336 MWh Nuclear Power 34,327,954 MWh Other 513,761 MWh Total Energy Production 62,502,299 MWh...

  5. Hawaii: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    768,368 MWh Coal Power 1,521,169 MWh Gas Power 40,378 MWh Petroleum Power 8,288,819 MWh Nuclear Power 0 MWh Other 166,284 MWh Total Energy Production 10,785,018 MWh Percent of...

  6. Nebraska: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    750,278 MWh Coal Power 23,427,525 MWh Gas Power 332,467 MWh Petroleum Power 24,899 MWh Nuclear Power 9,435,142 MWh Other 0 MWh Total Energy Production 33,970,311 MWh Percent of...

  7. California: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 1,948,279 MWh Gas Power 115,749,546 MWh Petroleum Power 1,638,019 MWh Nuclear Power 31,734,676 MWh Other 440,323 MWh Total Energy Production 204,824,249 MWh...

  8. Connecticut: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 2,453,497 MWh Gas Power 9,678,195 MWh Petroleum Power 288,349 MWh Nuclear Power 16,657,387 MWh Other 712,522 MWh Total Energy Production 31,172,260 MWh...

  9. Massachusetts: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 9,896,296 MWh Gas Power 21,242,542 MWh Petroleum Power 864,489 MWh Nuclear Power 5,396,021 MWh Other 770,712 MWh Total Energy Production 40,175,901 MWh...

  10. Louisiana: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 23,075,071 MWh Gas Power 45,313,617 MWh Petroleum Power 1,815,819 MWh Nuclear Power 16,782,077 MWh Other 390,454 MWh Total Energy Production 91,106,779 MWh...

  11. Washington: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 7,477,773 MWh Gas Power 11,409,482 MWh Petroleum Power 47,275 MWh Nuclear Power 6,634,014 MWh Other 63,675 MWh Total Energy Production 104,593,404 MWh...

  12. Texas: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 139,106,597 MWh Gas Power 191,652,532 MWh Petroleum Power 1,347,315 MWh Nuclear Power 41,497,617 MWh Other 621,766 MWh Total Energy Production 396,477,155 MWh...

  13. South Dakota: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    4,717,288 MWh Coal Power 3,190,913 MWh Gas Power 122,133 MWh Petroleum Power 10,089 MWh Nuclear Power 0 MWh Other 31,318 MWh Total Energy Production 8,071,741 MWh Percent of...

  14. Vermont: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Renewables 2,048,325 MWh Coal Power 0 MWh Gas Power 4,431 MWh Petroleum Power 3,577 MWh Nuclear Power 5,360,608 MWh Other 0 MWh Total Energy Production 7,416,941 MWh Percent of...

  15. Alabama: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 55,659,872 MWh Gas Power 32,369,863 MWh Petroleum Power 163,054 MWh Nuclear Power 39,716,204 MWh Other 7,137 MWh Total Energy Production 142,960,819 MWh...

  16. Maryland: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 24,414,551 MWh Gas Power 2,070,846 MWh Petroleum Power 346,732 MWh Nuclear Power 14,550,119 MWh Other 255,891 MWh Total Energy Production 44,126,270 MWh...

  17. Virginia: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    MWh Coal Power 26,539,392 MWh Gas Power 12,204,843 MWh Petroleum Power 1,110,821 MWh Nuclear Power 28,212,252 MWh Other 427,691 MWh Total Energy Production 71,159,684 MWh...

  18. Bellavista Geothermal Power Station | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Generation Delivered to Grid (MWh) Plant Parasitic Consumption (MWh) Well-Field Parasitic Consumption (MWh) Well Field Number of Production Wells (total) Number of Injection Wells...

  19. "YEAR","MONTH","STATE","UTILITY CODE","UTILITY NAME","NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL AMR METERS","NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL AMR METERS","NUMBER OF INDUSTRIAL AMR METERS","NUMBER OF TRANSPORTATION AMR METERS","TOTAL NUMBER OF AMR METERS","NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL AMI METERS","NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL AMI METERS","NUMBER OF INDUSTRIAL AMI METERS","NUMBER OF TRANSPORTATION AMI METERS","TOTAL NUMBER OF AMI METERS","RESIDENTIAL ENERGY SERVED THRU AMI METERS (MWh)","COMMERCIAL ENERGY SERVED THRU AMI METERS (MWh)","INDUSTRIAL ENERGY SERVED THRU AMI METERS (MWh)","TRANSPORTATION ENERGY SERVED THRU AMI METERS (MWh)","TOTAL ENERGY SERVED THRU AMI METERS (MWh)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    1,1,"AK",213,"Alaska Electric Light&Power Co",9111,782,58,0,9951,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0 2011,1,"AK",1651,"Bethel Utilities Corp",0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0 2011,1,"AK",10210,"Ketchikan Public Utilities",0,0,0,0,0,2974,264,2,0,3240,4461,786,114,0,5361 2011,1,"AK",10433,"Kodiak Electric Assn Inc",4574,976,101,0,5651,,,,,0,,,,,0 2011,1,"AK",11824,"Matanuska Electric Assn

  20. "YEAR","MONTH","STATE","UTILITY CODE","UTILITY NAME","NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL AMR METERS","NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL AMR METERS","NUMBER OF INDUSTRIAL AMR METERS","NUMBER OF TRANSPORTATION AMR METERS","TOTAL NUMBER OF AMR METERS","NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL AMI METERS","NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL AMI METERS","NUMBER OF INDUSTRIAL AMI METERS","NUMBER OF TRANSPORTATION AMI METERS","TOTAL NUMBER OF AMI METERS","RESIDENTIAL ENERGY SERVED THRU AMI METERS (MWh)","COMMERCIAL ENERGY SERVED THRU AMI METERS (MWh)","INDUSTRIAL ENERGY SERVED THRU AMI METERS (MWh)","TRANSPORTATION ENERGY SERVED THRU AMI METERS (MWh)","TOTAL ENERGY SERVED THRU AMI METERS (MWh)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    2,1,"AK",213,"Alaska Electric Light&Power Co",10105,925,62,0,11092,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0 2012,1,"AK",3522,"Chugach Electric Assn Inc",77639,,,,77639,,,,,0,,,,,0 2012,1,"AK",7353,"Golden Valley Elec Assn Inc",37816,6372,488,,44676,,,,,0,,,,,0 2012,1,"AK",10210,"Ketchikan Public Utilities",0,0,0,0,0,3262,312,0,0,3574,5074.17,742.17,0,0,5816.34 2012,1,"AK",10433,"Kodiak Electric Assn

  1. Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (short tons)",61909,13 " Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons)",67635,10 " Sulfur dioxide (lbsMWh)",2,19 " Nitrogen oxide (lbsMWh)",0.8,38 " Carbon dioxide (lbsMWh)",996,34 ...

  2. "YEAR","MONTH","STATE","UTILITY CODE","UTILITY NAME","RESIDENTIAL...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","RESIDENTIAL WIND ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","COMMERCIAL WIND ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","INDUSTRIAL WIND ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK ...

  3. Rocky Mountain Oilfield Testing Center | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Summer Peak Net Capacity (MW) Winter Peak Net Capacity (MW) Avg. Annual GenerationConsumption Gross Generation (MWh) Generation Delivered to Grid (MWh) Plant Parasitic...

  4. A & N Electric Coop (Virginia) EIA Revenue and Sales - August...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Sales (MWh) 31601.089 Residential Consumers 30021 Commercial Revenue(Thousand ) 2194.132 Commercial Sales (MWh) 18253.003 Commercial Consumers 4073 Industrial Revenue (Thousand...

  5. "Utility Characteristics",,,,,,"Number AMR- Automated Meter Reading",,,,,"Number AMI- Advanced Metering Infrastructure",,,,,"Non AMR/AMI Meters",,,,,"Total Numbers of Meters",,,,,"Energy Served - AMI (MWh)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    4,1,213,"Alaska Electric Light&Power Co","AK","Final",11521,1165,87,0,12773,0,0,0,0,0,".",".",".",".",".",".",".",".",".",0,0,0,0,0,0 2014,1,599,"Anchorage Municipal Light and

  6. "Utility Characteristics",,,,,,"Number AMR- Automated Meter Reading",,,,,"Number AMI- Advanced Metering Infrastructure",,,,,"Non AMR/AMI Meters",,,,,"Total Numbers of Meters",,,,,"Energy Served - AMI (MWh)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    5,1,213,"Alaska Electric Light&Power Co","AK","Preliminary",12188,1364,116,0,13668,0,0,0,0,0,2425,781,72,0,3278,14613,2145,188,0,16946,".",".",".",".",0 2015,1,221,"Alaska Village Elec Coop,

  7. "Utility Characteristics",,,,,,"Number AMR- Automated Meter Reading",,,,,"Number AMI- Advanced Metering Infrastructure",,,,,"Non AMR/AMI Meters",,,,,"Total Numbers of Meters",,,,,"Energy Served - AMI (MWh)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    6,1,213,"Alaska Electric Light&Power Co","AK","Preliminary",13300,1520,157,0,14977,0,0,0,0,0,1579,591,63,0,2233,14879,2111,220,0,17210,0,0,0,0,0 2016,1,219,"Alaska Power and Telephone Co","AK","Preliminary",5380,2259,".",".",7639,0,0,".",".",0,0,0,".",".",0,5380,2259,".",".",7639,0,0,".",".",0 2016,1,221,"Alaska Village Elec

  8. Microsoft Word - RNP answers.doc

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

    373,000 MWh of spill at Coulee and 234,000 MWh at Chief Joseph for a total of roughly 607,000 MWh of spill. Does all that sound close to being right? On the wind side, I see...

  9. Tax Credits, Rebates & Savings | Department of Energy

    Energy.gov [DOE] (indexed site)

    of solar generation, bundled in minimum denominations of one megawatt-hour (MWh) of production. The legislation... Eligibility: Commercial, Industrial, Local Government,...

  10. Continuum Magazine, Summer 2015. NREL Analysis: Reimagining What...

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

    ... battery life, and cost calculations for different vehicles and usage scenarios. ... Annual MWh Fully Commissioned Partially Commissioned Under Construction Announced Status ...

  11. Northwest Arctic Sustainable Energy Projects

    Energy.gov [DOE] (indexed site)

    ... each Water-sewer plant to off-set energy usage. * Yearly electricity offset per array ... Performance Community installed size Kw MWh Kwh lb Gallon installed Kwhday Since ...

  12. Relevant Studies for NERCs Analysis of EPAs Clean Power Plan...

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

    ... PRIS Study Scenarios Scenario Reduction in MWh Energy Output from Coal and Gas Plants ... thermal generation, some of the higher penetration scenarios showed new patterns of usage. ...

  13. BPA-2011-00834-FOIA Correspondence

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

    following: 1. Data associated with hourly load, thermal generation, wind generation and hydro generation in the BPA region in MWh. 2. Data to span between 112007 and 12312010...

  14. Tax Credits, Rebates & Savings | Department of Energy

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

    per megawatt-hour (MWh) of electric generation. Electric suppliers must provide this information to customers twice annually in a standardized, uniform format. The Michigan Public...

  15. South Carolina Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    South Carolina nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State ...

  16. California Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    California nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State ...

  17. Pennsylvania Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Pennsylvania nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State ...

  18. Connecticut Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Connecticut nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State ...

  19. "YEAR","MONTH","STATE","UTILITY CODE","UTILITY NAME","RESIDENTIAL...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    TRANSPORTATIONPHOTOVOLTAIC NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","TOTAL PHOTOVOLTAIC NET METERING CUSTOMER COUNT","RESIDENTIAL WIND ELECTRIC ENERGY SOLD BACK (MWh)","COMMERCIAL WIND ...

  20. New York Nuclear Profile - James A Fitzpatrick

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    James A Fitzpatrick" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" ...

  1. New Hampshire Nuclear Profile - Seabrook

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Seabrook" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" ...

  2. South Carolina Nuclear Profile - Oconee

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Oconee" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" ...

  3. New Jersey Nuclear Profile - Oyster Creek

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Oyster Creek" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" ...

  4. North Carolina Nuclear Profile - Harris

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Harris" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" ...

  5. New Jersey Nuclear Profile - PSEG Salem Generating Station

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    PSEG Salem Generating Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License ...

  6. New York Nuclear Profile - Indian Point

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Indian Point" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" ...

  7. South Carolina Nuclear Profile - H B Robinson

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    H B Robinson" "Unit","Summer Capacity (MW)","Net Generation (Thousand MWh)","Summer Capacity Factor (Percent)","Type","Commercial Operation Date","License Expiration Date" ...

  8. South Carolina Nuclear Profile - V C Summer

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    V C Summer" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" ...

  9. North Carolina Nuclear Profile - Brunswick

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Brunswick" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" ...

  10. North Carolina Nuclear Profile - McGuire

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    McGuire" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" ...

  11. New Jersey Nuclear Profile - PSEG Hope Creek Generating Station

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    PSEG Hope Creek Generating Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License ...

  12. South Carolina Nuclear Profile - Catawba

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Catawba" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" ...

  13. New Resources to Support Climate and Energy Planning with Energy...

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

    Energy efficiency could save consumers and businesses approximately 1 billion MWh of electricity between 2013 and 2030,1 providing cost savings, air quality improvements, economic ...

  14. Maryland Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant ...

  15. Maibarara Geothermal Power Plant | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    1 Avg. Annual Gross Operating Capacity(MW) Summer Peak Net Capacity (MW) Winter Peak Net Capacity (MW) Avg. Annual GenerationConsumption Gross Generation (MWh) 60 1...

  16. FY 2007 Volume 6

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    ... Average purchase power prices are anticipated to drop slightly from 43MWH in FY 2006 to ... routine and emergency situations in the high- voltage interconnected transmission system. ...

  17. Solar Renewable Energy Certificates Program (SRECs)

    Energy.gov [DOE]

    Solar Renewable Energy Certificates (SRECs) represent the renewable attributes of solar generation, bundled in minimum denominations of one megawatt-hour (MWh) of production. The legislation...

  18. Pennsylvania Nuclear Profile - PPL Susquehanna

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    PPL Susquehanna" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" ...

  19. Ohio Nuclear Profile - Davis Besse

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Davis Besse" "Unit","Summer Capacity (MW)","Net Generation (Thousand MWh)","Summer Capacity Factor (Percent)","Type","Commercial Operation Date","License Expiration Date" ...

  20. Pennsylvania Nuclear Profile - Limerick

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Limerick" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" ...

  1. Ohio Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Ohio nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net ...

  2. Ohio Nuclear Profile - Perry

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Perry" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" ...

  3. North Carolina Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Carolina nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear ...

  4. Pennsylvania Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net ...

  5. Pennsylvania Nuclear Profile - Beaver Valley

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Beaver Valley" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" ...

  6. New York Nuclear Profile - Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License ...

  7. Pennsylvania Nuclear Profile - Peach Bottom

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Peach Bottom" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" ...

  8. New York Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net ...

  9. Pennsylvania Nuclear Profile - Three Mile Island

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Three Mile Island" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" ...

  10. New York Nuclear Profile - R E Ginna Nuclear Power Plant

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    R E Ginna Nuclear Power Plant" "Unit","Summer Capacity (MW)","Net Generation (Thousand MWh)","Summer Capacity Factor (Percent)","Type","Commercial Operation Date","License ...

  11. Energy Markets 201

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    etc.) Deal Components * Price (MWh) * Product (Firm, ... (supply, demand, weather, fuel costs, RPS requirements, ... the more difficult to forecast The lifecycle of an ...

  12. Steamboat III Geothermal Facility | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Parasitic Consumption (MWh) Well Field Number of Production Wells (total) Number of Injection Wells (total) Avg. Well Depth (m) GeofluidGeosteam flow rate into plant Average...

  13. Steamboat Hills Geothermal Facility | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Parasitic Consumption (MWh) Well Field Number of Production Wells (total) Number of Injection Wells (total) Avg. Well Depth (m) GeofluidGeosteam flow rate into plant Average...

  14. City of Kansas City, Kansas (Utility Company) | Open Energy Informatio...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    SALES (MWH) OTH CONS TOT REV (THOUSAND ) TOT SALES (MWH) TOT CONS 2009-03 3,262 40,087 56,891 5,911 77,724 7,095 3,466 64,803 94 12,639 182,614 64,080 2009-02 5,311 48,126 57,266...

  15. East Central Energy (Wisconsin) | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    (MWH) OTH CONS TOT REV (THOUSAND ) TOT SALES (MWH) TOT CONS 2009-03 497.322 5,074.657 4,666 49.223 506.276 262 546.545 5,580.933 4,928 2009-02 617.038 6,336.617 4,668 59.259...

  16. Renewable Energy Production Tax Credit (Personal)

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Note: The tax credits are fully subscribed. As of February 2015, there are 712 MW (1,400,000 MWh) of projects in the waiting queue for the wind/biomass tax credit and 464 MW (1,212,000 MWh) of...

  17. City Utilities of Springfield | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    ) OTH SALES (MWH) OTH CONS TOT REV (THOUSAND ) TOT SALES (MWH) TOT CONS 2009-03 5,574.607 75,387.438 94,458 7,723.39 113,122.676 13,958 2,145.435 34,204.077 318 15,443.432...

  18. City of Seattle, Washington (Utility Company) | Open Energy Informatio...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    ) OTH SALES (MWH) OTH CONS TOT REV (THOUSAND ) TOT SALES (MWH) TOT CONS 2009-03 23,601 373,913 353,104 24,986 456,778 39,325 4,440 92,495 220 3 47 3 53,030 923,233 392,652...

  19. Renewable Energy Production Tax Credit (Corporate)

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Note: The tax credits are fully subscribed. As of February 2015, there are 712 MW (1,400,000 MWh) of projects in the waiting queue for the wind/biomass tax credit and 464 MW (1,212,000 MWh) of...

  20. Empire District Electric Co (Kansas) | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    OTH SALES (MWH) OTH CONS TOT REV (THOUSAND ) TOT SALES (MWH) TOT CONS 2009-03 766.958 8,132.05 8,688 437.806 4,470.832 1,413 386.225 5,336.492 51 1,590.989 17,939.374 10,152...

  1. Electricity transactions across international borders, 1985. [With Mexico, Canada

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1986-10-01

    This report summarizes the electricity exchange between the United States and Mexico and Canada during Calendar Year 1985. The construction, opration and maintenance of any electric transmission facility which crosses an international border of the United States requires a Presidential permit which has been granted by DOE. During 1985, the US imported 45,900,563 MWh of electric energy at a cost of $1,041,908,785. Of this total, 45,659,944 MWh were imported from Canada and the remainder (240,619 MWh) were received from Mexico. During this same period, US exports of electric energy totaled 4,964,930 MWh with gross revenues of $25,215,549. Of this, 4,812,537 MWh representing $22,068,665 in revenues were delivered to Canada, and 152,393 MWh representing $3,146,884 in revenues were delivered to Mexico. On a net basis, the US was an importer of 40,935,633 MWh of electric energy. These 1985 values constitute an increase of 8.1% in gross imports and an increase of 94.1% in gross exports compared to 1984 levels.

  2. Electricity transactions across international borders, 1984

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1985-10-01

    This report summarizes the electricity exchanges between the United States and Mexico and Canada during calendar year 1984. The construction, operation and maintenance of any electric transmission facility which crosses an international border of the United States requires a Presidential permit. These permits have been granted by DOE since its formation in 1977. During 1984, the US imported 42,219,259 MWh of electric energy at a cost of $1,070,046,345. Of this total, 42,034,392 MWh were imported from Canada and the remainder (184,867 MWh) were received from Mexico. During this same period, US exports of electric energy totaled 2,558,293 MWh with gross revenues of $21,795,733. Of this, 2,479,487 MWh representing $21,115,413 in revenues were delivered to Canada, and 78,806 MWh representing $680,320 in revenues were delivered to Mexico. On a net basis, the US was an importer of 39,660,966 MWh of electric energy. These 1984 values constitute an increase of 9.2% in gross imports and a decrease of 23.3% in gross exports compared to 1983 levels.

  3. SAS Output

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    . Demand-Side Management Program Annual Effects by Program Category, 2004 through 2012 (Table Discontinued) Energy Efficiency Load Management Total Year Energy Savings (Thousand MWh) Actual Peak Load Reduction (MW) Energy Savings (Thousand MWh) Potential Peak Load Reduction (MW) Actual Peak Load Reduction (MW) Energy Savings (Thousand MWh) Actual Peak Load Reduction (MW) 2004 52,663 14,272 1,966 20,997 9,263 54,629 23,535 2005 59,000 15,394 930 21,259 10,341 59,930 25,735 2006 63,076 16,006 790

  4. Microsoft Word - July Heat 7-17 v6.docx

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    expected to continue through the week, with the highest temperatures forecast for Thursday and Friday. Electricity prices: Day-ahead electricity prices in Mid-Atlantic, Northeast, and New England markets increased for a third day in a row as demand for electricity continued to increase, reaching prices above $100/MWh (and above $250/MWh for Long Island). Usual prices for these areas range between $30-$60/MWh. Electricity demand: System demand in New England and New York is forecast to be just

  5. Evaluation of Dry Sorbent Injection Technology for Pre-Combustion...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    ... coal usage. The regenerating boiler concept could benefit further from additional heat integration, but the results of this effort show a COE of 97.50 per MWh for a ...

  6. Search for: All records | SciTech Connect

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    ... coal usage. The regenerating boiler concept could benefit further from additional heat integration, but the results of this effort show a COE ofmore 97.50 per MWh for a ...

  7. The Value of Improved Short-Term Wind Power Forecasting

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

    ... up-ramp reserves c down cost in MWh of down-ramp reserves R down MW range for ... power forecasting and the increased gas usage that comes with less-accurate forecasting. ...

  8. Nebraska Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Cooper Unit 1",767,"6,793",61.4,"Nebraska Public Power District" "Fort Calhoun Unit ...

  9. Electricity Monthly Update - Energy Information Administration

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Coal Stocks (Thousand Tons) 171,686 8.3% Nuclear Generation (Thousand MWh) 70,349 -1.5% ... has risen every year since 2001. Wind facilities produced 190,927 gigawatt hours (GWh) ...

  10. Electricity Monthly Update

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Point and Saint Lucie nuclear plants. The rest of the country saw total fossil fuel use stay relatively the same or slightly decrease. Fossil Fuel Prices mmBtu MWh To gain some...

  11. Primus Power Corporation Wind Firming EnergyFarm

    Energy Saver

    Primus Power Corporation Wind Firming EnergyFarm (tm) Project Description Primus Power is deploying a 25MW75MWh EnergyFarm(tm) in the Modesto Irrigation District (MID) in ...

  12. LPO5-002-Proj-Poster-WIND-ShepardsFlat

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

    LOCATIONS Gilliam County & Morrow County, Oregon LOAN AMOUNT 1.3 Billion ISSUANCE DATE December 2010 GENERATION CAPACITY 845 MW PROJECTED ANNUAL GENERATION 1,800,000 MWh CLIMATE ...

  13. LNG markets: Implications of a low energy price environment for...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    low energy price environment for demand and U.S. exports LNG: Long-Term Competitiveness in ... is a substitution fuel competing in the ... China: LCOE Forecast (MWh) 9 What does it ...

  14. Mississippi Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Grand Gulf Unit 1","1,251","9,643",100.0,"System Energy Resources, Inc" "1 Plant 1 Reactor","1,251","9,643",100.0

  15. Vermont Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Vermont Yankee Unit 1",620,"4,782",100.0,"Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee" "1 Plant 1 Reactor",620,"4,782",100.0

  16. South Carolina Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" ... mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","6,486",27.0,"51,988",49.9 ...

  17. New York Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" ... mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","5,271",13.4,"41,870",30.6 ...

  18. North Carolina Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" ... mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","4,958",17.9,"40,740",31.7 ...

  19. New Jersey Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" ... mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","4,108",22.3,"32,771",49.9 ...

  20. New Hampshire Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" ... mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","1,247",29.8,"10,910",49.2 ...

  1. "Utility Characteristics",,,,,,"Number AMR- Automated Meter Reading...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Energy Served - AMI (MWh)" "Year","Month","Utility Number","Utility Name","State","Data ... 2013,1,27058,"High West Energy, Inc","CO","Final",611,19,270,".",900,"."...

  2. DOE Wind Vision Community | OpenEI Community

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    content Wind technology roadmap Total Cost Per MwH for all common large scale power generation sources If I generate 20 percent of my national electricity from wind and solar...

  3. DOE Wind Vision Community - Q & A | OpenEI Community

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    term Q & A Question Post date Answers Total Cost Per MwH for all common large scale power generation sources 6 May 2013 - 17:52 0 If I generate 20 percent of my national...

  4. Tax Credits, Rebates & Savings | Department of Energy

    Energy.gov [DOE] (indexed site)

    Renewable Energy Production Tax Credit (Corporate) Note: The tax credits are fully subscribed. As of February 2015, there are 712 MW (1,400,000 MWh) of projects in the waiting...

  5. Denison Dam Historical Generation

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

    50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 500,000 (MWh) Denison Dam Historical Generation

  6. Ground Gravity Survey At Neal Hot Springs Geothermal Area (U...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    survey was completed by MWH Geo-Surveys. Interpretations were made by creating a 3D density inversion map. Gravity and magnetic data were used in siting the first production...

  7. Arizona Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Palo Verde Unit 1, Unit 2, Unit 3","3,937","31,200",100.0,"Arizona Public Service Co" "1 Plant 3 ...

  8. Ramping Effect on Forecast Use: Integrated Ramping as a Mitigation Strategy; NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory)

    SciTech Connect

    Diakov, Victor; Barrows, Clayton; Brinkman, Gregory; Bloom, Aaron; Denholm, Paul

    2015-06-23

    Power generation ramping between forecasted (net) load set-points shift the generation (MWh) from its scheduled values. The Integrated Ramping is described as a method that mitigates this problem.

  9. Microsoft Word - Summary of BPA's Use of the Regional Economic...

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

    TABLE 21 - Long Term Employment and Income Impact Alternative 2 REVISED Price of Electricity MWh (IP rate) 40 45 50 55 60 70 Employment (job-years) Direct DSI 2,028 2,028...

  10. Electricity Monthly Update - Energy Information Administration

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

    Tons) 155,564 31.5% Nuclear Generation (Thousand MWh) 64,547 3.4% Electric utilities invest in enhanced distribution system efficiency Electric utilities are investing in a...

  11. Ohio Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","2,134",6.5,"15,805",11.0 "Coal","21,360",64.6,"117,828",82.1 "Hydro and Pumped ...

  12. Pennsylvania Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","9,540",20.9,"77,828",33.9 "Coal","18,481",40.6,"110,369",48.0 "Hydro and Pumped ...

  13. Energy Generation by State and Technology (2009) - Datasets ...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    2009, reported in MWh. Also includes facility-level data (directly from EIA Form 923). Data and Resources Energy Generation by Fuel Source and State, 2009XLS Energy Generation by...

  14. Florida Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Crystal River Unit 3",860,0,"--","Progress Energy Florida Inc" "St Lucie Unit 1, Unit ...

  15. Current State of the Voluntary Renewable Energy Market (Presentation)

    SciTech Connect

    Heeter, J.

    2013-09-01

    This presentation highlights the status of the voluntary green power market in 2012. The voluntary green power market totaled more than 48 million MWh in 2012, with about 1.9 million customers participating. The supply continues to be dominated by wind, though solar is increasing its share of utility green pricing programs. Prices for voluntary renewable energy certificates (RECs) increased to above $1/MWh.

  16. Measures of the environmental footprint of the front end of the nuclear fuel cycle

    SciTech Connect

    E. Schneider; B. Carlsen; E. Tavrides; C. van der Hoeven; U. Phathanapirom

    2013-11-01

    Previous estimates of environmental impacts associated with the front end of the nuclear fuel cycle (FEFC) have focused primarily on energy consumption and CO2 emissions. Results have varied widely. This work builds upon reports from operating facilities and other primary data sources to build a database of front end environmental impacts. This work also addresses land transformation and water withdrawals associated with the processes of the FEFC. These processes include uranium extraction, conversion, enrichment, fuel fabrication, depleted uranium disposition, and transportation. To allow summing the impacts across processes, all impacts were normalized per tonne of natural uranium mined as well as per MWh(e) of electricity produced, a more conventional unit for measuring environmental impacts that facilitates comparison with other studies. This conversion was based on mass balances and process efficiencies associated with the current once-through LWR fuel cycle. Total energy input is calculated at 8.7 x 10- 3 GJ(e)/MWh(e) of electricity and 5.9 x 10- 3 GJ(t)/MWh(e) of thermal energy. It is dominated by the energy required for uranium extraction, conversion to fluoride compound for subsequent enrichment, and enrichment. An estimate of the carbon footprint is made from the direct energy consumption at 1.7 kg CO2/MWh(e). Water use is likewise dominated by requirements of uranium extraction, totaling 154 L/MWh(e). Land use is calculated at 8 x 10- 3 m2/MWh(e), over 90% of which is due to uranium extraction. Quantified impacts are limited to those resulting from activities performed within the FEFC process facilities (i.e. within the plant gates). Energy embodied in material inputs such as process chemicals and fuel cladding is identified but not explicitly quantified in this study. Inclusion of indirect energy associated with embodied energy as well as construction and decommissioning of facilities could increase the FEFC energy intensity estimate by a factor of up

  17. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Alabama Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Alabama) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Natural gas Net summer capacity (megawatts) 31,953 8 Electric utilities 23,050 8 IPP & CHP 8,903 11 Net generation (megawatthours) 149,340,447 6 Electric utilities 112,340,555 3 IPP & CHP 36,999,892 10 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 152,225 8 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 61,909 13 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 67,635 10 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.0 19 Nitrogen oxide (lbs/MWh) 0.8 38

  18. Reduction of CO2 Emissions Due to Wind Energy - Methods and Issues in Estimating Operational Emission Reductions

    SciTech Connect

    Holttinen, Hannele; Kiviluoma, Juha; McCann, John; Clancy, Matthew; Millgan, Michael; Pineda, Ivan; Eriksen, Peter Borre; Orths, Antje; Wolfgang, Ove

    2015-10-05

    This paper presents ways of estimating CO2 reductions of wind power using different methodologies. Estimates based on historical data have more pitfalls in methodology than estimates based on dispatch simulations. Taking into account exchange of electricity with neighboring regions is challenging for all methods. Results for CO2 emission reductions are shown from several countries. Wind power will reduce emissions for about 0.3-0.4 MtCO2/MWh when replacing mainly gas and up to 0.7 MtCO2/MWh when replacing mainly coal powered generation. The paper focuses on CO2 emissions from power system operation phase, but long term impacts are shortly discussed.

  19. Options to Decarbonize our Energy System

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

    Options to Decarbonize our Energy System Arun Majumdar Stanford University Global Per Capita GDP Coal Oil Gas Biomass Global Atmospheric CO 2 Concentration Global Energy Use Global Exponentials Global Population 2015 7B 10B 16B 6B 2100 How can we decarbonize our energy system and continue economic growth? Energy Dense Fuel With CO 2 Capture Carbon-Free Electricity 20 40 60 80 100 120 2008 2010 2012 2014 '15 $20/MWh US Natural Gas & China Coal US Coal & Nuclear Contract Price $/MWh

  20. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    District of Columbia Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (District of Columbia) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Natural gas Net summer capacity (megawatts) 9 51 Electric utilities IPP & CHP 9 51 Net generation (megawatthours) 67,612 51 Electric utilities IPP & CHP 67,612 51 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 0 51 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 147 51 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 48 50 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.0 51 Nitrogen oxide (lbs/MWh) 4.3 3

  1. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Oklahoma Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Oklahoma) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Natural gas Net summer capacity (megawatts) 24,048 17 Electric utilities 17,045 17 IPP & CHP 7,003 16 Net generation (megawatthours) 70,155,504 22 Electric utilities 48,096,026 19 IPP & CHP 22,059,478 14 Emissions Sulfur dioxide 78,556 18 Nitrogen oxide 44,874 23 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 43,994 18 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.2 17 Nitrogen oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.3 26

  2. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Vermont Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Vermont) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Nuclear Net summer capacity (megawatts) 650 50 Electric utilities 337 44 IPP & CHP 313 49 Net generation (megawatthours) 7,031,394 48 Electric utilities 868,079 42 IPP & CHP 6,163,315 37 Emissions Sulfur Dioxide (short tons) 71 50 Nitrogen Oxide (short tons) 737 50 Carbon Dioxide (thousand metric tons) 14 51 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.0 50 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 0.2 51

  3. UTILITY_ID","UTILNAME","STATE_CODE","YEAR","MONTH","RES_REV (Thousand $)","RES_S

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    OTH_REV (Thousand $)","OTH_SALES (MWh)","OTH_CONS","TOT_REV (Thousand $)","TOT_SALES (MWh)","TOT_CONS" 0,"State Level Adjustment","AK","2007R",1,5766,24179,0,7398,30009,0,1385.504,7829.663,0,,,0,14549.504,62017.663,0 213,"Alaska Electric Light&Power Co","AK","2007R",1,1479,14609,13602,981,11953,2118,390.496,5260.337,99,0,0,0,2850.496,31822.337,15819 219,"Alaska Power

  4. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    District of Columbia Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (District of Columbia) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Natural gas Net summer capacity (megawatts) 9 51 Electric utilities IPP & CHP 9 51 Net generation (megawatthours) 67,612 51 Electric utilities IPP & CHP 67,612 51 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 0 51 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 147 51 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 48 50 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.0 51 Nitrogen oxide (lbs/MWh) 4.3 3

  5. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Maine Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Maine) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Natural gas Net summer capacity (megawatts) 4,470 43 Electric utilities 10 49 IPP & CHP 4,460 20 Net generation (megawatthours) 13,248,710 44 Electric utilities 523 49 IPP & CHP 13,248,187 27 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 10,990 38 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 8,622 46 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 3,298 46 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.7 25 Nitrogen oxide (lbs/MWh)

  6. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Ohio Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Ohio) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 31,507 9 Electric utilities 11,134 26 IPP & CHP 20,372 6 Net generation (megawatthours) 134,476,405 8 Electric utilities 43,290,512 25 IPP & CHP 91,185,893 7 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 355,108 1 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 105,688 4 Carbon dioxide (thousand metrictons) 98,650 5 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 5.3 2 Nitrogen oxide (lbs/MWh)

  7. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Oklahoma Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Oklahoma) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Natural gas Net summer capacity (megawatts) 24,048 17 Electric utilities 17,045 17 IPP & CHP 7,003 16 Net generation (megawatthours) 70,155,504 22 Electric utilities 48,096,026 19 IPP & CHP 22,059,478 14 Emissions Sulfur dioxide 78,556 18 Nitrogen oxide 44,874 23 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 43,994 18 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.2 17 Nitrogen oxide (lbs/MWh) 1.3 26

  8. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Vermont Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Vermont) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Nuclear Net summer capacity (megawatts) 650 50 Electric utilities 337 44 IPP & CHP 313 49 Net generation (megawatthours) 7,031,394 48 Electric utilities 868,079 42 IPP & CHP 6,163,315 37 Emissions Sulfur Dioxide (short tons) 71 50 Nitrogen Oxide (short tons) 737 50 Carbon Dioxide (thousand metric tons) 14 51 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.0 50 Nitrogen Oxide (lbs/MWh) 0.2 51

  9. Dayton Power & Light Co | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    REV (THOUSAND ) TOT SALES (MWH) TOT CONS 2009-03 42,929 405,917 457,328 32,828 369,986 56,335 12,936 163,248 1,748 38 375 1 88,731 939,526 515,412 2009-02 50,501 495,479 457,129...

  10. McKenzie Electric Coop Inc | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    (THOUSAND ) TOT SALES (MWH) TOT CONS 2009-03 4.139 55.309 113 0.083 0.047 2 4.222 55.356 115 2009-02 5.066 56.074 114 0.083 0.044 2 5.149 56.118 116 2009-01 4.899 69.559 114...

  11. PacifiCorp (Idaho) | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    OTH CONS TOT REV (THOUSAND ) TOT SALES (MWH) TOT CONS 2009-03 4,863.802 67,315.248 56,342 2,259.042 33,641.948 8,317 6,035.093 136,727.669 5,524 13,157.937 237,684.865 70,183...

  12. EPA RE-Powering Americas Lands: Kansas City Municipal Farm...

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

    ... to determine an annual energy load of 927 MWh per year and a peak monthly average power ... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Radio Tower (usage in 2013) 1,795 954 976 1,248 1,337 1,284 ...

  13. A Systematic Approach to Better Understanding Integration Costs

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

    ... term), which led to more efficient usage of the coal and combined-cycle units ... Generator Type (MWh) Type Ref Ref:FSG Coal 0.26 0.22 CC 0.47 1.03 CT Gas 6.34 99.98 Wt. ...

  14. Microsoft Word - Emergency Report Jan 06 2014.docx

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    New England 16.00 38.10 -- New York City 12.83 47.80 -- Day-ahead on-peak electricity price per MWh 3-day wknd Mon 16 Tue 17 New England 173.43 228.90 -- New York City ...

  15. Engineering and Economic Analysis of an Advanced Ultra-Supercritical Pulverized Coal Power Plant with and without Post-Combustion Carbon Capture Task 7. Design and Economic Studies

    SciTech Connect

    Booras, George; Powers, J.; Riley, C.; Hendrix, H.

    2015-09-01

    This report evaluates the economics and performance of two A-USC PC power plants; Case 1 is a conventionally configured A-USC PC power plant with superior emission controls, but without CO2 removal; and Case 2 adds a post-combustion carbon capture (PCC) system to the plant from Case 1, using the design and heat integration strategies from EPRI’s 2015 report, “Best Integrated Coal Plant.” The capture design basis for this case is “partial,” to meet EPA’s proposed New Source Performance Standard, which was initially proposed as 500 kg-CO2/MWh (gross) or 1100 lb-CO2/MWh (gross), but modified in August 2015 to 635 kg-CO2/MWh (gross) or 1400 lb-CO2/MWh (gross). This report draws upon the collective experience of consortium members, with EPRI and General Electric leading the study. General Electric provided the steam cycle analysis as well as v the steam turbine design and cost estimating. EPRI performed integrated plant performance analysis using EPRI’s PC Cost model.

  16. Wells Rural Electric Co (Utah) | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    TOT SALES (MWH) TOT CONS 2009-03 46 519 490 71 957 210 55 979 5 172 2,455 705 2009-02 52 607 492 69 1,045 211 46 797 5 167 2,449 708 2009-01 57 672 490 77 1,053 211 51 899 5 185...

  17. City of Independence, Missouri (Utility Company) | Open Energy...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    OTH CONS TOT REV (THOUSAND ) TOT SALES (MWH) TOT CONS 2009-03 3,560.56 35,314.852 51,607 3,689.899 38,562.777 5,126 271.211 3,999.786 10 7,521.67 77,877.415 56,743 2009-02...

  18. State Nuclear Profiles 2010

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    0.1 Other Renewable 1 775 4.3 2,474 3.8 Petroleum 790 4.4 718 1.1 Total 17,836 100.0 ... Plant nametotal reactors Summer capacity (mw) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of ...

  19. Microsoft Word - Document2

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    min, average, and max average CO 2 emissions by month for AZNM subregion (lbs CO 2 MWh load) 800 1,100 1,400 1,700 January 800 1,100 1,400 1,700 February 800 1,100 1,400 1,700...

  20. UESC Welcoming Remarks

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    that reduce kW and kWh across the greater Houston area. In 2014 our EE programs: Achieved a reduction of 159,000 kW (159 MW) and 15,316,300 kWh (153,316 MWH) across all ...

  1. Consolidated Edison Co-NY Inc | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    CONS TOT REV (THOUSAND ) TOT SALES (MWH) TOT CONS 2009-03 180,424 829,996 2,282,842 177,132 1,007,995 393,452 2,556 15,772 240 104 656 5 360,216 1,854,419 2,676,539 2009-02...

  2. Small Modular Reactor: First of a Kind (FOAK) and Nth of a Kind (NOAK) Economic Analysis

    SciTech Connect

    Lauren M. Boldon; Piyush Sabharwall

    2014-08-01

    Small modular reactors (SMRs) refer to any reactor design in which the electricity generated is less than 300 MWe. Often medium sized reactors with power less than 700 MWe are also grouped into this category. Internationally, the development of a variety of designs for SMRs is booming with many designs approaching maturity and even in or nearing the licensing stage. It is for this reason that a generalized yet comprehensive economic model for first of a kind (FOAK) through nth of a kind (NOAK) SMRs based upon rated power, plant configuration, and the fiscal environment was developed. In the model, a particular project’s feasibility is assessed with regards to market conditions and by commonly utilized capital budgeting techniques, such as the net present value (NPV), internal rate of return (IRR), Payback, and more importantly, the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) for comparison to other energy production technologies. Finally, a sensitivity analysis was performed to determine the effects of changing debt, equity, interest rate, and conditions on the LCOE. The economic model is primarily applied to the near future water cooled SMR designs in the United States. Other gas cooled and liquid metal cooled SMR designs have been briefly outlined in terms of how the economic model would change. FOAK and NOAK SMR costs were determined for a site containing seven 180 MWe water cooled SMRs and compared to a site containing one 1260 MWe reactor. With an equal share of debt and equity and a 10% cost of debt and equity, the LCOE was determined to be $79 $84/MWh and $80/MWh for the SMR and large reactor sites, respectively. With a cost of equity of 15%, the SMR LCOE increased substantially to $103 $109/MWh. Finally, an increase in the equity share to 70% at the 15% cost of equity resulted in an even higher LCOE, demonstrating the large variation in results due to financial and market factors. The NPV and IRR both decreased with increasing LCOE. Unless the price of electricity

  3. State and Local Publications | State, Local, & Tribal Governments | NREL

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

    Name Average retail price (cents/kWh) Net summer capacity (MW) Net generation (MWh) Total retail sales (MWh) Alabama 9.27 31,953 149,340,447 90,493,727 Alaska 17.46 2,464 6,042,830 6,164,812 Arizona 10.18 28,249 112,257,187 76,297,685 Arkansas 7.9 14,754 61,592,137 47,080,301 California 15.15 74,646 198,807,622 262,584,786 Colorado 10.06 14,933 53,847,386 53,396,521 Connecticut 17.05 8,832 33,676,980 29,354,460 Delaware 11.22 3,086 7,703,584 11,338,477 District of Columbia 12.11 9 67,612

  4. NREL Highlights 2012 Utility Green Power Leaders - News Releases | NREL

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

    Highlights 2012 Utility Green Power Leaders Top 10 programs support more than 4.2 million MWh of voluntary green power June 5, 2013 The Energy Department's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) today released its assessment of leading utility green power programs. Under these voluntary programs, residential and commercial consumers can choose to help support additional electricity production from renewable resources - such as wind and solar - that diversify our nation's energy portfolio

  5. Otter Tail Power Co (North Dakota) | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    ) TOT SALES (MWH) TOT CONS 2009-03 4,536 69,096 44,206 6,635 104,771 12,634 326 5,568 2 11,497 179,435 56,842 2009-02 4,919 69,170 44,146 6,370 97,635 12,601 334 6,444 2...

  6. Baker-Barry Tunnel Lighting: Evaluation of a Potential GATEWAY Demonstrations Project

    SciTech Connect

    Tuenge, Jason R.

    2011-06-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is evaluating the Baker-Barry Tunnel as a potential GATEWAY Demonstrations project for deployment of solid-state lighting (SSL) technology. The National Park Service (NPS) views this project as a possible proving ground and template for implementation of light-emitting diode (LED) luminaires in other NPS tunnels, thereby expanding the estimated 40% energy savings from 132 MWh/yr for this tunnel to a much larger figure national

  7. Solar Manufacturing Projects | Department of Energy

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

    Solar Manufacturing Projects Solar Manufacturing Projects Solar Manufacturing Projects Solar Manufacturing Projects Solar Manufacturing Projects Solar Manufacturing Projects SOLAR MANUFACTURING 1 PROJECT in 1 LOCATION 1,000 MW GENERATION CAPACITY 1,927,000 MWh PROJECTED ANNUAL GENERATION * 1,100,000 METRIC TONS OF CO2 EMISSIONS PREVENTED ANNUALLY ALL FIGURES AS OF MARCH 2015 * Calculated using the project's and NREL Technology specific capacity factors. For cases in which NREL's capacity factors

  8. John Sheldon 2012 poster

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

    proposal is supported by the Geothermal Technologies Program of the DOE/Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Office, DOE/National Energy Technology Laboratory - Pittsburgh, Department of Mechanical Engineering at Carnegie Mellon University. An experimentally-validated computational framework to enable nanofluid drilling technology Background and Introduction * Compared to the fixed costs of oil and gas drilling ($15.61/MWh), the exploration and drilling for geothermal resources is a

  9. LPO5-002-Proj-Poster-CSP-Ormat

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

    ORMAT NEVADA With 3 facilities across the state, Ormat Nevada increases Nevada's clean power capacity by tapping into a vast underground geothermal reservoir. OWNERS Ormat Nevada, Inc. & Ormat Technologies LOCATIONS Jersey Valley, McGinness Hills & Tuscarora, Nevada LOAN AMOUNT $350 Million ISSUANCE DATE September 2011 GENERATION CAPACITY 97 MW PROJECTED ANNUAL GENERATION 557,000 MWh CLIMATE BENEFIT 301,000 Metric Tons of C0 2 Prevented Annually INVESTING in AMERICAN ENERGY

  10. LPO5-002-Proj-Poster-GEO-USGOregon

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

    USG OREGON By pioneering a more e cient thermal extraction technology, USG Oregon is able to access previously untapped geothermal resources. INVESTING in AMERICAN ENERGY OWNERS U.S. Geothermal, Inc. & Enbridge (U.S.), Inc. LOCATION Malheur County, Oregon LOAN AMOUNT $97 Million ISSUANCE DATE February 2011 GENERATION CAPACITY 22 MW PROJECTED ANNUAL GENERATION 149,000 MWh CLIMATE BENEFIT 86,000 Metric Tons of C0 2 Prevented Annually

  11. LPO5-002-Proj-Poster-PV-AVSR

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

    ANTELOPE VALLEY SOLAR RANCH By scaling up innovative inverter technology, Antelope Valley Solar Ranch demonstrates that utility-scale photovoltaic solar can reliably deliver electricity. INVESTING in AMERICAN ENERGY OWNER Exelon LOCATION Lancaster, California LOAN AMOUNT $646 Million ISSUANCE DATE September 2011 GENERATION CAPACITY 242 MW PROJECTED ANNUAL GENERATION 482,000 MWh CLIMATE BENEFIT 279,000 Metric Tons of CO 2 Prevented Annually

  12. LPO5-002-Proj-Poster-PV-AguaCal

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

    AGUA CALIENTE By harnessing Arizona's abundant sunlight, Agua Caliente is demonstrating that photovoltaic solar can go big in the U.S. INVESTING in AMERICAN ENERGY OWNERS NRG Solar, LLC & MidAmerican Renewables, LLC LOCATION Yuma County, Arizona LOAN AMOUNT $967 Million ISSUANCE DATE August 2011 GENERATION CAPACITY 290 MW PROJECTED ANNUAL GENERATION 559,000 MWh CLIMATE BENEFIT 312,000 Metric Tons of CO 2 Prevented Annually

  13. LPO5-002-Proj-Poster-PV-Alamosa

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

    ALAMOSA Innovative tracking and concentrating optics increase the e ciency of Alamosa, the world's largest high concentration photovoltaic solar system. INVESTING in AMERICAN ENERGY OWNERS Cogentrix Power & Carlyle Infrastructure Partners LOCATION Alamosa, Colorado LOAN AMOUNT $90.6 Million ISSUANCE DATE September 2011 GENERATION CAPACITY 29 MW PROJECTED ANNUAL GENERATION 58,000 MWh CLIMATE BENEFIT 34,000 Metric Tons of CO 2 Prevented Annually

  14. LPO5-002-Proj-Poster-PV-CVSR

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

    boost output, California Valley Solar Ranch uses innovative single-axis trackers and a wireless monitoring and control system. CALIFORNIA VALLEY SOLAR RANCH INVESTING in AMERICAN ENERGY OWNERS NRG Energy, Inc. & NRG Solar, LLC LOCATION San Luis Obispo, California LOAN AMOUNT $1.2 Billion ISSUANCE DATE September 2011 GENERATION CAPACITY 250 MW PROJECTED ANNUAL GENERATION 650,000 MWh CLIMATE BENEFIT 370,000 Metric Tons of CO 2 Prevented Annually

  15. LPO5-002-Proj-Poster-PV-DesertSunlight

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

    DESERT SUNLIGHT By working with 14 commercial lending partners, Desert Sunlight helped pave the way for future utility-scale photovoltaic solar deals. INVESTING in AMERICAN ENERGY OWNERS NextEra Energy, General Electric & Sumitomo of America LOCATION Riverside County, California LOAN AMOUNT $1.5 Billion ISSUANCE DATE September 2011 GENERATION CAPACITY 550 MW PROJECTED ANNUAL GENERATION 1,060,000 MWh CLIMATE BENEFIT 614,000 Metric Tons of C0 2 Prevented Annually

  16. LPO5-002-Proj-Poster-PV-Mesquite1

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

    MESQUITE 1 As one of the first U.S. photovoltaic solar facilities larger than 100 MW, Mesquite 1 helped launch utility-scale solar in America. INVESTING in AMERICAN ENERGY OWNERS Sempra Energy & Consolidated Edison Development LOCATION Maricopa County, Arizona LOAN AMOUNT $337 Million ISSUANCE DATE September 2011 GENERATION CAPACITY 170 MW PROJECTED ANNUAL GENERATION 328,000 MWh CLIMATE BENEFIT 190,000 Metric Tons of CO 2 Prevented Annually

  17. LPO5-002-Proj-Poster-SLR-MFG-1366

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

    6 TECHNOLOGIES Using new, proprietary manufacturing processes, 1366 Technologies aims to produce higher-quality, lower-cost silicon wafers for solar cells. INVESTING in AMERICAN ENERGY OWNER 1366 Technologies, Inc. LOCATION Bedford, Massachusetts LOAN AMOUNT $150 Million ISSUANCE DATE August 2011 GENERATION CAPACITY 1,000 MW PROJECTED ANNUAL GENERATION 1,927,000 MWh CLIMATE BENEFIT 1,100,000 Metric Tons of CO 2 Prevented Annually

  18. New Resources to Support Climate and Energy Planning with Energy Efficiency

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

    | Department of Energy New Resources to Support Climate and Energy Planning with Energy Efficiency New Resources to Support Climate and Energy Planning with Energy Efficiency Energy efficiency could save consumers and businesses approximately 1 billion MWh of electricity between 2013 and 2030,1 providing cost savings, air quality improvements, economic development, increased energy system reliability, and other benefits across the United States. This fact sheet provides resources to support

  19. Maryland Nuclear Profile - Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,855,"6,755",90.2,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  20. Massachusetts Nuclear Profile - Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer cpacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,685,"5,918",98.7,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,685,"5,918",98.7

  1. Michigan Nuclear Profile - Donald C Cook

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Donald C Cook" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,"1,009","7,807",88.3,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  2. Michigan Nuclear Profile - Fermi

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Fermi" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 2,"1,085","7,738",81.4,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,"

  3. Michigan Nuclear Profile - Palisades

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Palisades" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,793,"6,241",89.8,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,793,"6,241&

  4. Nebraska Nuclear Profile - Fort Calhoun

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Fort Calhoun" "Unit","Summer Capacity (MW)","Net Generation (Thousand MWh)","Summer Capacity Factor (Percent)","Type","Commercial Operation Date","License Expiration Date" 1,478,"3,701",88.4,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,478,"3,701",88.4

  5. Fact Sheet: Tehachapi Wind Energy Storage Project (May 2014) | Department

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

    of Energy Tehachapi Wind Energy Storage Project (May 2014) Fact Sheet: Tehachapi Wind Energy Storage Project (May 2014) The Tehachapi Wind Energy Storage Project (TSP) Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) consists of an 8 MW-4 hour (32 MWh) lithium-ion battery and a smart inverter system that is cutting-edge in scale and application. Southern California Edison (SCE) will test the BESS for 24 months to determine its capability and effectiveness to support 13 operational users. For more

  6. Fact Sheet: Wind Firming EnergyFarm (August 2013) | Department of Energy

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

    Wind Firming EnergyFarm (August 2013) Fact Sheet: Wind Firming EnergyFarm (August 2013) Primus Power is deploying a 25 MW/75 MWh EnergyFarm(TM) in California's Central Valley, comprising an array of 20 kW EnergyCell flow batteries combined with off-the-shelf components and power electronics housed inside a standard shipping container. For more information about how OE performs research and development on a wide variety of storage technologies, including batteries, flywheels, electrochemical

  7. PacifiCorp | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    (MWH) TOT CONS 2009-03 4,513.328 40,300.371 35,420 2,957.385 28,242.692 7,794 295.18 3,403.742 1,964 7,765.893 71,946.805 45,178 2009-02 4,309.919 37,789.644 35,472 2,584.65...

  8. Alabama Nuclear Profile - Browns Ferry

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Browns Ferry" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,"1,101","8,072",83.7,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  9. Arizona Nuclear Profile - Palo Verde

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Palo Verde" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,"1,311","9,308",81.0,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  10. California Nuclear Profile - Diablo Canyon

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Diablo Canyon" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,"1,122","8,677",88.3,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  11. California Nuclear Profile - San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 2,"1,070","6,989",74.6,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  12. Advanced Nuclear Energy Projects | Department of Energy

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

    Projects Advanced Nuclear Energy Projects Advanced Nuclear Energy Projects Advanced Nuclear Energy Projects Advanced Nuclear Energy Projects Advanced Nuclear Energy Projects ADVANCED NUCLEAR ENERGY 1 PROJECT in 1 LOCATION 2,200 MW GENERATION CAPACITY 17,200,000 MWh PROJECTED ANNUAL GENERATION * 10,000,000 METRIC TONS OF CO2 EMISSIONS PREVENTED ANNUALLY ALL FIGURES AS OF MARCH 2015 * Calculated using the project's and NREL Technology specific capacity factors. For cases in which NREL's capacity

  13. Anaerobic MBR: Challenges and Opportunities | Department of Energy

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

    Anaerobic MBR: Challenges and Opportunities Anaerobic MBR: Challenges and Opportunities Presentation by Art Umble, MWH Americas, during the "Technological State of the Art" panel at the Hydrogen, Hydrocarbons, and Bioproduct Precursors from Wastewaters Workshop held March 18-19, 2015. Anaerobic MBR: Challenges and Opportunities (1.31 MB) More Documents & Publications Hydrogen, Hydrocarbons, and Bioproduct Precursors from Wastewaters Workshop Report The Anaerobic Fluidized Bed

  14. California: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    PV 246,008 GWh246,008,000,000 kWh 246,008,000,000,000 Wh 246,008,000 MWh 8.856288e+17 J 111 GW111,000 MW 111,000,000 kW 111,000,000,000 W 111,000,000,000,000 mW 0.111 TW 2,320...

  15. Provo City Corp (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    (MWH) TOT CONS 2009-03 1,368 18,290 30,311 1,749 28,411 4,779 437 10,070 1 3,554 56,771 35,091 2009-02 1,552 20,914 30,371 1,847 31,146 4,792 451 10,886 1 3,850 62,946 35,164...

  16. Slide 1

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

    Russell, P.E. Sr. Energy Engineer Nissan North America ISO50001 - What Counts! October 31 , 2012 Nissan's Commitments To Improving Energy Performance Cost Reduction On Energy Spend Nissan Green Program 2016 ENERGY STAR® Certification Of Plants DOE Better Plants Smyrna Vehicle Manufacturing Plant Conditioned Space Area 5.5 MM Sqft Production Capacity 550,000 Vehicles Per Year Energy Sources Typical Annual Use Electricity 220,000 MWH Natural Gas 650,000 MCF Coal 12,000 Tons Stamping Modern

  17. Slide 1

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

    Alliance Meeting Roger Smith South Mississippi Electric Power Association September 15, 2016 South Mississippi Electric Power (SMEPA) * SMEPA is a Rural Electric Generation & Transmission Cooperative * Serves 11 Distribution Member Cooperatives - Cumulatively serve 420,000 meters * 2015 Peak demand - 2,385 MW * 2015 Energy Sales - 10.1 Million MWH 2 3 SMEPA Serves Load in 3 Transmission Areas * On-System Area (SMEPA) * Off-System Area (EMI) * Borderline Area (MPC) SMEPA owns over 1727 miles

  18. Slide 1

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

    Team Cumberland Meeting Roger Smith South Mississippi Electric Power Association October 12, 2016 South Mississippi Electric Power (SMEPA) * SMEPA is a Rural Electric Generation & Transmission Cooperative * Serves 11 Distribution Member Cooperatives - Cumulatively serve 420,000 meters * 2015 Peak demand - 2,385 MW * 2015 Energy Sales - 10.1 Million MWH 2 3 SMEPA Serves Load in 3 Transmission Areas * On-System Area (SMEPA) * Off-System Area (EMI) * Borderline Area (MPC) SMEPA owns over 1727

  19. Verdigris Valley Elec Coop Inc | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    ) TOT SALES (MWH) TOT CONS 2009-03 3,334 39,732 29,287 620 6,280 4,308 487 5,668 607 4,441 51,680 34,202 2009-02 3,065 36,726 29,285 456 4,469 4,299 405 4,606 607 3,926...

  20. UNS Electric, Inc | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    REV (THOUSAND ) TOT SALES (MWH) TOT CONS 2009-03 5,500 45,911 79,490 5,666 46,579 10,607 2,748 28,348 20 13,914 120,838 90,117 2009-02 6,301 52,859 79,557 5,084 42,064 10,613...

  1. LPO5-002-Proj-Poster-CSP-Solana

    Energy Saver

    ORMAT NEVADA With 3 facilities across the state, Ormat Nevada increases Nevada's clean power capacity by tapping into a vast underground geothermal reservoir. OWNERS Ormat Nevada, Inc. & Ormat Technologies LOCATIONS Jersey Valley, McGinness Hills & Tuscarora, Nevada LOAN AMOUNT $350 Million ISSUANCE DATE September 2011 GENERATION CAPACITY 97 MW PROJECTED ANNUAL GENERATION 557,000 MWh CLIMATE BENEFIT 301,000 Metric Tons of C0 2 Prevented Annually INVESTING in AMERICAN ENERGY

  2. Tennessee Nuclear Profile - Sequoyah

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sequoyah" "Unit","Summer Capacity (MW)","Net Generation (Thousand MWh)","Summer Capacity Factor (Percent)","Type","Commercial Operation Date","License Expiration Date" 1,"1,152","8,962",88.8,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  3. Texas Nuclear Profile - Comanche Peak

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Comanche Peak" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,"1,209","9,677",91.4,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  4. Texas Nuclear Profile - South Texas Project

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    South Texas Project" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,"1,280","11,304",100.8,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  5. Montana-Dakota Utilities Co | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    ) TOT SALES (MWH) TOT CONS 2009-03 1,134 15,419 18,636 1,164 19,883 5,080 1,252 25,660 132 3,550 60,962 23,848 2009-02 1,069 14,377 18,635 1,136 19,109 5,099 1,198 23,937 132...

  6. US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG

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

    WHITNEY POWERHOUSE MAJOR REHABILITATION Fort Worth District 23 June 2016 BUILDING STRONG ® Whitney Powerhouse BUILDING STRONG ® Whitney Power Plant Main Generating Units Rehab Project 3 BUILDING STRONG ® General Plant Information Whitney Powerhouse  30 MW capacity, Peaking Plant  Purpose - Flood Control, Hydropower, Recreation  Two vertical axis Francis units  Average annual energy produced - 73,000 MWH  Plant placed in service in 1953  Remote operated from Sam Rayburn Plant

  7. New Resource to Support Climate and Energy Planning with Energy Efficiency

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

    Resources to Support Climate and Energy Planning with Energy Efficiency Opportunity Energy effciency could save consumers and businesses approximately 1 billion MWh of electricity between 2013 and 2030, 1 providing cost savings, air quality improvements, economic development, increased energy system reliability, and other benefts across the United States. Electricity Savings Potential from Energy Efficiency State and local governments across the U.S. are increasingly focused on how clean energy

  8. Georgia Nuclear Profile - Vogtle

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Vogtle" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,"1,150","10,247",101.7,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  9. Illinois Nuclear Profile - Braidwood Generation Station

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Braidwood Generation Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,"1,178","9,197",89.1,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  10. Illinois Nuclear Profile - Byron Generating Station

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Byron Generating Station" ,"Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,"1,164","10,337",101.4,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  11. Illinois Nuclear Profile - Clinton Power Station

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Clinton Power Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,"1,065","8,612",92.3,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-

  12. Illinois Nuclear Profile - LaSalle Generating Station

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    LaSalle Generating Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,"1,118","9,207",94.0,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  13. Iowa Nuclear Profile - Duane Arnold Energy Center

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Duane Arnold Energy Center" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,601,"4,451",84.5,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,601,"4,451",84.5

  14. Voluntary Green Power Market Forecast through 2015

    SciTech Connect

    Bird, L.; Holt, E.; Sumner, J.; Kreycik, C.

    2010-05-01

    Various factors influence the development of the voluntary 'green' power market--the market in which consumers purchase or produce power from non-polluting, renewable energy sources. These factors include climate policies, renewable portfolio standards (RPS), renewable energy prices, consumers' interest in purchasing green power, and utilities' interest in promoting existing programs and in offering new green options. This report presents estimates of voluntary market demand for green power through 2015 that were made using historical data and three scenarios: low-growth, high-growth, and negative-policy impacts. The resulting forecast projects the total voluntary demand for renewable energy in 2015 to range from 63 million MWh annually in the low case scenario to 157 million MWh annually in the high case scenario, representing an approximately 2.5-fold difference. The negative-policy impacts scenario reflects a market size of 24 million MWh. Several key uncertainties affect the results of this forecast, including uncertainties related to growth assumptions, the impacts that policy may have on the market, the price and competitiveness of renewable generation, and the level of interest that utilities have in offering and promoting green power products.

  15. ORNL Neutron Sciences Annual Report for 2007

    SciTech Connect

    Anderson, Ian S; Horak, Charlie M; Counce, Deborah Melinda; Ekkebus, Allen E

    2008-07-01

    This is the first annual report of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory Neutron Sciences Directorate for calendar year 2007. It describes the neutron science facilities, current developments, and future plans; highlights of the year's activities and scientific research; and information on the user program. It also contains information about education and outreach activities and about the organization and staff. The Neutron Sciences Directorate is responsible for operation of the High Flux Isotope Reactor and the Spallation Neutron Source. The main highlights of 2007 were highly successful operation and instrument commissioning at both facilities. At HFIR, the year began with the reactor in shutdown mode and work on the new cold source progressing as planned. The restart on May 16, with the cold source operating, was a significant achievement. Furthermore, measurements of the cold source showed that the performance exceeded expectations, making it one of the world's most brilliant sources of cold neutrons. HFIR finished the year having completed five run cycles and 5,880 MWd of operation. At SNS, the year began with 20 kW of beam power on target; and thanks to a highly motivated staff, we reached a record-breaking power level of 183 kW by the end of the year. Integrated beam power delivered to the target was 160 MWh. Although this is a substantial accomplishment, the next year will bring the challenge of increasing the integrated beam power delivered to 887 MWh as we chart our path toward 5,350 MWh by 2011.

  16. SAS Output

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    5. Unit of Measure Equivalents Unit Equivalent Kilowatt (kW) 1,000 (One Thousand) Watts Megawatt (MW) 1,000,000 (One Million) Watts Gigawatt (GW) 1,000,000,000 (One Billion) Watts Terawatt (TW) 1,000,000,000,000 (One Trillion) Watts Gigawatt 1,000,000 (One Million) Kilowatts Thousand Gigawatts 1,000,000,000 (One Billion) Kilowatts Kilowatthours (kWh) 1,000 (One Thousand) Watthours Megawatthours (MWh) 1,000,000 (One Million) Watthours Gigawatthours (GWh) 1,000,000,000 (One Billion) Watthours

  17. Paper Mill Pursues Five Projects Following Plant-Wide Assessment (Augusta Newsprint)

    SciTech Connect

    2003-06-01

    Augusta Newsprint undertook a plant-wide energy efficiency assessment of its Augusta, Georgia, plant in 2001. The assessment helped the company decide to implement five energy efficiency projects. Four of the five projects will save the company 11,000 MWh of electrical energy (about $369,000) each year. The remaining project will produce more than $300,000 annually, from sale of the byproduct turpentine. The largest annual savings, $881,000, will come from eliminating Kraft pulp by using better process control. All of the projects could be applied to other paper mills and most of the projects could be applied in other industries.

  18. GSA Wind Supply Opportunity

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

    Wind Supply Opportunity 1 2 3 Proposed Location * Size: 100-210 MegaWatts *Location: Bureau County, IL *Planned COD: December 2014 or 2015 *Site Control: 17,000 acres *Wind Resource Assessment: 7.4 m/s *Annual Production Estimate: 350,000 - 725,000 MWh * Interim 2013 renewable energy goal of 15% met and exceeded * Still short of 2020 goal to be 30% renewable * Renewable Power supply is an excellent method of meeting these goals 4 GSA's Renewable Mandate 5 Mechanics of Supply *MG2 would deliver

  19. Louisiana Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","2,142",8.0,"18,639",18.1 "Coal","3,417",12.8,"23,924",23.3 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",192,0.7,"1,109",1.1

  20. Louisiana Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Louisiana nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant Name/Total Reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (Pprcent)","Owner" "River Bend Unit 1",974,"8,363",44.9,"Entergy Gulf States - LA LLC" "Waterford 3 Unit 3","1,168","10,276",55.1,"Entergy Louisiana Inc" "2 Plants 2

  1. Louisiana Nuclear Profile - River Bend

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    River Bend" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,974,"8,363",98.0,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,974,"8,363",98.0 "Data for 2010" "BWR = Boiling

  2. Louisiana Nuclear Profile - Waterford 3

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Waterford 3" "Unit","Summer Capacity (MW)","Net Generation (Thousand MWh)","Summer Capacity Factor (Percent)","Type","Commercial Operation Date","License Expiration Date" 3,"1,168","8,949",87.5,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,"1,168","8,949",87.5

  3. Maryland Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","1,705",13.6,"13,994",32.1 "Coal","4,886",39.0,"23,668",54.3 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",590,4.7,"1,667",3.8

  4. Maryland Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Unit 1, Unit 2","1,705","13,994",100.0,"Calvert Cliffs Nuclear PP Inc" "1 Plant 2 Reactors","1,705","13,994",100.0 "Note: Totals

  5. Massachusetts Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, smmer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear",685,5.0,"5,918",13.8 "Coal","1,669",12.2,"8,306",19.4 "Hydro and Pumped Storage","1,942",14.2,659,1.5 "Natural

  6. Massachusetts Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Unit 1",685,"5,918",100.0,"Entergy Nuclear Generation Co" "1 Plant 1 Reactor",685,"5,918",100.0 "Note: Totals may not equal sum of components due to

  7. Michigan Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy Source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","3,947",13.2,"29,625",26.6 "Coal","11,531",38.7,"65,604",58.8 "Hydro and Pumped Storage","2,109",7.1,228,0.2

  8. Michigan Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Donald C Cook Unit 1, Unit 2","2,069","15,646",52.8,"Indiana Michigan Power Co" "Fermi Unit 2","1,085","7,738",26.1,"Detroit Edison Co" "Palisades Unit

  9. Minnesota Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","1,594",10.8,"13,478",25.1 "Coal","4,789",32.5,"28,083",52.3 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",193,1.3,840,1.6 "Natural

  10. Minnesota Nuclear Profile - Monticello

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Monticello" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,554,"4,695",96.7,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,554,"4,695",96.7 "Data for 2010" "BWR = Boiling Water Reactor."

  11. Minnesota Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Minnesota nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Monticello Unit 1",554,"4,695",34.8,"Northern States Power Co - Minnesota" "Prairie Island Unit 1, Unit 2","1,040","8,783",65.2,"Northern States Power Co -

  12. Minnesota Nuclear Profile - Prairie Island

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Prairie Island" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,521,"4,655",102.0,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" 2,519,"4,128",90.8,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  13. Mississippi Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","1,251",8.0,"9,643",17.7 "Coal","2,526",16.1,"13,629",25.0 "Natural Gas","11,640",74.2,"29,619",54.4

  14. Mississippi Nuclear Profile - Grand Gulf

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Grand Gulf" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,"1,251","9,643",88.0,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,"1,251","9,643",88.0 "Data for 2010" "BWR = Boiling Water Reactor."

  15. Mississippi Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Mississippi nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Grand Gulf Unit 1","1,251","9,643",100.0,"System Energy Resources, Inc" "1 Plant 1 Reactor","1,251","9,643",100.0

  16. Missouri Nuclear Profile - Callaway

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Callaway" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,"1,190","8,996",86.3,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,"1,190","8,996",86.3

  17. Missouri Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Callaway Unit 1","1,190","8,996",100.0,"Union Electric Co" "1 Plant 1 Reactor","1,190","8,996",100.0 "Note: Totals may not equal sum of components due to

  18. Nebraska Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","1,245",15.8,"11,054",30.2 "Coal","3,932",50.0,"23,363",63.8 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",278,3.5,"1,314",3.6

  19. Nebraska Nuclear Profile - Cooper

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Cooper" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,767,"6,793",101.1,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,767,"6,793",101.1 "Data for 2010" "BWR = Boiling

  20. Nebraska Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Nebraska nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Cooper Unit 1",767,"6,793",61.4,"Nebraska Public Power District" "Fort Calhoun Unit 1",478,"4,261",38.6,"Omaha Public Power District" "2 Plants 2

  1. New Hampshire Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (nw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Seabrook Unit 1","1,247","10,910",100.0,"NextEra Energy Seabrook LLC" "1 Plant 1 Reactor","1,247","10,910",100.0 "Note: Totals may not equal sum of components due

  2. New Jersey Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Oyster Creek Unit 1",615,"4,601",14.0,"Exelon Nuclear" "PSEG Hope Creek Generating Station Unit 1","1,161","9,439",28.8,"PSEG Nuclear LLC" "PSEG Salem Generating

  3. Superconductive magnetic energy storage (SMES) external fields and safety considerations

    SciTech Connect

    Polk, C. . Dept. of Electrical Engineering); Boom, R.W.; Eyssa, Y.M. . Applied Superconductivity Center)

    1992-01-01

    This paper addresses preferred SMES configurations and the external magnetic fields which they generate. Possible biological effects of fields are reviewed briefly. It is proposed that SMES units be fenced at the 10 gauss (1 mT) level to keep unrestricted areas safe, even for persons with cardiac pacemakers. For a full size 5000 MWh (1.8 {times} 10 {sup 13} J) SMES the magnetic field decreases to 10 gauss at a radial distance of 2 km from the center of the coil. Other considerations related to the environmental impact of large SMES magnetic fields are discussed briefly.

  4. Alabama Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","5,043",15.6,"37,941",24.9 "Coal","11,441",35.3,"63,050",41.4 "Hydro and Pumped

  5. Alabama Nuclear Profile - Joseph M Farley

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Joseph M Farley" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,874,"6,577",85.9,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" 2,860,"6,592",87.5,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  6. Alabama Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Browns Ferry Unit 1, Unit 2, Unit 3","3,309","24,771",65.3,"Tennessee Valley Authority" "Joseph M Farley Unit 1, Unit 2","1,734","13,170",34.7,"Alabama Power

  7. Arizona Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (nw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear",3937,14.9,"31,200",27.9 "Coal","6,233",23.6,"43,644",39.1 "Hydro and Pumped Storage","2,937",11.1,"6,831",6.1

  8. Arizona Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Palo Verde Unit 1, Unit 2, Unit 3","3,937","31,200",100.0,"Arizona Public Service Co" "1 Plant 3 Reactors","3,937","31,200",100.0 "Note: Totals may not equal sum of

  9. Arkansas Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","1,835",11.5,"15,023",24.6 "Coal","4,535",28.4,"28,152",46.2 "Hydro and Pumped

  10. Arkansas Nuclear Profile - Arkansas Nuclear One

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Nuclear One" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,842,"6,607",89.6,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" 2,993,"8,416",96.7,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  11. Arkansas Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1, Unit 2","1,835","15,023",100.0,"Entergy Arkansas Inc" "1 Plant 2 Reactors","1,835","15,023",100.0

  12. California Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","4,390",6.5,"32,201",15.8 "Coal",374,0.6,"2,100",1.0 "Hydro and Pumped Storage","13,954",20.7,"33,260",16.3

  13. California Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    California nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Diablo Canyon Unit 1, Unit 2","2,240","18,430",57.2,"Pacific Gas & Electric Co" "San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit 2, Unit

  14. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Connecticut Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Connecticut) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Nuclear Net summer capacity (megawatts) 8,832 35 Electric utilities 161 45 IPP & CHP 8,671 12 Net generation (megawatthours) 33,676,980 38 Electric utilities 54,693 45 IPP & CHP 33,622,288 11 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 1,897 47 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 8,910 45 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 7,959 41 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.1 46 Nitrogen oxide

  15. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Georgia Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Georgia) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 38,250 7 Electric utilities 28,873 3 IPP & CHP 9,377 10 Net generation (megawatthours) 125,837,224 10 Electric utilities 109,523,336 4 IPP & CHP 16,313,888 20 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 105,998 11 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 58,144 14 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 62,516 12 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.7 24 Nitrogen oxide

  16. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Idaho Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Idaho) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Hydroelectric Net summer capacity (megawatts) 4,944 42 Electric utilities 3,413 37 IPP & CHP 1,531 39 Net generation (megawatthours) 15,184,417 43 Electric utilities 9,628,016 37 IPP & CHP 5,556,400 39 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 5,777 42 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 20,301 37 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 1,492 49 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.8 36 Nitrogen oxide

  17. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Illinois Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Illinois) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Nuclear Net summer capacity (megawatts) 44,727 4 Electric utilities 5,263 35 IPP & CHP 39,464 4 Net generation (megawatthours) 202,143,878 4 Electric utilities 10,457,398 36 IPP & CHP 191,686,480 3 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 187,536 6 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 58,076 15 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 96,624 6 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.9 20 Nitrogen

  18. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Indiana Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Indiana) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 27,499 14 Electric utilities 23,319 7 IPP & CHP 4,180 23 Net generation (megawatthours) 115,395,392 12 Electric utilities 100,983,285 6 IPP & CHP 14,412,107 22 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 332,396 3 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 133,412 3 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 103,391 3 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 5.8 1 Nitrogen oxide

  19. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Kansas Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Kansas) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 14,227 31 Electric utilities 11,468 24 IPP & CHP 2,759 33 Net generation (megawatthours) 49,728,363 31 Electric utilities 39,669,629 29 IPP & CHP 10,058,734 31 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 31,550 29 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 29,014 29 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 31,794 29 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.3 29 Nitrogen oxide

  20. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Louisiana Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Louisiana) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Natural gas Net summer capacity (megawatts) 26,657 15 Electric utilities 18,120 16 IPP & CHP 8,537 13 Net generation (megawatthours) 104,229,402 15 Electric utilities 58,518,271 17 IPP & CHP 45,711,131 8 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 96,240 14 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 83,112 8 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 57,137 15 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.8 21

  1. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Michigan Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Michigan) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 30,435 12 Electric utilities 22,260 9 IPP & CHP 8,175 14 Net generation (megawatthours) 106,816,991 14 Electric utilities 84,075,322 12 IPP & CHP 22,741,669 13 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 173,521 7 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 77,950 9 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 64,062 11 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 3.2 7 Nitrogen oxide

  2. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Minnesota Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Minnesota) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 15,621 28 Electric utilities 11,557 22 IPP & CHP 4,064 24 Net generation (megawatthours) 56,998,330 27 Electric utilities 45,963,271 22 IPP & CHP 11,035,059 29 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 39,272 27 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 38,373 28 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 32,399 28 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.4 27 Nitrogen

  3. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Hampshire Electricity Profile 2013 Table 1. 2013 Summary statistics (New Hampshire) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Nuclear Net summer capacity (megawatts) 4,413 44 Electric utilities 1,121 41 IPP & CHP 3,292 30 Net generation (megawatthours) 19,778,520 42 Electric utilities 2,266,903 41 IPP & CHP 17,511,617 20 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 3,733 44 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 5,057 47 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 3,447 46 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.4 45 Nitrogen

  4. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    South Dakota Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (South Dakota) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Hydroelectric Net summer capacity (megawatts) 3,948 45 Electric utilities 3,450 36 IPP & CHP 499 48 Net generation (megawatthours) 10,995,240 45 Electric utilities 9,344,872 38 IPP & CHP 1,650,368 48 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 13,852 35 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 10,638 44 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 3,093 47 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.5 15

  5. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Virginia Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Virginia) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Nuclear Net summer capacity (megawatts) 26,292 16 Electric utilities 22,062 10 IPP & CHP 4,231 22 Net generation (megawatthours) 77,137,438 21 Electric utilities 62,966,914 16 IPP & CHP 14,170,524 23 Emissions Sulfur Dioxide (short tons) 68,550 20 Nitrogen Oxide (short tons) 40,656 26 Carbon Dioxide (thousand metric tons) 33,295 25 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.8 23 Nitrogen

  6. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Wisconsin Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Wisconsin) Item Value Rank Primary Energy Source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 17,166 23 Electric utilities 14,377 18 IPP & CHP 2,788 32 Net generation (megawatthours) 61,064,796 25 Electric utilities 47,301,782 20 IPP & CHP 13,763,014 26 Emissions Sulfur Dioxide (short tons) 81,239 17 Nitrogen Oxide (short tons) 39,597 27 Carbon Dioxide (thousand metric tons) 43,750 19 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.7 12 Nitrogen

  7. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    United States Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (United States) Item Value Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 1,068,422 Electric utilities 616,632 IPP & CHP 451,791 Net generation (megawatthours) 4,093,606,005 Electric utilities 2,382,473,495 IPP & CHP 1,711,132,510 Emissions Sulfur Dioxide (short tons) 3,842,005 Nitrogen Oxide (short tons) 2,400,375 Carbon Dioxide (thousand metric tons) 2,160,342 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.9 Nitrogen Oxide

  8. LCOE Uncertainty Analysis for Hydropower using Monte Carlo Simulations

    SciTech Connect

    Chalise, Dol Raj; O'Connor, Patrick W; DeNeale, Scott T; Uria Martinez, Rocio; Kao, Shih-Chieh

    2015-01-01

    Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) is an important metric to evaluate the cost and performance of electricity production generation alternatives, and combined with other measures, can be used to assess the economics of future hydropower development. Multiple assumptions on input parameters are required to calculate the LCOE, which each contain some level of uncertainty, in turn affecting the accuracy of LCOE results. This paper explores these uncertainties, their sources, and ultimately the level of variability they introduce at the screening level of project evaluation for non-powered dams (NPDs) across the U.S. Owing to site-specific differences in site design, the LCOE for hydropower varies significantly from project to project unlike technologies with more standardized configurations such as wind and gas. Therefore, to assess the impact of LCOE input uncertainty on the economics of U.S. hydropower resources, these uncertainties must be modeled across the population of potential opportunities. To demonstrate the impact of uncertainty, resource data from a recent nationwide non-powered dam (NPD) resource assessment (Hadjerioua et al., 2012) and screening-level predictive cost equations (O Connor et al., 2015) are used to quantify and evaluate uncertainties in project capital and operations & maintenance costs, and generation potential at broad scale. LCOE dependence on financial assumptions is also evaluated on a sensitivity basis to explore ownership/investment implications on project economics for the U.S. hydropower fleet. The results indicate that the LCOE for U.S. NPDs varies substantially. The LCOE estimates for the potential NPD projects of capacity greater than 1 MW range from 40 to 182 $/MWh, with average of 106 $/MWh. 4,000 MW could be developed through projects with individual LCOE values below 100 $/MWh. The results also indicate that typically 90 % of LCOE uncertainty can be attributed to uncertainties in capital costs and energy production; however

  9. Slide 1

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

    Electric Transmission Congestion Study Workshop St. Louis, MO December 8, 2011 Panel II - Industry Laureen L. Ross McCalib Great River Energy Great River Energy * Not-for-profit electric cooperative * 28 members * 3,400 MW of capacity * 14,300,000 MWH sales * 4,500 miles of transmission * $3.3 billion in assets * 850 employees Conditional Constraint Areas National Electric Transmission Congestion Study 2009 Figure ES-1. 2009 Type I and Type II Conditional Constraint Areas Predominantly wind and

  10. Table 1. Updated estimates of power plant capital and operating costs

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Updated estimates of power plant capital and operating costs" ,"Plant Characteristics",,,"Plant Costs (2012$)" ,"Nominal Capacity (MW)","Heat Rate (Btu/kWh)",,"Overnight Capital Cost ($/kW)","Fixed O&M Cost ($/kW-yr)","Variable O&M Cost ($/MWh)" ,,,,,,,"NEMS Input" " Coal" "Single Unit Advanced PC",650,8800,,3246,37.8,4.47,"N" "Dual Unit Advanced

  11. LPO5-002-Proj-Poster-PV-Mesquite

    Energy Saver

    BLUE MOUNTAIN The state-of-the-art Blue Mountain plant is helping Nevada use its geothermal resources to meet its clean energy goals. INVESTING in AMERICAN ENERGY OWNER AltaRock Energy, Inc. LOCATION Humbolt County, Nevada LOAN AMOUNT $98.5 Million ISSUANCE DATE November 2010 GENERATION CAPACITY 39 MW PROJECTED ANNUAL GENERATION 240,000 MWh CLIMATE BENEFIT 130,000 Metric Tons of C0 2 Prevented Annually

    USG OREGON By pioneering a more e cient thermal extraction technology, USG Oregon is able

  12. South Carolina Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    South Carolina nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Catawba Unit 1, Unit 2","2,258","18,964",36.5,"Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC" "H B Robinson Unit 2",724,"3,594",6.9,"Progress Energy Carolinas Inc"

  13. Tennessee Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","3,401",15.9,"27,739",33.7 "Coal","8,805",41.1,"43,670",53.0 "Hydro and Pumped

  14. Tennessee Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Tennessee nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Sequoyah Unit 1, Unit 2","2,278","18,001",64.9,"Tennessee Valley Authority" "Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Unit 1","1,123","9,738",35.1,"Tennessee Valley

  15. Tennessee Nuclear Profile - Watts Bar Nuclear Plant

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Watts Bar Nuclear Plant" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,"1,123","9,738",99.0,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,"1,123","9,738",99.0 "Data for 2010" "PWR = Pressurized Light Water

  16. Texas Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","4,966",4.6,"41,335",10.0 "Coal","22,335",20.6,"150,173",36.5 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",689,0.6,"1,262",0.3

  17. Texas Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Comanche Peak Unit 1, Unit 2","2,406","20,208",48.9,"Luminant Generation Company LLC" "South Texas Project Unit 1, Unit 2","2,560","21,127",51.1,"STP Nuclear

  18. Nuclear reactor characteristics and operational history

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    2. Ownership Data, Table 3. Characteristics and Operational History Table 1. Nuclear Reactor, State, Type, Net Capacity, Generation, and Capacity Factor PDF XLS Plant/Reactor Name Generator ID State Type 2009 Summer Capacity Net MW(e)1 2010 Annual Generation Net MWh2 Capacity Factor Percent3 Arkansas Nuclear One 1 AR PWR 842 6,607,090 90 Arkansas Nuclear One 2 AR PWR 993 8,415,588 97 Beaver Valley 1 PA PWR 892 7,119,413 91 Beaver Valley 2 PA PWR 885 7,874,151 102 Braidwood Generation Station 1

  19. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Vermont profile Vermont total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 620 55.0 4,782 72.2 Hydro and Pumped Storage 324 28.7 1,347 20.3 Natural Gas - - 4 0.1 Other Renewable1 84 7.5 482 7.3 Petroleum 100 8.9 5 0.1 Total 1,128 100.0 6,620 100.0 1Municipal Solid Waste net generation is allocated according to the

  20. Vermont Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear",620,55.0,"4,782",72.2 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",324,28.7,"1,347",20.3 "Natural Gas","-","-",4,0.1 "Other

  1. Vermont Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Vermont Yankee Unit 1",620,"4,782",100.0,"Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee" "1 Plant 1 Reactor",620,"4,782",100.0

  2. Vermont Nuclear Profile - Vermont Yankee

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Vermont Yankee" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,620,"4,782",88.0,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,620,"4,782",88.0 "Data for 2010" "BWR = Boiling

  3. Virginia Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","3,501",14.5,"26,572",36.4 "Coal","5,868",24.3,"25,459",34.9 "Hydro and Pumped Storage","4,107",17.0,10,"*"

  4. Virginia Nuclear Profile - North Anna

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    North Anna" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,920,"6,780",84.1,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" 2,943,"6,620",80.1,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  5. Virginia Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "North Anna Unit 1, Unit 2","1,863","13,399",50.4,"Virginia Electric & Power Co" "Surry Unit 1, Unit 2","1,638","13,172",49.6,"Virginia Electric & Power

  6. Virginia Nuclear Profile - Surry

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Surry" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,839,"6,206",84.4,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" 2,799,"6,966",99.5,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  7. Washington Nuclear Profile - Columbia Generating Station

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Columbia Generating Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 2,"1,097","9,241",96.2,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,"1,097","9,241",96.2

  8. Washington Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Washington nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Columbia Generating Station Unit 2","1,097","9,241",100.0,"Energy Northwest" "1 Plant 1 Reactor","1,097","9,241",100.0

  9. Wisconsin Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (nw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","1,584",8.9,"13,281",20.7 "Coal","8,063",45.2,"40,169",62.5 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",492,2.8,"2,112",3.3

  10. Wisconsin Nuclear Profile - Kewaunee

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Kewaunee" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer cpacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,566,"4,990",100.6,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,566,"4,990",100.6 "Data for 2010" "PWR = Pressurized Light

  11. Wisconsin Nuclear Profile - Point Beach Nuclear Plant

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Point Beach Nuclear Plant" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,506,"3,954",89.2,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" 2,512,"4,336",96.7,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  12. Wisconsin Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Wisconsin nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Kewaunee Unit 1",566,"4,990",37.6,"Dominion Energy Kewaunee Inc." "Point Beach Nuclear Plant Unit 1, Unit 2","1,018","8,291",62.4,"NextEra Energy Point Beach

  13. Connecticut Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","2,103",25.4,"16,750",50.2 "Coal",564,6.8,"2,604",7.8 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",151,1.8,400,1.2 "Natural

  14. Connecticut Nuclear Profile - Millstone

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Millstone" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 2,869,"7,415",97.4,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" 3,"1,233","9,336",86.4,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  15. Connecticut Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Connecticut nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Millstone Unit 2, Unit 3","2,103","16,750",100.0,"Dominion Nuclear Conn Inc" "1 Plant 2 Reactors","2,103","16,750",100.0

  16. Florida Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (nw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","3,924",6.6,"23,936",10.4 "Coal","9,975",16.9,"59,897",26.1 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",55,0.1,177,0.1 "Natural

  17. Florida Nuclear Profile - Crystal River

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Crystal River1" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 3,860,0,"--","PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,860,0,"--" "Data for 2010" "1 Unit was offline in 2010 for repairs." "-- Not applicable.

  18. Florida Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Florida nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Crystal River Unit 3",860,0,"--","Progress Energy Florida Inc" "St Lucie Unit 1, Unit 2","1,678","12,630",52.8,"Florida Power & Light Co" "Turkey Point

  19. Florida Nuclear Profile - St Lucie

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    St Lucie" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,839,"5,299",72.1,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" 2,839,"7,331",99.7,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  20. Florida Nuclear Profile - Turkey Point

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Turkey Point" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 3,693,"5,356",88.2,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" 4,693,"5,950",98.0,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  1. Georgia Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","4,061",11.1,"33,512",24.4 "Coal","13,230",36.1,"73,298",53.3 "Hydro and Pumped

  2. Georgia Nuclear Profile - Edwin I Hatch

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Edwin I Hatch" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,876,"6,510",84.8,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" 2,883,"7,392",95.6,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  3. Georgia Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Edwin I Hatch Unit 1, Unit 2","1,759","13,902",41.5,"Georgia Power Co" "Vogtle Unit 1, Unit 2","2,302","19,610",58.5,"Georgia Power Co" "2 Plants 4

  4. Illinois Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","11,441",25.9,"96,190",47.8 "Coal","15,551",35.2,"93,611",46.5 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",34,0.1,119,0.1 "Natural

  5. Illinois Nuclear Profile - Dresden Generating Station

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Dresden Generating Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 2,867,"7,727",101.7,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" 3,867,"6,866",90.4,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  6. Illinois Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Illinois nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Braidwood Generation Station Unit 1, Unit 2","2,330","19,200",20.0,"Exelon Nuclear" "Byron Generating Station Unit 1, Unit 2","2,300","19,856",20.6,"Exelon

  7. Iowa Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear",601,4.1,"4,451",7.7 "Coal","6,956",47.7,"41,283",71.8 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",144,1.0,948,1.6 "Natural

  8. Iowa Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Iowa nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Duane Arnold Energy Center Unit 1",601,"4,451",100.0,"NextEra Energy Duane Arnold LLC" "1 Plant 1 Reactor",601,"4,451",100.0

  9. Kansas Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","1,160",9.2,"9,556",19.9 "Coal","5,179",41.3,"32,505",67.8 "Hydro and Pumped Storage",3,"*",13,"*"

  10. Kansas Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Kansas nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Wolf Creek Generating Station Unit 1","1,160","9,556",100.0,"Wolf Creek Nuclear Optg Corp" "1 Plant 1 Reactor","1,160","9,556",100.0

  11. Kansas Nuclear Profile - Wolf Creek Generating Station

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    April 2012" "Next Release Date: February 2013" "Wolf Creek Generating Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer capacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,"1,160","9,556",94.0,"PWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  12. Renaissance in Flow-Cell Technologies: Recent Advancements and Future Opportunities

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

    Renaissance in Flow-Cell Technologies Recent Advancements and Future Opportunities Mike Perry Project Leader, Electrochemical Systems United Technologies Research Center ec c es UTC Proprietary Grand Challenges in Electrical Energy Storage (EES) SCALE & COST: Want to go from Wh to kWh to MWh...  El tri Vehicl  Grid-Scale $100/kWh GRIDS Program Target  Portable Devices > $500/kWh  Electric Vehicles $250/kWh BEEST Program Target Wh UTC Proprietary Batteries are currently < 1%

  13. EIA's Energy in Brief: How much of the world's electricity supply is

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    generated from wind and who are the leading generators? How much of U.S. electricity supply comes from wind, and how does that compare with other countries? Last Updated: March 4, 2016 The United States is the world's top producer of electricity generated by wind, a title it has held since 2008. U.S. wind power totaled nearly 182 million megawatthours (MWh) during 2014, equal to 4.4% of U.S. electricity generation and more than three times the wind power generated in the United States in

  14. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Arizona Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Arizona) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 28,249 13 Electric utilities 21,311 11 IPP & CHP 6,938 17 Net generation (megawatthours) 112,257,187 13 Electric utilities 94,847,135 8 IPP & CHP 17,410,053 19 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 22,597 32 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 56,726 17 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 53,684 16 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.4 41 Nitrogen oxide

  15. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    California Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (California) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Natural gas Net summer capacity (megawatts) 74,646 2 Electric utilities 28,201 4 IPP & CHP 46,446 2 Net generation (megawatthours) 198,807,622 5 Electric utilities 71,037,135 14 IPP & CHP 127,770,487 4 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 3,102 46 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 98,348 5 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 57,223 14 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.0 49

  16. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Colorado Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Colorado) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 14,933 29 Electric utilities 10,204 28 IPP & CHP 4,729 18 Net generation (megawatthours) 53,847,386 30 Electric utilities 43,239,615 26 IPP & CHP 10,607,771 30 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 28,453 30 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 44,349 24 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 38,474 22 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.1 32 Nitrogen

  17. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Connecticut Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Connecticut) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Nuclear Net summer capacity (megawatts) 8,832 35 Electric utilities 161 45 IPP & CHP 8,671 12 Net generation (megawatthours) 33,676,980 38 Electric utilities 54,693 45 IPP & CHP 33,622,288 11 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 1,897 47 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 8,910 45 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 7,959 41 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.1 46 Nitrogen oxide

  18. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Delaware Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Delaware) Item Value U.S. rank Primary energy source Natural gas Net summer capacity (megawatts) 3,086 46 Electric utilities 102 46 IPP & CHP 2,984 31 Net generation (megawatthours) 7,703,584 47 Electric utilities 49,050 46 IPP & CHP 7,654,534 35 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 824 48 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 2,836 48 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 4,276 43 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.2 45 Nitrogen oxide

  19. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Florida Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Florida) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Natural gas Net summer capacity (megawatts) 59,440 3 Electric utilities 51,775 1 IPP & CHP 7,665 15 Net generation (megawatthours) 230,015,937 2 Electric utilities 211,970,587 1 IPP & CHP 18,045,350 15 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 126,600 10 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 91,356 6 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 111,549 2 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.1 30 Nitrogen

  20. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Georgia Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Georgia) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 38,250 7 Electric utilities 28,873 3 IPP & CHP 9,377 10 Net generation (megawatthours) 125,837,224 10 Electric utilities 109,523,336 4 IPP & CHP 16,313,888 20 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 105,998 11 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 58,144 14 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 62,516 12 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.7 24 Nitrogen oxide

  1. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Hawaii Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Hawaii) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Petroleum Net summer capacity (megawatts) 2,672 47 Electric utilities 1,732 40 IPP & CHP 939 45 Net generation (megawatthours) 10,204,158 46 Electric utilities 5,517,389 39 IPP & CHP 4,686,769 40 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 21,670 33 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 26,928 31 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 7,313 42 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 4.2 4 Nitrogen oxide

  2. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Idaho Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Idaho) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Hydroelectric Net summer capacity (megawatts) 4,944 42 Electric utilities 3,413 37 IPP & CHP 1,531 39 Net generation (megawatthours) 15,184,417 43 Electric utilities 9,628,016 37 IPP & CHP 5,556,400 39 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 5,777 42 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 20,301 37 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 1,492 49 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.8 36 Nitrogen oxide

  3. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Illinois Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Illinois) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Nuclear Net summer capacity (megawatts) 44,727 4 Electric utilities 5,263 35 IPP & CHP 39,464 4 Net generation (megawatthours) 202,143,878 4 Electric utilities 10,457,398 36 IPP & CHP 191,686,480 3 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 187,536 6 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 58,076 15 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 96,624 6 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.9 20 Nitrogen

  4. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Indiana Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Indiana) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 27,499 14 Electric utilities 23,319 7 IPP & CHP 4,180 23 Net generation (megawatthours) 115,395,392 12 Electric utilities 100,983,285 6 IPP & CHP 14,412,107 22 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 332,396 3 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 133,412 3 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 103,391 3 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 5.8 1 Nitrogen oxide

  5. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Iowa Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Iowa) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 16,507 24 Electric utilities 12,655 20 IPP & CHP 3,852 25 Net generation (megawatthours) 56,853,282 28 Electric utilities 43,021,954 27 IPP & CHP 13,831,328 25 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 74,422 19 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 41,793 25 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 39,312 21 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.6 13 Nitrogen oxide

  6. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Kansas Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Kansas) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 14,227 31 Electric utilities 11,468 24 IPP & CHP 2,759 33 Net generation (megawatthours) 49,728,363 31 Electric utilities 39,669,629 29 IPP & CHP 10,058,734 31 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 31,550 29 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 29,014 29 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 31,794 29 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.3 29 Nitrogen oxide

  7. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Kentucky Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Kentucky) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 20,878 21 Electric utilities 19,473 15 IPP & CHP 1,405 40 Net generation (megawatthours) 90,896,435 17 Electric utilities 90,133,403 10 IPP & CHP 763,032 49 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 204,873 5 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 89,253 7 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 85,795 7 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 4.5 3 Nitrogen oxide

  8. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Louisiana Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Louisiana) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Natural gas Net summer capacity (megawatts) 26,657 15 Electric utilities 18,120 16 IPP & CHP 8,537 13 Net generation (megawatthours) 104,229,402 15 Electric utilities 58,518,271 17 IPP & CHP 45,711,131 8 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 96,240 14 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 83,112 8 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 57,137 15 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.8 21

  9. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Maryland Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Maryland) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 12,264 33 Electric utilities 85 47 IPP & CHP 12,179 8 Net generation (megawatthours) 37,833,652 35 Electric utilities 20,260 47 IPP & CHP 37,813,392 9 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 41,370 26 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 20,626 35 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 20,414 34 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.2 18 Nitrogen oxide

  10. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Massachusetts Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Massachusetts) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Natural gas Net summer capacity (megawatts) 13,128 32 Electric utilities 971 42 IPP & CHP 12,157 9 Net generation (megawatthours) 31,118,591 40 Electric utilities 679,986 43 IPP & CHP 30,438,606 12 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 6,748 41 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 13,831 43 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 12,231 39 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.4 40

  11. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Michigan Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Michigan) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 30,435 12 Electric utilities 22,260 9 IPP & CHP 8,175 14 Net generation (megawatthours) 106,816,991 14 Electric utilities 84,075,322 12 IPP & CHP 22,741,669 13 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 173,521 7 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 77,950 9 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 64,062 11 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 3.2 7 Nitrogen oxide

  12. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Minnesota Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Minnesota) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 15,621 28 Electric utilities 11,557 22 IPP & CHP 4,064 24 Net generation (megawatthours) 56,998,330 27 Electric utilities 45,963,271 22 IPP & CHP 11,035,059 29 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 39,272 27 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 38,373 28 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 32,399 28 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.4 27 Nitrogen

  13. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Mississippi Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Mississippi) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Natural gas Net summer capacity (megawatts) 16,090 26 Electric utilities 13,494 19 IPP & CHP 2,597 34 Net generation (megawatthours) 55,127,092 29 Electric utilities 47,084,382 21 IPP & CHP 8,042,710 34 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 101,093 13 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 23,993 32 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 24,037 33 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 3.7 5

  14. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Missouri Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Missouri) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 21,790 19 Electric utilities 20,538 13 IPP & CHP 1,252 42 Net generation (megawatthours) 87,834,468 18 Electric utilities 85,271,253 11 IPP & CHP 2,563,215 46 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 149,842 9 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 77,749 10 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 75,735 8 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 3.4 6 Nitrogen oxide

  15. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Montana Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Montana) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 6,330 41 Electric utilities 3,209 38 IPP & CHP 3,121 30 Net generation (megawatthours) 30,257,616 41 Electric utilities 12,329,411 35 IPP & CHP 17,928,205 16 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 14,426 34 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 20,538 36 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 17,678 36 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.0 34 Nitrogen oxide

  16. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Nebraska Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Nebraska) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 8,732 36 Electric utilities 7,913 30 IPP & CHP 819 46 Net generation (megawatthours) 39,431,291 34 Electric utilities 36,560,960 30 IPP & CHP 2,870,331 45 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 63,994 22 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 27,045 30 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 26,348 31 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 3.2 8 Nitrogen oxide

  17. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Nevada Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Nevada) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Natural gas Net summer capacity (megawatts) 10,485 34 Electric utilities 8,480 29 IPP & CHP 2,006 35 Net generation (megawatthours) 36,000,537 37 Electric utilities 27,758,728 33 IPP & CHP 8,241,809 33 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 10,229 40 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 18,606 39 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 16,222 37 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.4 38 Nitrogen

  18. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Hampshire Electricity Profile 2013 Table 1. 2013 Summary statistics (New Hampshire) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Nuclear Net summer capacity (megawatts) 4,413 44 Electric utilities 1,121 41 IPP & CHP 3,292 30 Net generation (megawatthours) 19,778,520 42 Electric utilities 2,266,903 41 IPP & CHP 17,511,617 20 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 3,733 44 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 5,057 47 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 3,447 46 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.4 45 Nitrogen

  19. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Jersey Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (New Jersey) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Nuclear Net summer capacity (megawatts) 19,399 22 Electric utilities 544 43 IPP & CHP 18,852 7 Net generation (megawatthours) 68,051,086 23 Electric utilities -117,003 50 IPP & CHP 68,168,089 7 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 3,369 44 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 15,615 41 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 17,905 35 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.1 47 Nitrogen oxide

  20. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Mexico Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (New Mexico) Item Value U.S. Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 8,072 39 Electric utilities 6,094 33 IPP & CHP 1,978 37 Net generation (megawatthours) 32,306,210 39 Electric utilities 26,422,867 34 IPP & CHP 5,883,343 38 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 12,064 37 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 46,192 22 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 24,712 32 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.7 37 Nitrogen

  1. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    York Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (New York) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Natural Gas Net summer capacity (megawatts) 40,404 6 Electric utilities 10,989 27 IPP & CHP 29,416 5 Net generation (megawatthours) 137,122,202 7 Electric utilities 34,082 31 IPP & CHP 103,039,347 5 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 31,878 28 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 46,971 21 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 33,240 26 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.5 39 Nitrogen oxide

  2. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Carolina Electricity Profile 2013 Table 1. 2013 Summary statistics (North Carolina) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 30,048 12 Electric utilities 26,706 6 IPP & CHP 3,342 29 Net generation (megawatthours) 125,936,293 9 Electric utilities 116,317,050 2 IPP & CHP 9,619,243 31 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 71,293 20 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 62,397 12 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 56,940 14 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.1 32 Nitrogen

  3. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Dakota Electricity Profile 2013 Table 1. 2013 Summary statistics (North Dakota) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 6,566 40 Electric utilities 5,292 34 IPP & CHP 1,274 41 Net generation (megawatthours) 35,021,673 39 Electric utilities 31,044,374 32 IPP & CHP 3,977,299 42 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 56,854 23 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 48,454 22 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 30,274 28 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 3.2 11 Nitrogen oxide

  4. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Oregon Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Oregon) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Hydroelectric Net summer capacity (megawatts) 15,884 27 Electric utilities 11,175 25 IPP & CHP 4,709 19 Net generation (megawatthours) 60,119,907 26 Electric utilities 44,565,239 24 IPP & CHP 15,554,668 21 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 10,595 39 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 14,313 42 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 8,334 40 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.4 42 Nitrogen

  5. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Pennsylvania Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Pennsylvania) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 42,723 5 Electric utilities 39 48 IPP & CHP 42,685 3 Net generation (megawatthours) 221,058,365 3 Electric utilities 90,994 44 IPP & CHP 220,967,371 2 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 297,598 4 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 141,486 2 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 101,361 4 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.7 11 Nitrogen oxide

  6. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Rhode Island Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Rhode Island) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Natural gas Net summer capacity (megawatts) 1,810 49 Electric utilities 8 50 IPP & CHP 1,803 38 Net generation (megawatthours) 6,281,748 49 Electric utilities 10,670 48 IPP & CHP 6,271,078 36 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 100 49 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 1,224 49 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 2,566 48 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.0 48 Nitrogen oxide

  7. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Carolina Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (South Carolina) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Nuclear Net summer capacity (megawatts) 22,824 18 Electric utilities 20,836 12 IPP & CHP 1,988 36 Net generation (megawatthours) 97,158,465 16 Electric utilities 93,547,004 9 IPP & CHP 3,611,461 43 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 43,659 25 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 21,592 34 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 33,083 27 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.9 35

  8. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    South Dakota Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (South Dakota) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Hydroelectric Net summer capacity (megawatts) 3,948 45 Electric utilities 3,450 36 IPP & CHP 499 48 Net generation (megawatthours) 10,995,240 45 Electric utilities 9,344,872 38 IPP & CHP 1,650,368 48 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 13,852 35 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 10,638 44 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 3,093 47 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.5 15

  9. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Tennessee Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Tennessee) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 20,998 20 Electric utilities 20,490 14 IPP & CHP 508 47 Net generation (megawatthours) 79,506,886 20 Electric utilities 76,986,629 13 IPP & CHP 2,520,257 47 Emissions Sulfur dioxide (short tons) 89,357 16 Nitrogen oxide (short tons) 23,913 33 Carbon dioxide (thousand metric tons) 41,405 20 Sulfur dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.2 16 Nitrogen oxide

  10. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Texas Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Texas) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Natural gas Net summer capacity (megawatts) 112,914 1 Electric utilities 29,113 2 IPP & CHP 83,800 1 Net generation (megawatthours) 437,629,668 1 Electric utilities 94,974,953 7 IPP & CHP 342,654,715 1 Emissions Sulfur Dioxide (short tons) 349,245 2 Nitrogen Oxide short tons) 229,580 1 Carbon Dioxide (thousand metric tons) 254,488 1 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.6 26 Nitrogen Oxide

  11. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    United States Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (United States) Item Value Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 1,068,422 Electric utilities 616,632 IPP & CHP 451,791 Net generation (megawatthours) 4,093,606,005 Electric utilities 2,382,473,495 IPP & CHP 1,711,132,510 Emissions Sulfur Dioxide (short tons) 3,842,005 Nitrogen Oxide (short tons) 2,400,375 Carbon Dioxide (thousand metric tons) 2,160,342 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.9 Nitrogen Oxide

  12. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Virginia Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Virginia) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Nuclear Net summer capacity (megawatts) 26,292 16 Electric utilities 22,062 10 IPP & CHP 4,231 22 Net generation (megawatthours) 77,137,438 21 Electric utilities 62,966,914 16 IPP & CHP 14,170,524 23 Emissions Sulfur Dioxide (short tons) 68,550 20 Nitrogen Oxide (short tons) 40,656 26 Carbon Dioxide (thousand metric tons) 33,295 25 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.8 23 Nitrogen

  13. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Washington Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Washington) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Hydroelectric Net summer capacity (megawatts) 30,949 10 Electric utilities 27,376 5 IPP & CHP 3,573 26 Net generation (megawatthours) 116,334,363 11 Electric utilities 102,294,256 5 IPP & CHP 14,040,107 24 Emissions Sulfur Dioxide (short tons) 13,716 36 Nitrogen Oxide (short tons) 18,316 40 Carbon Dioxide (thousand metric tons) 12,427 398 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 0.2 44

  14. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    West Virginia Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (West Virginia) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 16,276 25 Electric utilities 11,981 21 IPP & CHP 4,295 21 Net generation (megawatthours) 81,059,577 19 Electric utilities 63,331,833 15 IPP & CHP 17,727,743 17 Emissions Sulfur Dioxide (short tons) 102,406 12 Nitrogen Oxide (short tons) 72,995 11 Carbon Dioxide (thousand metric tons) 73,606 9 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.5 14

  15. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Wisconsin Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Wisconsin) Item Value Rank Primary Energy Source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 17,166 23 Electric utilities 14,377 18 IPP & CHP 2,788 32 Net generation (megawatthours) 61,064,796 25 Electric utilities 47,301,782 20 IPP & CHP 13,763,014 26 Emissions Sulfur Dioxide (short tons) 81,239 17 Nitrogen Oxide (short tons) 39,597 27 Carbon Dioxide (thousand metric tons) 43,750 19 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 2.7 12 Nitrogen

  16. EIA - State Electricity Profiles

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Wyoming Electricity Profile 2014 Table 1. 2014 Summary statistics (Wyoming) Item Value Rank Primary energy source Coal Net summer capacity (megawatts) 8,458 37 Electric utilities 7,233 32 IPP & CHP 1,225 43 Net generation (megawatthours) 49,696,183 32 Electric utilities 45,068,982 23 IPP & CHP 4,627,201 41 Emissions Sulfur Dioxide (short tons) 45,704 24 Nitrogen Oxide (short tons) 49,638 18 Carbon Dioxide (thousand metric tons) 47,337 17 Sulfur Dioxide (lbs/MWh) 1.8 22 Nitrogen Oxide

  17. 2009 PowerPoint Template Presentation Title Style 1

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Widespread Renewables Deployment Bryan Hannegan Vice President, Environment & Generation EIA 2009 Energy Conference April 7, 2009 2 © 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved. Renewables in Various Stages of Maturity 3 © 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved. 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 0 10 20 30 40 50 Levelized Cost of Electricity, $/MWh Cost of CO 2 , $/Metric Ton IGCC NGCC ($8/MMBtu) PC Wind (32.5% Capacity Factor) Nuclear Biomass

  18. TITLE SLIDE OPTION 1 PRESENTATION TITLE HERE KEEP LEFT JUSTIFIED

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

    Bishop, USACE Kathleen King, MWH October 12, 2016 WOLF CREEK HYDROPOWER REHABILITATION ANALYSIS REPORT 1 File Name WOLF CREEK POWER PLANT Location: Russell County, KY River Mile 460.9 Generation: 6 Units @ 51.8 MW 310.5 MW WOL/P HRAR 2 CONSTRAINTS  SEPA MOU  Minimum Flow  Dissolved Oxygen  Drawdown Limits  Downstream Release  Temperature  Water Control Manual  Refill Restrictions 3 WOL/P HRAR ANALYSIS  Opinion of Probable Construction Cost  Opinion of Schedule 

  19. Emissions Benefits of Distributed Generation in the Texas Market

    SciTech Connect

    Hadley, SW

    2005-06-16

    One potential benefit of distributed generation (DG) is a net reduction in air emissions. While DG will produce emissions, most notably carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxides, the power it displaces might have produced more. This study used a system dispatch model developed at Oak Ridge National Laboratory to simulate the 2012 Texas power market with and without DG. This study compares the reduction in system emissions to the emissions from the DG to determine the net savings. Some of the major findings are that 85% of the electricity displaced by DG during peak hours will be simple cycle natural gas, either steam or combustion turbine. Even with DG running as baseload, 57% of electricity displaced will be simple cycle natural gas. Despite the retirement of some gas-fired steam units and the construction of many new gas turbine and combined cycle units, the marginal emissions from the system remain quite high (1.4 lb NO{sub x}/MWh on peak and 1.1 lb NO{sub x}/MWh baseload) compared to projected DG emissions. Consequently, additions of DG capacity will reduce emissions in Texas from power generation in 2012. Using the DG exhaust heat for combined heat and power provides an even greater benefit, since it eliminates further boiler emissions while adding none over what would be produced while generating electricity. Further studies are warranted concerning the robustness of the result with changes in fuel prices, demands, and mixes of power generating technology.

  20. Geothermal rotary separator turbine: wellhead power system tests at Milford, Utah

    SciTech Connect

    Hughes, E.E.

    1983-08-01

    Through development of a separator/expander engine EPRI is improving the efficiency of single flash geothermal power systems. Under cost-shared contracts with Biphase Energy Systems and Utah Power and Light Company (UP and L), a wellhead power generating system has been built and tested. The wellhead unit has been operated for 4000 hours at Roosevelt Hot Springs near Milford, Utah. Phillips Petroleum Company operates the geothermal field at this site. The rotary separator turbine (RST) is a separating expander that increases the resource utilization efficiency by extracting power upstream of a steam turbine in either a 1-stage or 2-stage flash power system. The first power output was achieved October 28, 1981, six weeks after arrival of the RST at the site. The RST system produced 3270 MWh(e) gross and 2770 MWh(e) net to the UP and L grid. Total equivalent power produced by the wellhead RST (actual power output of the RST plus the power obtainable from the steam flow out of the RST) is 15 to 20 percent above the power that would be produced by an optimum 1-stage direct flash plant operated on the same geothermal well.

  1. Performance evaluation of an anaerobic/aerobic landfill-based digester using yard waste for energy and compost production

    SciTech Connect

    Yazdani, Ramin; Barlaz, Morton A.; Augenstein, Don; Kayhanian, Masoud; Tchobanoglous, George

    2012-05-15

    Highlights: Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer Biochemical methane potential decreased by 83% during the two-stage operation. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer Net energy produced was 84.3 MWh or 46 kWh per million metric tons (Mg). Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer The average removal efficiency of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) was 96-99%. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer The average removal efficiency of non-methane organic compounds (NMOCs) was 68-99%. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer The two-stage batch digester proved to be simple to operate and cost-effective. - Abstract: The objective of this study was to evaluate a new alternative for yard waste management by constructing, operating and monitoring a landfill-based two-stage batch digester (anaerobic/aerobic) with the recovery of energy and compost. The system was initially operated under anaerobic conditions for 366 days, after which the yard waste was aerated for an additional 191 days. Off gas generated from the aerobic stage was treated by biofilters. Net energy recovery was 84.3 MWh, or 46 kWh per million metric tons of wet waste (as received), and the biochemical methane potential of the treated waste decreased by 83% during the two-stage operation. The average removal efficiencies of volatile organic compounds and non-methane organic compounds in the biofilters were 96-99% and 68-99%, respectively.

  2. SAS Output

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    2. Demand-Side Management Program Annual Effects by Program Category, by Sector, 2004 through 2012 (Table Discontinued) Year Residential Commercial Industrial Transportation Total Energy Efficiency - Energy Savings (Thousand MWh) 2004 17,185 24,290 11,137 50 52,663 2005 18,894 28,073 11,986 47 59,000 2006 21,150 28,720 13,155 50 63,076 2007 22,772 30,359 14,038 108 67,278 2008 25,396 34,634 14,766 75 74,871 2009 27,395 34,831 14,610 76 76,912 2010 32,150 37,416 17,259 89 86,914 2011 46,790

  3. SAS Output

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    4. Demand-Side Management Program Incremental Effects by Program Category, by Sector, 2004 through 2012 (Table Discontinued) Year Residential Commercial Industrial Transportation Total Energy Efficiency - Energy Savings (Thousand MWh) 2004 1,827 1,812 894 -- 4,532 2005 2,249 2,559 1,071 -- 5,879 2006 2,127 2,281 986 -- 5,394 2007 3,659 2,830 1,178 13 7,680 2008 4,568 4,383 1,477 1 10,428 2009 5,030 4,959 2,918 1 12,907 2010 6,492 5,325 1,771 5 13,592 2011 9,989 8,166 3,261 6 21,421 2012 9,531

  4. SAS Output

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    6. Energy Efficiency Category, by Sector, 2013 through 2014 Year Residential Commercial Industrial Transportation Total Incremental Annual Savings - Energy Savings (MWh) 2013 11,031,419 10,478,997 3,141,213 29,894 24,681,523 2014 11,442,191 11,928,895 3,074,819 19,316 26,465,221 Incremental Annual Savings - Peak Demand Savings (MW) 2013 6,812 11,319 1,463 5 19,599 2014 3,031 2,920 564 2 6,517 Incremental Costs - Customer Incentive (thousand dollars) 2013 1,252,085 1,274,406 345,676 5 2,872,171

  5. SAS Output

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    7. Energy Efficiency - Life Cycle Category, by Sector, 2013 through 2014 Year Residential Commercial Industrial Transportation Total Life Cycle Savings - Energy Savings (MWh) 2013 84,525,515 128,026,835 38,500,862 448,421 251,464,746 2014 100,729,499 149,493,353 39,631,016 287,925 290,141,793 Life Cycle Savings - Peak Demand Savings (MW) 2013 44,351 70,979 19,524 6 134,861 2014 17,911 46,600 12,248 2 76,760 Life Cycle Costs - Customer Incentive (thousand dollars) 2013 2,698,741 2,875,605 455,357

  6. Novel Flow Sheet for Low Energy CO2 Capture Enabled by Biocatalyst Delivery System

    SciTech Connect

    Reardon, John; Shaffer, Alex; Vaysman, Vladimir

    2015-02-01

    This report documents a preliminary Techno-Economic Assessment (TEA) for processes utilizing Akermin’s second generation biocatalyst delivery system to enhance AKM24, a non- volatile salt solution for CO2 capture. Biocatalyst enhanced AKM24 offers the potential to reduce the cost of CO2 capture in flue gas applications due to its improved equilibrium and stoichiometric properties that result in double the absorption capacity relative to previously demonstrated biocatalyst enhanced solvents. The study assumes a new supercritical pulverized coal fired power plant with a net output of 550 MWe after 90% CO2 capture and uses the June 2011 cost basis (August 2012 update of Bituminous Baseline Study, or BBS). Power plant modeling, capital cost review, and economic calculations were provided by WorleyParsons. Rate-based CO2 capture process modeling and equipment sizing was performed by Akermin using AspenPlus® V8.4, customized to accurately predict thermodynamics, kinetics, and physical properties of the AKM-24 solvent based on available laboratory data. Equipment capital costs were estimated using Aspen Process Economic Analyzer™ which compared well with published baseline cost estimates. Quotes of equipment costs and power consumption for vacuum blower and CO2 compression equipment were also provided by Man Diesel & Turbo. Three process scenarios were examined for Akermin biocatalyst enhanced solvent systems including: Case-1A: an absorption-desorption system operated with a reboiler pressure of 0.16 bara (60°C); Case-2A: an absorption-desorption system with moderate vacuum assisted regeneration at 0.40 bara (80°C); and finally, Case-2B: a conventional absorption-desorption system with near atmospheric pressure regeneration at 1.07 bara (105°C). The estimated increases in cost of electricity (ICOE) for these cases were $58.1/MWh, $47.3/MWh and $46.4/MWh, respectively. Case 2B had the best results for this analysis

  7. The carbon component of the UK power price

    SciTech Connect

    Kris Voorspools

    2006-08-01

    CO{sub 2} emissions trading is in full swing in Europe and is already having an impact on the price of power in the UK. If EU allowances (EUAs) trade at euro 20/t-CO{sub 2}, the EUA component in the power price is estimated to be slightly < euro 10/MW.h. In the case of UK power for delivery 1 year ahead, this is {approximately} 10% of the market price of power. The introduction of a carbon components into the UK power prices took place along before the 'official' start of ETS in 2005. Analysis of historical data of the price of power, gas, coal and EUAs shows that the first trace of a CO{sub 2} component in UK power dates back to August 2003, shortly after EUAs first started to trade. In April 2004, CO{sub 2} was fully integrated into the UK power price. 4 refs., 5 figs.

  8. Development of zinc-bromine batteries for utility energy storage. First annual report, 1 September 1978-31 August 1979. [8-kWh submodule

    SciTech Connect

    Putt, R.; Attia, A.J.; Lu, P.Y.; Heyland, J.H.

    1980-05-01

    Development work on the Zn/Br battery is reported. A major improvement was the use of a bipolar cell design; this design is superior with respect to cost, performance, and simplicity. A cost and design study for an 80-kWh module resulted in a cost estimate of $54/kWh(1979$) for purchased materials and components, on the basis of 2500 MWh of annual production. A cell submodule (nominal 2 kWh) of full-sized electrodes (1 ft/sup 2/) accrued over 200 continuous cycles in a hands-off, automatic routine with efficiencies in the range of 53 to 56%. Initial testing of a full-sized 8-kWh submodule demonstrated energy efficiencies of 65 to 67%. 23 figures, 10 tables. (RWR)

  9. Missouri Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary energy source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","1,190",5.5,"8,996",9.7 "Coal","12,070",55.5,"75,047",81.3 "Hydro and Pumped Storage","1,221",5.6,"2,427",2.6

  10. High-temperature superconducting current leads

    SciTech Connect

    Niemann, R.C.

    1995-03-01

    Use of high-temperature superconductors (HTSs) for current leads to deliver power to devices at liquid helium temperature can reduce refrigeration requirements to values significantly below those achievable with conventional leads. HTS leads are now near commercial realization. Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) has developed a sinter-forge process to fabricate current leads from bismuth-based superconductors. The current-carrying capacity of these leads is five times better than that of HTS leads made by a conventional fabrication process. ANL along with Superconductivity, Inc., has developed a 1500 ampere current lead for an existing superconducting magnetic energy storage (SMES) device. With Babcock & Wilcox Company, Argonne is creating 16-kiloampere leads for use in a 0.5 MWh SMES. In a third project Argonne performed characterization testing of a existing, proprietary conduction-cooled lead being developed by Zer Res Corp.

  11. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Alabama Nuclear Profile 2010 Alabama profile Alabama total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 5,043 15.6 37,941 24.9 Coal 11,441 35.3 63,050 41.4 Hydro and Pumped Storage 3,272 10.1 8,704 5.7 Natural Gas 11,936 36.8 39,235 25.8 Other1 100 0.3 643 0.4 Other Renewable1 583 1.8 2,377 1.6 Petroleum 43 0.1 200

  12. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Arizona Nuclear Profile 2010 Arizona profile Arizona total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,937 14.9 31,200 27.9 Coal 6,233 23.6 43,644 39.1 Hydro and Pumped Storage 2,937 11.1 6,831 6.1 Natural Gas 13,012 49.3 29,676 26.6 Other 1 - - 15 * Other Renewable1 181 0.7 319 0.3 Petroleum 93 0.4 66 0.1 Total

  13. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Arkansas Nuclear Profile 2010 Arkansas profile Arkansas total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State ttal (percent) Nuclear 1,835 11.5 15,023 24.6 Coal 4,535 28.4 28,152 46.2 Hydro and Pumped Storage 1,369 8.6 3,658 6.0 Natural Gas 7,894 49.4 12,469 20.4 Other 1 - - 28 * Other Renewable1 326 2.0 1,624 2.7 Petroleum 22 0.1 45 0.1 Total

  14. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    California Nuclear Profile 2010 California profile California total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 4,390 6.5 32,201 15.8 Coal 374 0.6 2,100 1.0 Hydro and Pumped Storage 13,954 20.7 33,260 16.3 Natural Gas 41,370 61.4 107,522 52.7 Other 1 220 0.3 2,534 1.2 Other Renewable1 6,319 9.4 25,450 12.5 Petroleum

  15. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Connecticut Nuclear Profile 2010 Connecticut profile Connecticut total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 2,103 25.4 16,750 50.2 Coal 564 6.8 2,604 7.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 151 1.8 400 1.2 Natural Gas 2,292 27.7 11,716 35.1 Other 1 27 0.3 730 2.2 Other Renewable1 159 1.9 740 2.2 Petroleum 2,989 36.1 409

  16. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Florida Nuclear Profile 2010 Florida profile Florida total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary Energy Source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 3,924 6.6 23,936 10.4 Coal 9,975 16.9 59,897 26.1 Hydro and Pumped Storage 55 0.1 177 0.1 Natural Gas 31,563 53.4 128,634 56.1 Other1 544 0.9 2,842 1.2 Other Renewable1 1,053 1.8 4,487 2.0 Petroleum 12,033 20.3

  17. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Georgia Nuclear Profile 2010 Georgia profile Georgia total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 4,061 11.1 33,512 24.6 Coal 13,230 36.1 73,298 54.0 Hydro and Pumped Storage 3,851 10.5 3,044 2.7 Natural Gas 12,668 34.6 23,884 15.9 Other 1 - - 18 * Other Renewable1 637 1.7 3,181 2.2 Petroleum 2,189 6.0 641 0.5

  18. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Illinois Nuclear Profile 2010 Illinois profile Illinois total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 11,441 25.9 96,190 47.8 Coal 15,551 35.2 93,611 46.5 Hydro and Pumped Storage 34 0.1 119 0.1 Natural Gas 13,771 31.2 5,724 2.8 Other 1 145 0.3 461 0.2 Other Renewable1 2,078 4.7 5,138 2.6 Petroleum 1,106 2.5 110

  19. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Iowa Nuclear Profile 2010 Iowa profile Iowa total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 601 4.1 4,451 7.7 Coal 6,956 47.7 41,283 71.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 144 1.0 948 1.6 Natural Gas 2,299 15.8 1,312 2.3 Other Renewable1 3,584 24.6 9,360 16.3 Petroleum 1,007 6.9 154 .0.3 Total 14,592 100.0 57,509 100

  20. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Kansas Nuclear Profile 2010 Kansas profile Kansas total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,160 9.2 9,556 19.9 Coal 5,179 41.3 32,505 67.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 3 * 13 * Natural Gas 4,573 36.5 2,287 4.8 Other Renewable1 1,079 8.6 3,459 7.2 Petroleum 550 4.4 103 0.2 Total 12,543 100.0 47,924 100

  1. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Maryland Nuclear Profile 2010 Maryland profile Maryland total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (Percent) Nuclear 1,705 13.6 13,994 32.1 Coal 4,886 39.0 23,668 54.3 Hydro and Pumped Storage 590 4.7 1,667 3.8 Natural Gas 2,041 16.3 2,897 6.6 Other 1 152 1.2 485 1.1 Other Renewable1 209 1.7 574 1.3 Petroleum 2,933 23.4 322

  2. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Massachusetts Nuclear Profile 2010 Massachusetts profile Massachusetts total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 685 5.0 5,918 13.8 Coal 1,669 12.2 8,306 19.4 Hydro and Pumped Storage 1,942 14.2 659 1.5 Natural Gas 6,063 44.3 25,582 59.8 Other 1 3 * 771 1.8 Other Renewable1 304 2.2 1,274 3.0 Petroleum 3,031

  3. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Michigan Nuclear Profile 2010 Michigan profile Michigan total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 3,947 13.2 29,625 26.6 Coal 11,531 38.7 65,604 58.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 2,109 7.1 228 0.2 Natural Gas 11,033 37.0 12,249 11.0 Other 1 - - 631 0.6 Other Renewable1 571 1.9 2,832 2.5 Petroleum 640 2.1 382 0.3

  4. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Minnesota Nuclear Profile 2010 Minnesota profile Minnesota total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,549 10.8 13,478 25.1 Coal 4,789 32.5 28,083 52.3 Hydro and Pumped Storage 193 1.3 840 1.6 Natural Gas 4,936 33.5 4,341 8.1 Other 1 13 0.1 258 0.5 Other Renewable1 2,395 16.3 6,640 12.4 Petroleum 795 5.4 31

  5. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Mississippi Nuclear Profile 2010 Mississippi profile Mississippi total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,251 8.0 9,643 17.7 Coal 2,526 16.1 13,629 25.0 Natural Gas 11,640 74.2 29,619 54.4 Other 1 4 * 10 * Other Renewable1 235 1.5 1,504 2.8 Petroleum 35 0.2 18 0.1 Total 15,691 100.0 54,487 100.0

  6. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Missouri Nuclear Profile 2010 Missouri profile Missouri total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,190 5.5 8,996 9.7 Coal 12,070 55.5 75,047 81.3 Hydro and Pumped Storage 1,221 5.6 2,427 2.6 Natural Gas 5,579 25.7 4,690 5.1 Other 1 - - 39 * Other Renewable1 466 2.1 988 1.1 Petroleum 1,212 5.6 126 0.1 Total

  7. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Nebraska Nuclear Profile 2010 Nebraska profile Nebraska total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,245 15.8 11,054 30.2 Coal 3,932 50.0 23,368 63.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 278 3.5 1,314 3.6 Natural Gas 1,864 23.5 375 1.0 Other Renewable1 165 2.1 493 1.3 Petroleum 387 4.9 31 0.1 Total 7,857 100.0 36,630

  8. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Hampshire Nuclear Profile 2010 New Hampshire profile New Hampshire total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,247 29.8 10,910 49.2 Coal 546 13.1 3,083 13.9 Hydro and Pumped Storage 489 11.7 1,478 6.7 Natural Gas 1,215 29.1 5,365 24.2 Other 1 - - 57 0.3 Other Renewable1 182 4.4 1,232 5.6 Petroleum 501 12.0

  9. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Jersey Nuclear Profile 2010 New Jersey profile New Jersey total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 4,108 22.3 32,771 49.9 Coal 2,036 11.1 6,418 9.8 Hydro and Pumped Storage 404 2.2 -176 -0.3 Natural Gas 10,244 55.6 24,902 37.9 Other 1 56 0.3 682 1.0 Other Renewable1 226 1.2 850 1.3 Petroleum 1,351 7.3 235

  10. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    North Carolina Nuclear Profile 2010 North Carolina profile North Carolina total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 4,958 17.9 40,740 31.7 Coal 12,766 46.1 71,951 55.9 Hydro and Pumped Storage 2,042 7.4 4,757 3.7 Natural Gas 6,742 24.4 8,447 6.6 Other 1 50 0.2 407 0.3 Other Renewable1 543 2.0 2,083 1.6

  11. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Ohio Nuclear Profile 2010 Ohio profile Ohio total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 2,134 6.5 15,805 11.0 Coal 21,360 64.6 117,828 82.1 Hydro and Pumped Storage 101 0.3 429 0.3 Natural Gas 8,203 24.8 7,128 5.0 Other 1 123 0.4 266 0.2 Other Renewable1 130 0.4 700 0.5 Petroleum 1,019 3.1 1,442 1.0 Total

  12. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Tennessee profile Tennessee total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 3,401 15.9 27,739 33.7 Coal 8,805 41.1 43,670 53.0 Hydro and Pumped Storage 4,277 20.0 7,416 9.0 Natural Gas 4,655 21.7 2,302 2.8 Other 1 - - 16 * Other Renewable1 222 1.0 988 1.2 Petroleum 58 0.3 217 0.3 Total 21,417 100.0 82,349 100.0

  13. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Texas profile Texas total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 4,966 4.6 41,335 10.0 Coal 22,335 20.6 150,173 36.5 Hydro and Pumped Storage 689 0.6 1,262 0.3 Natural Gas 69,291 64.0 186,882 45.4 Other 1 477 0.4 3,630 0.9 Other Renewable1 10,295 9.5 27,705 6.7 Petroleum 204 0.2 708 0.2 Total 108,258 100.0

  14. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Virginia profile Virginia total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 3,501 14.5 26,572 36.4 Coal 5,868 24.3 25,459 34.9 Hydro and Pumped Storage 4,107 17.0 10 * Natural Gas 7,581 31.4 16,999 23.3 Other 1 - - 414 0.6 Other Renewable1 621 2.6 2,220 3.0 Petroleum 2,432 10.1 1,293 1.8 Total 24,109 100.0 72,966

  15. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Washington profile Washington total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,097 3.6 9,241 8.9 Coal 1,340 4.4 8,527 8.2 Hydro and Pumped Storage 21,495 70.5 68,342 66.0 Natural Gas 3,828 12.6 10,359 10.0 Other 1 - - 354 0.3 Other Renewable1 2,703 8.9 6,617 6.4 Petroleum 15 * 32 * Total 30,478 100.0 103,473

  16. EIA - State Nuclear Profiles

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Wisconsin profile Wisconsin total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010 Primary energy source Summer capacity (mw) Share of State total (percent) Net generation (thousand mwh) Share of State total (percent) Nuclear 1,584 8.9 13,281 20.7 Coal 8,063 45.2 40,169 62.5 Hydro and Pumped Storage 492 2.8 2,112 3.3 Natural Gas 6,110 34.3 5,497 8.5 Other 1 21 0.1 63 0.1 Other Renewable1 775 4.3 2,474 3.8 Petroleum 790 4.4 718 1.1 Total 17,836 100.0 64,314

  17. Washington Nuclear Profile - All Fuels

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    total electric power industry, summer capacity and net generation, by energy source, 2010" "Primary Energy Source","Summer capacity (mw)","Share of State total (percent)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State total (percent)" "Nuclear","1,097",3.6,"9,241",8.9 "Coal","1,340",4.4,"8,527",8.2 "Hydro and Pumped Storage","21,495",70.5,"68,342",66.0

  18. About EIA - Insideeia - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    3 Early Release Base Overnight Project Technological Total Overnight Variable Fixed Heatrate 6 nth-of-a- kind Online Size Lead time Cost in 2012 Contingency Optimism Cost in 2012 4 O&M 5 O&M in 2012 Heatrate Technology Year 1 (MW) (years) (2011 $/kW) Factor 2 Factor 3 (2011 $/kW) (2011 $/MWh) (2011$/kW) (Btu/kWh) (Btu/kWh) Scrubbed Coal New 7 2016 1300 4 2,694 1.07 1.00 2,883 4.39 30.64 8,800 8,740 Integrated Coal-Gasification Comb Cycle (IGCC) 7 2016 1200 4 3,475 1.07 1.00 3,718 7.09

  19. Electric Power Annual 2014

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    4 | Release Date: February 16, 2016 | Next Release Date: February 2017 | full report Previous issues Electric industry sales to ultimate customers statistics by state State Sales to ultimate customers (thousand MWh) Revenue (thousand dollars) Customers Alabama 90,494 8,386,390 2,537,927 Alaska 6,165 1,076,133 333,742 Arizona 76,298 7,764,422 2,981,625 Arkansas 47,080 3,720,556 1,566,538 California 262,585 39,780,326 15,079,226 Colorado 53,397 5,369,170 2,572,992 Connecticut 29,354 5,003,978

  20. Energy and Cost Optimized Technology Options to Meet Energy Needs of Food Processors

    SciTech Connect

    Makhmalbaf, Atefe; Srivastava, Viraj; Hoffman, Michael G.; Wagner, Anne W.; Thornton, John

    2015-05-01

    Full Paper Submission for: Combined cooling, heating and electric power (CCHP) distributed generation (DG) systems can provide electric power and, heating and cooling capability to commercial and industrial facilities directly onsite, while increasing energy efficiency, security of energy supply, grid independence and enhancing the environmental and economic situation for the site. Food processing industries often have simultaneous requirements for heat, steam, chilling and electricity making them well suited for the use of such systems to supply base-load or as peak reducing generators enabling reduction of overall energy use intensity. This paper documents analysis from a project evaluating opportunities enabled by CCHPDG for emission and cost reductions and energy storage systems installed onsite at food processing facilities. In addition, this distributed generation coupled with energy storage demonstrates a non-wires solution to delay or eliminate the need for upgrades to electric distribution systems. It was found that a dairy processing plant in the Pacific Northwest currently purchasing 15,000 MWh/yr of electricity and 190,000 MMBtu/yr of gas could be provided with a 1.1 MW CCHP system reducing the amount of electric power purchased to 450 MWh/yr while increasing the gas demand to 255,000 MMBtu/yr. The high percentage of hydro-power in this region resulted in CO2 emissions from CCHP to be higher than that attributed to the electric utility/regional energy mix. The value of this work is in documenting a real-world example demonstrating the value of CCHP to facility owners and financial decision makers to encourage them to more seriously consider CCHP systems when building or upgrading facilities.

  1. Geothermal district heating and cooling in Vicenza, Italy

    SciTech Connect

    Leoni, P.

    1995-06-01

    The discovery of a large low-enthalpy geothermal water reservoir under the city of Vicenza (110,000 people) in northern Italy, through an oil prospecting venture, opened up the opportunity to install a district heating system with low energy consumption. Although the geothermal water is at 67{degrees}C, this is insufficient for heating the city`s commercial and residential buildings using their existing high-temperature heat distribution systems. Heat pumps are, therefore, used to obtain optimum useful heat energy from the geothermal source. Experience so far suggests that the system can reduce energy consumption by up to 60%, or 3885 MWh/year. The 2000 m deep well was completed in 1983 and is the first such well in Italy to be located within an urban area, making it ideal as a heat source for a district heating system. It produces 100 m{sup 3}/h of low salt-content water. The {open_quotes}Vicenza{close_quotes} geothermal heating and cooling project was developed by {open_quotes}Aziende Industriali Muncipalizzate{close_quotes} from 1988 to 1991, a utility company owned by the city of Vicenza, with the purpose of distributing approximately 40,000 MWh year to residential and commercial buildings. The project includes the installation of a power plant, and a district heating and cooling network. A reduction in the consumption of conventional fuels both for heating and domestic water has been achieved through a highly-efficient thermodynamic system based on reversible heat pumps. The system provides heating in the winter and air conditioning in summer.

  2. A Locational Analysis of Generation Benefits on Long Island, NewYork

    SciTech Connect

    Wang, Juan; Cohen, Jesse; Edwards, Jennifer; Marnay, Chris

    2005-11-08

    Beginning in April of 2004, nine sites owned by Verizon began to participate in the Long Island Real Time Purchasing Pilot Project (LIRTP) as retail choice customers. LIRTP was designed to minimize electricity costs for retail customers who own on-site distributed generation (DG) units in the near-term, and to stabilize overall electricity costs in the long-term. The nine Verizon buildings have two types of DG units: gas turbines with an estimated generation cost of $156/MWh, and diesel units with an estimated cost of $120/MWh. Due to total site emission limits, the operable hours of the DG units are limited. To estimate the economic value of running on-site DG units, an analysis of the New York Independent System Operator (NYISO) Locational Based Marginal Price (LBMP) data for Long Island was conducted, mainly covering the summer months from 2000 to 2004. Distributions of LBMP, relationship between LBMP and load, and estimates of profitable operating hours for the units were all analyzed. Since Long Island is a diverse and highly congested area, LBMP varies greatly. Looking at the data statistically offers a zone-wide viewpoint, while using spatial analysis shows the LBMP intrazonal differentiation. LBMP is currently used by NYISO for pricing in the 11 NY control zones. Because geographic information systems (GIS) visualize the distribution of a phenomenon over space, it clarifies where load and generation nodes are located, and where load reduction would be most valuable. This study is based on the assumption that the control zone areas do not fully represent the diversity of pricing, and that intrazonal pricing can be analyzed to determine where and when electricity conservation or injection into the network is most valuable.

  3. Sensitivity Analysis of Offshore Wind Cost of Energy (Poster)

    SciTech Connect

    Dykes, K.; Ning, A.; Graf, P.; Scott, G.; Damiami, R.; Hand, M.; Meadows, R.; Musial, W.; Moriarty, P.; Veers, P.

    2012-10-01

    No matter the source, offshore wind energy plant cost estimates are significantly higher than for land-based projects. For instance, a National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) review on the 2010 cost of wind energy found baseline cost estimates for onshore wind energy systems to be 71 dollars per megawatt-hour ($/MWh), versus 225 $/MWh for offshore systems. There are many ways that innovation can be used to reduce the high costs of offshore wind energy. However, the use of such innovation impacts the cost of energy because of the highly coupled nature of the system. For example, the deployment of multimegawatt turbines can reduce the number of turbines, thereby reducing the operation and maintenance (O&M) costs associated with vessel acquisition and use. On the other hand, larger turbines may require more specialized vessels and infrastructure to perform the same operations, which could result in higher costs. To better understand the full impact of a design decision on offshore wind energy system performance and cost, a system analysis approach is needed. In 2011-2012, NREL began development of a wind energy systems engineering software tool to support offshore wind energy system analysis. The tool combines engineering and cost models to represent an entire offshore wind energy plant and to perform system cost sensitivity analysis and optimization. Initial results were collected by applying the tool to conduct a sensitivity analysis on a baseline offshore wind energy system using 5-MW and 6-MW NREL reference turbines. Results included information on rotor diameter, hub height, power rating, and maximum allowable tip speeds.

  4. Energy and Cost Optimized Technology Options to Meet Energy Needs of Food Processors

    SciTech Connect

    Makhmalbaf, Atefe; Srivastava, Viraj; Hoffman, Michael G.; Wagner, Anne W.; Thornton, John

    2015-04-02

    ABSTRACT Combined cooling, heating and electric power (CCHP) distributed generation (DG) systems can provide electricity, heat, and cooling power to buildings and industrial processes directly onsite, while significantly increasing energy efficiency, security of energy supply, and grid independence. Fruit, vegetable, dairy and meat processing industries with simultaneous requirements for heat, steam, chilling and electricity, are well suited for the use of such systems to supply base-load electrical demand or as peak reducing generators with heat recovery in the forms of hot water, steam and/or chilled water. This paper documents results and analysis from a pilot project to evaluate opportunities for energy, emission, and cost for CCHP-DG and energy storage systems installed onsite at food processing facilities. It was found that a dairy processing plant purchasing 15,000 MWh of electricity will need to purchase 450 MWh with the integration of a 1.1 MW CCHP system. Here, the natural gas to be purchased increased from 190,000 MMBtu to 255,000 MMBtu given the fuel requirements of the CCHP system. CCHP systems lower emissions, however, in the Pacific Northwest the high percentage of hydro-power results in CO2 emissions from CCHP were higher than that attributed to the electric utility/regional energy mix. The value of this paper is in promoting and educating financial decision makers to seriously consider CCHP systems when building or upgrading facilities. The distributed generation aspect can reduce utility costs for industrial facilities and show non-wires solution benefits to delay or eliminate the need for upgrades to local electric transmission and distribution systems.

  5. Effects of new environmental regulations on coal-fired generation

    SciTech Connect

    LaCount, R.

    1999-07-01

    As restructuring of the electricity industry places downward pressure on power production costs, new environmental regulations are having the opposite effect. Although power plants may be subject to a variety of environmental regulations over the next ten years including reductions in mercury, toxics, and carbon dioxide, new regulations for sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) are poised to impact the electricity industry in the very short term. The cost for coal-fired power plants to comply with these new regulations has the potential to alter their competitive position. January 1, 2000 marks the beginning of Phase II for the Environmental Protection Agency's SO2 allowance market. Starting in January, all coal and oil plants above 25 MW will be required to comply with the federal SO2 provisions. Regulatory deadlines for NOX are also fast approaching; though the ultimate requirements are still subject to change. On May 1, 1999, a NOX allowance market began for states within the Northeast Ozone Transport Commission (OTC). A second phase of this program is scheduled to begin in 2003 that will lower the overall cap for allowable NOX emissions in the participating states. EPA is also working to expand the reach of regional NOX reductions in 2003 through its NOX SIP call. This program, which is currently subject to litigation, would require NOX reductions in 14 states outside of the OTC. A new study by Resource Data International (RDI), Coal-Fired Generation in Competitive Power Markets, assessed the potential impact that the new SO2 and NOX regulations may have on the competitiveness of coal-fired generation. Overall, the study shows that coal-fired generation will continue to grow despite significant environmental costs and competition from natural gas-fired units. The new environmental regulations have the effect of increasing the dispatch cost of coal-fired units from $0.65/MWh on average in the WSCC to $4.14/MWh on average in the MAAC region. The addition

  6. TMCC WIND RESOURCE ASSESSMENT

    SciTech Connect

    Turtle Mountain Community College

    2003-12-30

    North Dakota has an outstanding resource--providing more available wind for development than any other state. According to U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) studies, North Dakota alone has enough energy from good wind areas, those of wind power Class 4 and higher, to supply 36% of the 1990 electricity consumption of the entire lower 48 states. At present, no more than a handful of wind turbines in the 60- to 100-kilowatt (kW) range are operating in the state. The first two utility-scale turbines were installed in North Dakota as part of a green pricing program, one in early 2002 and the second in July 2002. Both turbines are 900-kW wind turbines. Two more wind turbines are scheduled for installation by another utility later in 2002. Several reasons are evident for the lack of wind development. One primary reason is that North Dakota has more lignite coal than any other state. A number of relatively new minemouth power plants are operating in the state, resulting in an abundance of low-cost electricity. In 1998, North Dakota generated approximately 8.2 million megawatt-hours (MWh) of electricity, largely from coal-fired plants. Sales to North Dakota consumers totaled only 4.5 million MWh. In addition, the average retail cost of electricity in North Dakota was 5.7 cents per kWh in 1998. As a result of this surplus and the relatively low retail cost of service, North Dakota is a net exporter of electricity, selling approximately 50% to 60% of the electricity produced in North Dakota to markets outside the state. Keeping in mind that new electrical generation will be considered an export commodity to be sold outside the state, the transmission grid that serves to export electricity from North Dakota is at or close to its ability to serve new capacity. The markets for these resources are outside the state, and transmission access to the markets is a necessary condition for any large project. At the present time, technical assessments of the transmission network indicate

  7. Electrochemical Investigation of Al–Li/LixFePO4 Cells in Oligo(ethylene glycol) Dimethyl Ether/LiPF6

    SciTech Connect

    Wang, X.J.; Zhou, Y.N.; Lee, H.S.; Nam, K.W.; Yang, X.Q.; Haas, O.

    2011-02-01

    1 M LiPF{sub 6} dissolved in oligo(ethylene glycol) dimethyl ether with a molecular weight, 500 g mol{sup -1} (OEGDME500, 1 M LiPF{sub 6}), was investigated as an electrolyte in experimental Al-Li/LiFePO{sub 4} cells. More than 60 cycles were achieved using this electrolyte in a Li-ion cell with an Al-Li alloy as an anode sandwiched between two Li x FePO{sub 4} electrodes (cathodes). Charging efficiencies of 96-100% and energy efficiencies of 86-89% were maintained during 60 cycles at low current densities. A theoretical investigation revealed that the specific energy can be increased up to 15% if conventional LiC{sub 6} anodes are replaced by Al-Li alloy electrodes. The specific energy and the energy density were calculated as a function of the active mass per electrode surface (charge density). The results reveal that for a charge density of 4 mAh cm{sup -2} about 160 mWh g{sup -1} can be reached with Al-Li/LiFePO{sub 4} batteries. Power limiting diffusion processes are discussed, and the power capability of Al-Li/LiFePO{sub 4} cells was experimentally evaluated using conventional electrolytes.

  8. Chapter 2: Sustainable and Unsustainable Developments in the U.S. Energy System

    SciTech Connect

    Levine, Mark; Levine, Mark D.; Aden, Nathaniel T.

    2008-05-01

    Over the course of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the United States developed a wealthy society on the basis of cheap and abundant fossil fuel energy. As fossil fuels have become ecologically and economically expensive in the twenty-first century, America has shown mixed progress in transitioning to a more sustainable energy system. From 2000 to 2006, energy and carbon intensity of GDP continued favorable long-term trends of decline. Energy end-use efficiency also continued to improve; for example, per-capita electricity use was 12.76 MWh per person per year in 2000 and again in 2006, despite 16 percent GDP growth over that period. Environmental costs of U.S. energy production and consumption have also been reduced, as illustrated in air quality improvements. However, increased fossil fuel consumption, stagnant efficiency standards, and expanding corn-based ethanol production have moved the energy system in the opposite direction, toward a less sustainable energy system. This chapter reviews energy system developments between 2000 and 2006 and presents policy recommendations to move the United States toward a more sustainable energy system.

  9. Waste-to-Energy Cogeneration Project, Centennial Park

    SciTech Connect

    Johnson, Clay; Mandon, Jim; DeGiulio, Thomas; Baker, Ryan

    2014-04-29

    The Waste-to-Energy Cogeneration Project at Centennial Park has allowed methane from the closed Centennial landfill to export excess power into the the local utility’s electric grid for resale. This project is part of a greater brownfield reclamation project to the benefit of the residents of Munster and the general public. Installation of a gas-to-electric generator and waste-heat conversion unit take methane byproduct and convert it into electricity at the rate of about 103,500 Mwh/year for resale to the local utility. The sale of the electricity will be used to reduce operating budgets by covering the expenses for streetlights and utility bills. The benefits of such a project are not simply financial. Munster’s Waste-to Energy Cogeneration Project at Centennial Park will reduce the community’s carbon footprint in an amount equivalent to removing 1,100 cars from our roads, conserving enough electricity to power 720 homes, planting 1,200 acres of trees, or recycling 2,000 tons of waste instead of sending it to a landfill.

  10. Status of the S.E. Geysers effluent pipeline & injection project

    SciTech Connect

    Dellinger, M.

    1997-12-31

    A unique public/private partnership of local, state, federal, and corporate stakeholders is constructing the world`s first wastewater-to-electricity system in Lake County, California. A rare example of a genuinely {open_quotes}sustainable{close_quotes} system, three Lake County communities will recycle their treated wastewater effluent through the Geysers geothermal steamfield to produce an estimated 625,000 MWh of electricity annually from six existing geothermal power plants. The concept is shown schematically. Construction was initiated in October 1995, and as of this writing, the system is approximately 85% complete. Operational start-up is expected in October 1997. The key to the project`s success thus far has been its emphasis on cooperative action among affected stakeholders; and a broad, community-based view of solving problems rather than the traditional, narrower view of engineering-driven technical solutions. Special attention has been given to environmentally-responsive engineering design to avoid or minimize adverse environmental impacts.

  11. Turning community wastes into sustainable geothermal energy: The S.E. Geysers effluent pipeline project

    SciTech Connect

    Dellinger, M.; Allen, E.

    1996-12-31

    A unique public/private partnership of local, state, federal, and corporate stakeholders are constructing the world`s first wastewater-to-electricity system at The Geysers. A rare example of a genuinely {open_quotes}sustainable{close_quote} energy system, three Lake County communities will recycle their treated wastewater effluent through the southeast portion of The Geysers steamfield to produce approximately 625,000 MWh annually from six existing geothermal power plants. In effect, the communities` effluent will produce enough power to indefinitely sustain their electric needs, along with enough extra power for thousands of other California consumers. Because of the project`s unique sponsorship, function, and environmental impacts, its implementation has required: (1) preparation of a consolidated state environmental impact report (EIR) and federal environmental impact statement (EIS), and seven related environmental agreements and management plans; (2) acquisition of 25 local, state, and federal permits; (3) negotiation of six federal and state financial assistance agreements; (4) negotiation of six participant agreements on construction, operation, and financing of the project; and (5) acquisition of 163 easements from private land owners for pipeline construction access and ongoing maintenance. The project`s success in efficiently and economically completing these requirements is a model for geothermal innovation and partnering throughout the Pacific Rim and elsewhere internationally.

  12. The Geysers pipeline project

    SciTech Connect

    Dellinger, M.; Allen, E.

    1997-01-01

    A unique public/private partnership of local, state, federal and corporate stakeholders are constructing the world`s first wastewater-to-electricity system at The Geysers. A rare example of a genuinely {open_quotes}sustainable{close_quotes} energy system, three Lake County communities will recycle their treated wastewater effluent through the southeast portion of the The Geysers steamfield to produce approximately 625,000 MWh annually from six existing geothermal power plants. In effect, the communities` effluent will produce enough power to indefinitely sustain their electric needs, along with enough extra power for thousands of other California consumers. Because of the project`s unique sponsorship, function and environmental impacts, its implementation has required: (1) preparation of a consolidated state environmental impact report (EIR) and federal environmental impact statement (EIS), and seven related environmental agreements and management plans; (2) acquisition of 25 local, state, and federal permits; (3) negotiation of six federal and state financial assistance agreements; (4) negotiation of six participant agreements on construction, operation and financing of the project, and (5) acquisition of 163 easements from private land owners for pipeline construction access and ongoing maintenance. The project`s success in efficiently and economically completing these requirements is a model for geothermal innovation and partnering throughout the Pacific Rim and elsewhere internationally.

  13. Geographic Footprint of Electricity Use for Water Services in the Western U.S.

    SciTech Connect

    Tidwell, Vincent C.; Moreland, Barbara Denise; Zemlick, Katie

    2014-06-25

    A significant fraction of our nation’s electricity use goes to lift, convey, and treat water, while the resulting expenditures on electricity represent a key budgetary consideration for water service providers. In order to improve understanding of the electricity-for-water interdependency, electricity used in providing water services is mapped at the regional, state and county level for the 17-conterminous states in the Western U.S. Our study is unique in estimating electricity use for large-scale conveyance and agricultural pumping as well as mapping these electricity uses along with that for drinking and wastewater services at a state and county level. These results indicate that drinking and wastewater account for roughly 2% of total West-wide electricity use, while an additional 1.2% is consumed by large-scale conveyance projects and 2.6% is consumed by agricultural pumping. The percent of electricity used for water services varies strongly by state with some as high as 34%, while other states expend less than 1%. Every county in the West uses some electricity for water services; however, there is a large disparity in use ranging from 10 MWh/yr to 5.8 TWh/yr. Finally, our results support long-term transmission planning in the Western U.S. by characterizing an important component of the electric load.

  14. An Analysis of Wind Power Development in the Town of Hull, MA, Appendix 2: LaCapra Financial Study

    SciTech Connect

    Adams, Christopher

    2013-06-30

    The financial analysis and summary results presented in this document represent a first cut at an economic assessment of the proposed Hull Offshore Wind Project. Wind turbine price increases have outpaced the materials and labor price pressures faced by nonrenewable power plant developers due to increased demands on a limited pool of turbine manufacturers and offshore installation companies. Moreover, given the size of the proposed offshore facility, it may be difficult to contract with turbine manufacturers and/or foundation companies given the size and scope of competing worldwide demand. The results described in this report assume that such conditions will not significantly impact the prices that will have to be received from the output of the project; rather, the project size may require as a prerequisite that Hull be able to piggyback on other offshore efforts. The financial estimates provided here necessarily feature a range due to uncertainty in a number of project assumptions as well as overall uncertainty in offshore wind costs. Nevertheless, taken together, the analysis provides a ballpark revenue requirement of approximately $157/MWh for the municipal financing option, with higher estimates possible assuming escalation in costs to levels higher than assumed here.

  15. Technology Pathway Partnership Final Scientific Report

    SciTech Connect

    Hall, John C. Dr.; Godby, Larry A.

    2012-04-26

    This report covers the scientific progress and results made in the development of high efficiency multijunction solar cells and the light concentrating non-imaging optics for the commercial generation of renewable solar energy. During the contract period the efficiency of the multijunction solar cell was raised from 36.5% to 40% in commercially available fully qualified cells. In addition significant strides were made in automating production process for these cells in order to meet the costs required to compete with commercial electricity. Concurrent with the cells effort Boeing also developed a non imaging optical systems to raise the light intensity at the photovoltaic cell to the rage of 800 to 900 suns. Solar module efficiencies greater than 30% were consistently demonstrated. The technology and its manufacturing were maturated to a projected price of < $0.015 per kWh and demonstrated by automated assembly in a robotic factory with a throughput of 2 MWh/yr. The technology was demonstrated in a 100 kW power plant erected at California State University Northridge, CA.

  16. Sustainable Building in China -- A Green Leap Forward?

    SciTech Connect

    Diamond, Richard; Ye, Qing; Feng, Wei; Yan, Tao; Mao, Hongwei; Li, Yutong; Guo, Yongcong; Wang, Jialiang

    2013-09-01

    China is constructing new commercial buildings at an enormous rate -- roughly 2 billion square meters per year, with considerable interest and activity in green design and construction. We review the context of commercial building design and construction in China, and look at a specific project as an example of a high performance, sustainable design, the Shenzhen Institute of Building Research (IBR). The IBR building incorporates over 40 sustainable technologies and strategies, including daylighting, natural ventilation, gray-water recycling, solar-energy generation, and highly efficient Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) systems. We present measured data on the performance of the building, including detailed analysis by energy end use, water use, and occupant comfort and satisfaction. Total building energy consumption in 2011 was 1151 MWh, with an Energy Use Intensity (EUI) of 63 kWh/m2 (20 kBtu/ft2), which is 61% of the mean EUI value of 103 kWh/m2 (33 kBtu/ft2) for similar buildings in the region. We also comment on the unique design process, which incorporated passive strategies throughout the building, and has led to high occupant satisfaction with the natural ventilation, daylighting, and green patio work areas. Lastly we present thoughts on how the design philosophy of the IBR building can be a guide for low-energy design in different climate regions throughout China and elsewhere.

  17. Steam generator materials performance in high temperature gas-cooled reactors

    SciTech Connect

    Chafey, J.E.; Roberts, D.I.

    1980-11-01

    This paper reviews the materials technology aspects of steam generators for HTGRs which feature a graphite-moderated, uranium-thorium, all-ceramic core and utilizes high-pressure helium as the primary coolant. The steam generators are exposed to gas-side temperatures approaching 760/sup 0/C and produce superheated steam at 538/sup 0/C and 16.5 MPa (2400 psi). The prototype Peach Bottom I 40-MW(e) HTGR was operated for 1349 EFPD over 7 years. Examination after decommissioning of the U-tube steam generators and other components showed the steam generators to be in very satisfactory condition. The 330-MW(e) Fort St. Vrain HTGR, now in the final stages of startup, has achieved 70% power and generated more than 1.5 x 10/sup 6/ MWh of electricity. The steam generators in this reactor are once-through units of helical configuration, requiring a number of new materials factors including creep-fatigue and water chemistry control. Current designs of larger HTGRs also feature steam generators of helical once-through design. Materials issues that are important in these designs include detailed consideration of time-dependent behavior of both base metals and welds, as required by current American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code rules, evaluation of bimetallic weld behavior, evaluation of the properties of large forgings, etc.

  18. Impact Assessment of Plug-in Hybrid Vehicles on the U.S. Power Grid

    SciTech Connect

    Kintner-Meyer, Michael CW; Nguyen, Tony B.; Jin, Chunlian; Balducci, Patrick J.; Secrest, Thomas J.

    2010-09-30

    The US electricity grid is a national infrastructure that has the potential to deliver significant amounts of the daily driving energy of the US light duty vehicle (cars, pickups, SUVs, and vans) fleet. This paper discusses a 2030 scenario with 37 million plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) on the road in the US demanding electricity for an average daily driving distance of about 33 miles (53 km). The paper addresses the potential grid impacts of the PHEVs fleet relative to their effects on the production cost of electricity, and the emissions from the electricity sector. The results of this analysis indicate significant regional difference on the cost impacts and the CO2 emissions. Battery charging during the day may have twice the cost impacts than charging during the night. The CO2 emissions impacts are very region-dependent. In predominantly coal regions (Midwest), the new PHEV load may reduce the CO2 emission intensity (ton/MWh), while in others regions with significant clean generation (hydro and renewable energy) the CO2 emission intensity may increase. Discussed will the potential impact of the results with the valuation of carbon emissions.

  19. Fuel Cell Demonstration Project - 200 kW - Phosphoric Acid Fuel Cell Power Plant Located at the National Transportation Research Center: FINAL REPORT

    SciTech Connect

    Berry, JB

    2005-05-06

    Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) researches and develops distributed generation technology for the Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Distributed Energy Program. This report describes installation and operation of one such distributed generation system, a United Technology Corporation fuel cell located at the National Transportation Research Center in Knoxville, Tennessee. Data collected from June 2003 to June of 2004, provides valuable insight regarding fuel cell-grid compatibility and the cost-benefit of the fuel cell operation. The NTRC fuel cell included a high-heat recovery option so that use of thermal energy improves project economics and improves system efficiency to 59% year round. During the year the fuel cell supplied a total of 834MWh to the NTRC and provided 300MBtu of hot water. Installation of the NTRC fuel cell was funded by the Distributed Energy Program with partial funding from the Department of Defense's Climate Change Fuel Cell Buy Down Program, administered by the National Energy Technology Laboratory. On-going operational expenses are funded by ORNL's utility budget and are paid from operational cost savings. Technical information and the benefit-cost of the fuel cell are both evaluated in this report and sister reports.

  20. A Green Prison: The Santa Rita Jail Campus Microgrid

    SciTech Connect

    Marnay, Chris; DeForest, Nicholas; Lai, Judy

    2012-01-22

    A large microgrid project is nearing completion at Alameda County’s twenty-two-year-old 45 ha 4,000-inmate Santa Rita Jail, about 70 km east of San Francisco. Often described as a green prison, it has a considerable installed base of distributed energy resources (DER) including an eight-year old 1.2 MW PV array, a five-year old 1 MW fuel cell with heat recovery, and considerable efficiency investments. A current US$14 M expansion adds a 2 MW-4 MWh Li-ion battery, a static disconnect switch, and various controls upgrades. During grid blackouts, or when conditions favor it, the Jail can now disconnect from the grid and operate as an island, using the on-site resources described together with its back-up diesel generators. In other words, the Santa Rita Jail is a true microgrid, or μgrid, because it fills both requirements, i.e. it is a locally controlled system, and it can operate both grid connected and islanded. The battery’s electronics includes Consortium for Electric Reliability Technology (CERTS) Microgrid technology. This enables the battery to maintain energy balance using droops without need for a fast control system.

  1. Integrating Solar PV in Utility System Operations: Analytical Framework and Arizona Case Study

    SciTech Connect

    Wu, Jing; Botterud, Audun; Mills, Andrew; Zhou, Zhi; Hodge, Bri-Mathias; Mike, Heaney

    2015-06-01

    A systematic framework is proposed to estimate the impact on operating costs due to uncertainty and variability in renewable resources. The framework quantifies the integration costs associated with subhourly variability and uncertainty as well as day-ahead forecasting errors in solar PV (photovoltaics) power. A case study illustrates how changes in system operations may affect these costs for a utility in the southwestern United States (Arizona Public Service Company). We conduct an extensive sensitivity analysis under different assumptions about balancing reserves, system flexibility, fuel prices, and forecasting errors. We find that high solar PV penetrations may lead to operational challenges, particularly during low-load and high solar periods. Increased system flexibility is essential for minimizing integration costs and maintaining reliability. In a set of sensitivity cases where such flexibility is provided, in part, by flexible operations of nuclear power plants, the estimated integration costs vary between $1.0 and $4.4/MWh-PV for a PV penetration level of 17%. The integration costs are primarily due to higher needs for hour-ahead balancing reserves to address the increased sub-hourly variability and uncertainty in the PV resource. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

  2. Membrane Development for Vanadium Redox Flow Batteries

    SciTech Connect

    Schwenzer, Birgit; Zhang, Jianlu; Kim, Soowhan; Li, Liyu; Liu, Jun; Yang, Zhenguo

    2011-10-17

    Large-scale energy storage has become a main bottleneck for increasing the percentage of renewable energy in our electricity grids. Redox flow batteries are considered to be among the best options for electricity storage in the megawatt range, and large demonstration systems have already been installed. Although the full technological potential of these systems has not been reached yet, currently the main problem hindering more widespread commercialization is the high cost of redox flow batteries. Nafion{reg_sign} as the preferred membrane material is responsible for {approx}11% of the overall cost of a 1 MW/8 MWh system. Therefore in recent years two main membrane-related research threads have emerged: (a) chemical and physical modification of Nafion membranes to optimize their properties with regard to vanadium redox flow battery (VRFB) application; and (b) replacement of the Nafion membranes with different, less expensive materials. This review summarizes the underlying basic science issues associated with membrane use in VRFBs and presents an overview of membrane-related research approaches aimed at improving the efficiency of VRFBs and making the technology cost-competitive. Promising research strategies and materials are identified and suggestions are provided on how materials issues could be overcome.

  3. 100 kilowatt solar photovoltaic flat panel power system for the combined Beverly High School/C. H. Patten Vocational High School, Beverly, Massachusetts

    SciTech Connect

    Addiss, R.R. Jr.

    1981-01-01

    The 100 kW system consists of the photovoltaic array, the inverter/control subsystem, the building and utility interface, and the monitoring subsystem. The photovoltaic array consists of 40 separate subarrays of 80 photovoltaic modules each (5 parallel by 16 series), deployed in rows on the southerly facing slope north of the school building. Typical operating voltage is 250 V. The wiring scheme permits individual modules to be disconnected without a radical change in subarray output current. Power is transmitted at 4160 V from the inverters and a step-up transformer to the main 4160 V utility feed line in the school. Separate metering measures power bought and sold. At the optimum tilt angle of 40/sup 0/, the array provides 116 MWh of ac energy annually, or 8% of the school load. A fault detection and isolation scheme which can find faulty modules is incorporated into the monitoring subsystem. Safety during installation, operation and maintenance was a major consideration in system design.

  4. 194 kilowatt solar photovoltaic flat panel power system for the combined Beverly High School/C. H. Patten Vocational High School, Beverly, Massachusetts. Final technical report, October 1, 1978-March 31, 1979

    SciTech Connect

    Addiss, R.R. Jr.; Lawson, P.A.

    1980-06-01

    The 194 kW system consists of the photovoltaic array, the inverter/control subsystem, the building and utility interface, and the monitoring subsystem. The photovoltaic array consists of 56 separate subarrays of 112 photovoltaic modules each, deployed in rows on the southerly facing slope north of the school building. The wiring scheme permits individual modules to be disconnected without a radical change in subarray output current. Power is transmitted at 4160 V from the inverters and a step-up transformer to the main 4160 V utility feed line in the school. Separate metering measures power bought and sold. At the optimum tilt angle of 40/sup 0/, the array provides 232 MWh of ac energy annually, or 17% of the school load. It provides a good match to the summer daily load profile, resulting primarily from the central air-conditioning. Some power is sold to the utility throughout the year, mainly on weekends. The immediate impact is an $8000 saving in the annual utility bill. Levelized busbar energy costs are reduced from $2/kWh to $1/kWh when site-specific parameters are used in the analysis instead of the JPL-specified nominal values. A fault detection and isolation scheme which can find a single module failure is incorporated into the monitoring subsystem.

  5. Performance assessment of the PNM Prosperity electricity storage project :

    SciTech Connect

    Roberson, Dakota; Ellison, James F.; Bhatnagar, Dhruv; Schoenwald, David A.

    2014-05-01

    The purpose of this study is to characterize the technical performance of the PNM Prosperity electricity storage project, and to identify lessons learned that can be used to improve similar projects in the future. The PNM Prosperity electricity storage project consists of a 500 kW/350 kWh advanced lead-acid battery with integrated supercapacitor (for energy smoothing) and a 250 kW/1 MWh advanced lead-acid battery (for energy shifting), and is co-located with a 500 kW solar photovoltaic (PV) resource. The project received American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) funding. The smoothing system is e ective in smoothing intermittent PV output. The shifting system exhibits good round-trip efficiencies, though the AC-to-AC annual average efficiency is lower than one might hope. Given the current utilization of the smoothing system, there is an opportunity to incorporate additional control algorithms in order to increase the value of the energy storage system.

  6. Water: May be the Best Near-Term Benefit and Driver of a Robust Wind Energy Future (Poster)

    SciTech Connect

    Flowers, L.; Reategui, S.

    2009-05-01

    Water may be the most critical natural resource variable that affects the selection of generation options in the next decade. Extended drought in the western United States and more recently in the Southeast has moved water management and policy to the forefront of the energy options discussions. Recent climate change studies indicate that rising ambient temperatures could increase evapotranspiration by more than 25% to 30% in large regions of the country. Increasing demand for electricity, and especially from homegrown sources, inevitably will increase our thermal fleet, which consumes 400 to 700 gal/MWh for cooling. Recovering the vast oil shale resources in the West (one of the energy options discussed) is water intensive and threatens scarce water supplies. Irrigation for the growing corn ethanol industry requires 1,000 to 2,000 gallons of water for 1 gallon of production. Municipalities continue to grow and drive water demands and emerging constrained market prices upward. As illustrated by the 20% Wind Energy by 2030 analysis, wind offers an important mitigation opportunity: a 4-trillion-gallon water savings. This poster highlights the emerging constrained water situation in the United States and presents the case for wind energy as one of the very few means to ameliorate the emerging water wars in various U.S. regions.

  7. MODEL REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS TO PROVIDE ENERGY AND OTHER ATTRIBUTES FROM AN OFFSHORE WIND POWER PROJECT

    SciTech Connect

    Jeremy Firestone; Dawn Kurtz Crompton

    2011-10-22

    This document provides a model RFP for new generation. The 'base' RFP is for a single-source offshore wind RFP. Required modifications are noted should a state or utility seek multi-source bids (e.g., all renewables or all sources). The model is premised on proposals meeting threshold requirements (e.g., a MW range of generating capacity and a range in terms of years), RFP issuer preferences (e.g., likelihood of commercial operation by a date certain, price certainty, and reduction in congestion), and evaluation criteria, along with a series of plans (e.g., site, environmental effects, construction, community outreach, interconnection, etc.). The Model RFP places the most weight on project risk (45%), followed by project economics (35%), and environmental and social considerations (20%). However, if a multi-source RFP is put forward, the sponsor would need to either add per-MWh technology-specific, life-cycle climate (CO2), environmental and health impact costs to bid prices under the 'Project Economics' category or it should increase the weight given to the 'Environmental and Social Considerations' category.

  8. Radiation tolerance of piezoelectric bulk single-crystal aluminum nitride

    SciTech Connect

    David A. Parks; Bernhard R. Tittmann

    2014-07-01

    For practical use in harsh radiation environments, we pose selection criteria for piezoelectric materials for nondestructive evaluation (NDE) and material characterization. Using these criteria, piezoelectric aluminum nitride is shown to be an excellent candidate. The results of tests on an aluminumnitride-based transducer operating in a nuclear reactor are also presented. We demonstrate the tolerance of single-crystal piezoelectric aluminum nitride after fast and thermal neutron fluences of 1.85 × 1018 neutron/cm2 and 5.8 × 1018 neutron/cm2, respectively, and a gamma dose of 26.8 MGy. The radiation hardness of AlN is most evident from the unaltered piezoelectric coefficient d33, which measured 5.5 pC/N after a fast and thermal neutron exposure in a nuclear reactor core for over 120 MWh, in agreement with the published literature value. The results offer potential for improving reactor safety and furthering the understanding of radiation effects on materials by enabling structural health monitoring and NDE in spite of the high levels of radiation and high temperatures, which are known to destroy typical commercial ultrasonic transducers.

  9. Evaluating the risk-reduction benefits of wind energy

    SciTech Connect

    Brower, M.C.; Bell, K.; Bernow, S.; Duckworth, M.; Spinney P.

    1996-12-31

    This paper presents preliminary results of a study to evaluate the risk-reduction benefits of wind power for a case study utility system using decision analysis techniques. The costs and risks of two alternative decisions-whether to build a 400 MW gas-fired combined cycle plant or a 1600 MW wind plant in 2003-were compared through computer simulations as fuel prices, environmental regulatory costs, wind and conventional power plant availability, and load growth were allowed to vary. Three different market scenarios were examined: traditional regulation, a short-term power pool, and fixed-price contracts of varying duration. The study concludes that, from the perspective of ratepayers, wind energy provides a net levelized risk-reduction benefit of $3.4 to $7.8/MWh under traditional regulation, and less in the other scenarios. From the perspective of the utility plant owners, wind provides a significant risk benefit in the unregulated market scenarios but none in a regulated market. The methodology and findings should help inform utility resource planning and industry restructuring efforts. 2 figs., 3 tabs.

  10. Geographic Footprint of Electricity Use for Water Services in the Western U.S.

    DOE PAGES [OSTI]

    Tidwell, Vincent C.; Moreland, Barbara Denise; Zemlick, Katie

    2014-06-25

    A significant fraction of our nation’s electricity use goes to lift, convey, and treat water, while the resulting expenditures on electricity represent a key budgetary consideration for water service providers. In order to improve understanding of the electricity-for-water interdependency, electricity used in providing water services is mapped at the regional, state and county level for the 17-conterminous states in the Western U.S. Our study is unique in estimating electricity use for large-scale conveyance and agricultural pumping as well as mapping these electricity uses along with that for drinking and wastewater services at a state and county level. These results indicatemore » that drinking and wastewater account for roughly 2% of total West-wide electricity use, while an additional 1.2% is consumed by large-scale conveyance projects and 2.6% is consumed by agricultural pumping. The percent of electricity used for water services varies strongly by state with some as high as 34%, while other states expend less than 1%. Every county in the West uses some electricity for water services; however, there is a large disparity in use ranging from 10 MWh/yr to 5.8 TWh/yr. Finally, our results support long-term transmission planning in the Western U.S. by characterizing an important component of the electric load.« less

  11. Brighter Future: A Study on Solar in U.S. Schools

    Energy.gov [DOE]

    In a first-of-its-kind report tracking the use of solar energy at K-12 schools in the United States, The Solar Foundation has developed the most comprehensive understanding to date of how schools are using and financing solar energy and the potential for still more schools to benefit from the technology. According to the report, there are currently 3,752 K-12 schools with solar installations, meaning nearly 2.7 million students attend schools with solar energy systems. These PV systems have a combined capacity of 490 megawatts (MW), and generate roughly 642,000 megawatt-hours (MWh) of electricity each year, equivalent to $77.8 million worth of utility bills and enough clean, renewable energy to offset 50 million gallons of gasoline. Solar potential on schools remains largely untapped. Of the 125,000 K-12 schools in the country, up to 72,000 schools (60%) can "go solar" cost-effectively. Approximately 450 individual schools districts have the potential to save more than $1 million over 30 years by installing a solar PV system.

  12. Optimal Synthesis of a Pulverized Coal Power Plant with Carbon Capture

    SciTech Connect

    Prakash R. Kotecha; Juan M. Salazar; Stephen Zitney

    2009-01-01

    Coal constitutes an important source of fuel for the production of power in the United States. For instance, in January 2009, pulverized coal (PC) power plants alone contributed to over 45 percent of the Nation's total electric power production. However, PC power plants also contribute to increased emissions of greenhouse gases principally carbon-dioxide (CO2). Recently, various carbon capture strategies have been under active investigation so as to make these plants compete with the more environmental friendly renewable energy sources. One such technology that has received considerable success is the capture of CO2 by an amine-based solvent extraction process. However, an aqueous absorption/stripping technology when used in a PC power plant can reduce the net power output of the plant by as much as 20-40%. The energy penalty comes from heating up the solvent in the regenerator, balancing the enthalpy of reaction, and water stripping. This energy penalty poses considerable limitations on commercial viability of the solvent extraction process and, as a result, various energy-saving modifications have been proposed in the literature ranging from the use of hybrid solvents to novel stripper configurations. In this paper, we show that the energy penalty can be further reduced by heat integration of various PC plant components with the carbon capture system. In addition to the release of greenhouse gases to the environment, PC plants also consume a large amount of freshwater. It is estimated that subcritical and supercritical PC plants have water losses of 714 gal/MWh and 639 gal/MWh, respectively. Water loss is based on an overall balance of the plant source and exit streams. This includes coal moisture, air humidity, process makeup, cooling tower makeup (equivalent to evaporation plus blowdown), process losses (including losses through reactions, solids entrainment, and process makeup/blowdown) and flue gas losses. The primary source of water used in PC power plants

  13. Advanced Microturbine Systems

    SciTech Connect

    Rosfjord, T; Tredway, W; Chen, A; Mulugeta, J; Bhatia, T

    2008-12-31

    metric or a system-output metric. A common form for the technology metric is in the units of PPM {at} 15% O2. In this case the metric reflects the molar fraction of the pollutant in the powerplant exhaust when corrected to a standard exhaust condition as containing 15% (molar) oxygen, assuring that the PPM concentrations are not altered by subsequent air addition or dilution. Since fuel combustion consumes oxygen, the output oxygen reference is equivalent to a fuel input reference. Hence, this technology metric reflects the moles of pollutant per mole of fuel input, but not the useful output of the powerplant-i.e. the power. The system-output metric does embrace the useful output and is often termed an output-based metric. A common form for the output-based metric is in the units of lb/MWh. This is a system metric relating the pounds of pollutant to output energy (e.g., MWh) of the powerplant.

  14. Design Concepts for Co-Production of Power, Fuels & Chemicals Via Coal/Biomass Mixtures

    SciTech Connect

    Rao, A. D.; Chen, Q.; Samuelsen, G. S.

    2012-09-30

    performance between the various coproduct cases is further complicated by the fact that the carbon footprint is not the same when carbon leaving with the coproduct are accounted for. The economic analysis and demand for a particular coproduct in the market place is a more meaningful comparison of the various coproduction scenarios. The first year cost of electricity calculated for the bituminous coal is $102.9/MWh while that for the lignite is $108.1/MWh. The calculated cost of hydrogen ranged from $1.42/kg to $2.77/kg depending on the feedstock, which is lower than the DOE announced hydrogen cost goal of $3.00/kg in July 14, 2005. Methanol cost ranged from $345/MT to $617/MT, while the market price is around $450/MT. For Fischer-Tropsch liquids, the calculated cost ranged from $65/bbl to $112/bbl, which is comparable to the current market price of crude oil at around $100/bbl. It should be noted, however, that F-T liquids contain no sulfur and nitrogen compounds. The calculated cost of alcohol ranged from $4.37/gal to $5.43/gal, while it ranged from $2.20/gal to $3.70/gal in a DOE funded study conducted by Louisiana State University. The Louisiana State University study consisted of a significantly larger plant than our study and benefited from economies of scale. When the plant size in our study is scaled up to similar size as in the Louisiana State University study, cost of alcohol is then reduced to a range of $3.24/gal to $4.28/gal, which is comparable. Urea cost ranged from $307/MT to $428/MT, while the market price is around $480/MT.

  15. Changes in the Economic Value of Variable Generation at High Penetration Levels: A Pilot Case Study of California

    SciTech Connect

    Mills, Andrew; Wiser, Ryan

    2012-05-18

    We estimate the long-run economic value of variable renewable generation with increasing penetration using a unique investment and dispatch model that captures long-run investment decisions while also incorporating detailed operational constraints and hourly time resolution over a full year. High time resolution and the incorporation of operational constraints are important for estimating the economic value of variable generation, as is the use of a modeling framework that accommodates new investment decisions. The model is herein applied with a case study that is loosely based on California in 2030. Increasing amounts of wind, photovoltaics (PV), and concentrating solar power (CSP) with and without thermal energy storage (TES) are added one at a time. The marginal economic value of these renewable energy sources is estimated and then decomposed into capacity value, energy value, day-ahead forecast error cost, and ancillary services. The marginal economic value, as defined here, is primarily based on the combination of avoided capital investment cost and avoided variable fuel and operations and maintenance costs from other power plants in the power system. Though the model only captures a subset of the benefits and costs of renewable energy, it nonetheless provides unique insights into how the value of that subset changes with technology and penetration level. Specifically, in this case study implementation of the model, the marginal economic value of all three solar options is found to exceed the value of a flat-block of power (as well as wind energy) by \\$20--30/MWh at low penetration levels, largely due to the high capacity value of solar at low penetration. Because the value of CSP per unit of energy is found to be high with or without thermal energy storage at low penetration, we find little apparent incremental value to thermal storage at low solar penetration in the present case study analysis. The marginal economic value of PV and CSP without thermal

  16. A Distributed Intelligent Automated Demand Response Building Management System

    SciTech Connect

    Auslander, David; Culler, David; Wright, Paul; Lu, Yan; Piette, Mary

    2013-12-30

    The goal of the 2.5 year Distributed Intelligent Automated Demand Response (DIADR) project was to reduce peak electricity load of Sutardja Dai Hall at UC Berkeley by 30% while maintaining a healthy, comfortable, and productive environment for the occupants. We sought to bring together both central and distributed control to provide “deep” demand response1 at the appliance level of the building as well as typical lighting and HVAC applications. This project brought together Siemens Corporate Research and Siemens Building Technology (the building has a Siemens Apogee Building Automation System (BAS)), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (leveraging their Open Automated Demand Response (openADR), Auto-­Demand Response, and building modeling expertise), and UC Berkeley (related demand response research including distributed wireless control, and grid-­to-­building gateway development). Sutardja Dai Hall houses the Center for Information Technology Research in the Interest of Society (CITRIS), which fosters collaboration among industry and faculty and students of four UC campuses (Berkeley, Davis, Merced, and Santa Cruz). The 141,000 square foot building, occupied in 2009, includes typical office spaces and a nanofabrication laboratory. Heating is provided by a district heating system (steam from campus as a byproduct of the campus cogeneration plant); cooling is provided by one of two chillers: a more typical electric centrifugal compressor chiller designed for the cool months (Nov-­ March) and a steam absorption chiller for use in the warm months (April-­October). Lighting in the open office areas is provided by direct-­indirect luminaries with Building Management System-­based scheduling for open areas, and occupancy sensors for private office areas. For the purposes of this project, we focused on the office portion of the building. Annual energy consumption is approximately 8053 MWh; the office portion is estimated as 1924 MWh. The maximum peak load

  17. Water Power for a Clean Energy Future (Fact Sheet)

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    2012-03-01

    This fact sheet provides an overview of the U.S. Department of Energy's Wind and Water Power Program's water power research activities. Water power is the nation's largest source of clean, domestic, renewable energy. Harnessing energy from rivers, manmade waterways, and oceans to generate electricity for the nation's homes and businesses can help secure America's energy future. Water power technologies fall into two broad categories: conventional hydropower and marine and hydrokinetic technologies. Conventional hydropower facilities include run-of-the-river, storage, and pumped storage. Most conventional hydropower plants use a diversion structure, such as a dam, to capture water's potential energy via a turbine for electricity generation. Marine and hydrokinetic technologies obtain energy from waves, tides, ocean currents, free-flowing rivers, streams and ocean thermal gradients to generate electricity. The United States has abundant water power resources, enough to meet a large portion of the nation's electricity demand. Conventional hydropower generated 257 million megawatt-hours (MWh) of electricity in 2010 and provides 6-7% of all electricity in the United States. According to preliminary estimates from the Electric Power Resource Institute (EPRI), the United States has additional water power resource potential of more than 85,000 megawatts (MW). This resource potential includes making efficiency upgrades to existing hydroelectric facilities, developing new low-impact facilities, and using abundant marine and hydrokinetic energy resources. EPRI research suggests that ocean wave and in-stream tidal energy production potential is equal to about 10% of present U.S. electricity consumption (about 400 terrawatt-hours per year). The greatest of these resources is wave energy, with the most potential in Hawaii, Alaska, and the Pacific Northwest. The Department of Energy's (DOE's) Water Power Program works with industry, universities, other federal agencies, and DOE

  18. Economic evaluation of losses to electric power utilities caused by ash fouling. Final technical report, November 1, 1979-April 30, 1980

    SciTech Connect

    Burkhardt, F.R.; Persnger, M.M.

    1980-01-01

    Problems with convection ash fouling and wall slagging were considerable during our study. The Dakota lignites posed the greatest problems, particularly with fouling. The subbituminous coals had considerable problems, related mostly with wall slagging. The Texas lignites had few problems, and those were only associated with wall slagging. The generation losses were as follows: The Dakota lignite burning stations averaged an overall availability of 87.13%. Convection fouling outages were responsible for 57.75% of this outage time for a decrease in availability of 7.43%. Fouling was responsible for curtailment losses of 317,649 Mwh or 8.25% of the remaining available generation. Slagging was responsible for losses of 2732 megawatt hours or .07% of the remaining available generation. Total ash related losses amounted to 16.08% of the total available generation. The subbituminous burning stations averaged an overall availability of 78.36%. Total ash related losses amounted to 1.54% of the total available generation. The Texas lignite burning stations averaged an overall availability of 80.63%. No ash related outage losses occurred. Slagging curtailments accounted 0.08% of the total available generation. Costs due to ash fouling and slagging related curtailments are a tremendous sum. Seven power stations were studied for a six month period to assess costs. The total cost directly attributable to ash slagging and fouling condition was $20,638,113. Recommendations for reducing the problems involve soot blowers, control of furnace gas exit temperature, water blowers and more conservative boiler design.

  19. Plantwide Energy Assessment of a Sugarcane Farming and Processing Facility

    SciTech Connect

    Jakeway, L.A.; Turn, S.Q.; Keffer, V.I.; Kinoshita, C.M.

    2006-02-27

    A plantwide energy assessment was performed at Hawaiian Commercial & Sugar Co., an integrated sugarcane farming and processing facility on the island of Maui in the State of Hawaii. There were four main tasks performed for the plantwide energy assessment: 1) pump energy assessment in both field and factory operations, 2) steam generation assessment in the power production operations, 3) steam distribution assessment in the sugar manufacturing operation, and 4) electric power distribution assessment of the company system grid. The energy savings identified in each of these tasks were summarized in terms of fuel savings, electricity savings, or opportunity revenue that potentially exists mostly from increased electric power sales to the local electric utility. The results of this investigation revealed eight energy saving projects that can be implemented at HC&S. These eight projects were determined to have potential for $1.5 million in annual fuel savings or 22,337 MWh equivalent annual electricity savings. Most of the savings were derived from pump efficiency improvements and steam efficiency improvements both in generation and distribution. If all the energy saving projects were implemented and the energy savings were realized as less fuel consumed, there would be corresponding reductions in regulated air pollutants and carbon dioxide emissions from supplemental coal fuel. As HC&S is already a significant user of renewable biomass fuel for its operations, the projected reductions in air pollutants and emissions will not be as great compared to using only coal fuel for example. A classification of implementation priority into operations was performed for the identified energy saving projects based on payback period and ease of implementation.

  20. A Methodology for Estimating Large-Customer Demand Response MarketPotential

    SciTech Connect

    Goldman, Charles; Hopper, Nicole; Bharvirkar, Ranjit; Neenan,Bernie; Cappers,Peter

    2007-08-01

    Demand response (DR) is increasingly recognized as an essential ingredient to well-functioning electricity markets. DR market potential studies can answer questions about the amount of DR available in a given area and from which market segments. Several recent DR market potential studies have been conducted, most adapting techniques used to estimate energy-efficiency (EE) potential. In this scoping study, we: reviewed and categorized seven recent DR market potential studies; recommended a methodology for estimating DR market potential for large, non-residential utility customers that uses price elasticities to account for behavior and prices; compiled participation rates and elasticity values from six DR options offered to large customers in recent years, and demonstrated our recommended methodology with large customer market potential scenarios at an illustrative Northeastern utility. We observe that EE and DR have several important differences that argue for an elasticity approach for large-customer DR options that rely on customer-initiated response to prices, rather than the engineering approaches typical of EE potential studies. Base-case estimates suggest that offering DR options to large, non-residential customers results in 1-3% reductions in their class peak demand in response to prices or incentive payments of $500/MWh. Participation rates (i.e., enrollment in voluntary DR programs or acceptance of default hourly pricing) have the greatest influence on DR impacts of all factors studied, yet are the least well understood. Elasticity refinements to reflect the impact of enabling technologies and response at high prices provide more accurate market potential estimates, particularly when arc elasticities (rather than substitution elasticities) are estimated.

  1. Baker-Barry Tunnel Lighting: Evaluation of a Potential GATEWAY Demonstrations Project

    SciTech Connect

    Tuenge, Jason R.

    2011-06-28

    The U.S. Department of Energy is evaluating the Baker-Barry Tunnel as a potential GATEWAY Demonstrations project for deployment of solid-state lighting (SSL) technology. The National Park Service views this project as a possible proving ground and template for implementation of light-emitting diode (LED) luminaires in other tunnels, thereby expanding the estimated 40% energy savings from 132 MWh/yr to a much larger figure nationally. Most of the energy savings in this application is attributable to the instant-restrike capability of LED products and to their high tolerance for frequent on/off switching, used here to separately control either end of the tunnel during daytime hours. Some LED luminaires rival or outperform their high-intensity discharge (HID) counterparts in terms of efficacy, but options are limited, and smaller lumen packages preclude true one-for-one equivalence. However, LED products continue to improve in efficacy and affordability at a rate unmatched by other light source technologies; the estimated simple payback period of eight years (excluding installation costs and maintenance savings) can be expected to improve with time. The proposed revisions to the existing high-pressure sodium (HPS) lighting system would require slightly increased controls complexity and significantly increased luminaire types and quantities. In exchange, substantial annual savings (from reduced maintenance and energy use) would be complemented by improved quantity and quality of illumination. Although advanced lighting controls could offer additional savings, it is unclear whether such a system would prove cost-effective; this topic may be explored in future work.

  2. Tracer-level radioactive pilot-scale test of in situ vitrification for the stabilization of contaminated soil sites at ORNL

    SciTech Connect

    Spalding, B.P.; Jacobs, G.K.; Naney, M.T.; Dunbar, N.W.; Tixier, J.S.; Powell, T.D.

    1992-11-01

    A field demonstration of in situ vitrification (ISV) was completed in May 1991, and produced approximately 12 Mg of melted earthen materials containing 12.7 mCi of radioactivity within 500 g of sludge in amodel of an old seepage trench waste disposal unit. Past waste disposal operations at Oak Ridge National Laboratory have left several contaminated seepage sites. In planning for remediation of such sites, ISV technology has been identified as a leading candidate because of the high risks associated with any retrieval option and because of the usual high quality of vitreous waste form. Major isotopes placed in the test trench were {sup 137}Cs and {sup 90}Sr, with lesser amounts of {sup 6O}Co, {sup 241}Am, and {sup 239,240}Pu. A total of 29 MWh of electrical power was delivered to the ground over a 5-day period producing a melt depth of 8.5 ft. During melting, 2.4% of the {sup 137}Cs volatilized from the melt into an off-gas containment hood and was captured quantitatively on a high efficiency particulate air filter. No volatilization of {sup 90}Sr, {sup 241}Am, or {sup 239,240}Pu was detected and > 99.993% retention of these isotopes in the melt was estimated. The use of added rare earth tracers (Ce, La, and Nd), as surrogates for transuranic isotopes, led to estimated melt retentions of >99.9995% during the test. The molten material, composed of the native soil and dolomitic limestone used for filling the test trench, reached a processing temperature of 1500{degrees}C. Standardized leaching procedures using Product Consistency Testing indicated that the ISV product has excellent characteristics relative to other vitreous nuclear waste forms.

  3. TEP Power Partners Project [Tucson Electric Power

    SciTech Connect

    None, None

    2014-02-06

    The Arizona Governor’s Office of Energy Policy, in partnership with Tucson Electric Power (TEP), Tendril, and Next Phase Energy (NPE), formed the TEP Power Partners pilot project to demonstrate how residential customers could access their energy usage data and third party applications using data obtained from an Automatic Meter Reading (AMR) network. The project applied for and was awarded a Smart Grid Data Access grant through the U.S. Department of Energy. The project participants’ goal for Phase I is to actively engage 1,700 residential customers to demonstrate sustained participation, reduction in energy usage (kWh) and cost ($), and measure related aspects of customer satisfaction. This Demonstration report presents a summary of the findings, effectiveness, and customer satisfaction with the 15-month TEP Power Partners pilot project. The objective of the program is to provide residential customers with energy consumption data from AMR metering and empower these participants to better manage their electricity use. The pilot recruitment goals included migrating 700 existing customers from the completed Power Partners Demand Response Load Control Project (DRLC), and enrolling 1,000 new participants. Upon conclusion of the project on November 19, 2013; 1,390 Home Area Networks (HANs) were registered; 797 new participants installed a HAN; Survey respondents’ are satisfied with the program and found value with a variety of specific program components; Survey respondents report feeling greater control over their energy usage and report taking energy savings actions in their homes after participating in the program; On average, 43 % of the participants returned to the web portal monthly and 15% returned weekly; and An impact evaluation was completed by Opinion Dynamics and found average participant savings for the treatment period1 to be 2.3% of their household use during this period.2 In total, the program saved 163 MWh in the treatment period of 2013.

  4. Molten carbonate fuel cell product development test. Final report, September 30, 1992--March 31, 1997

    SciTech Connect

    1997-12-31

    This report summarizes the work performed for manufacturing and demonstrating the performance of its 250-kW molten carbonate fuel cell (MCFC) stack in an integrated system at the Naval Air Station Miramar (NAS Miramar) located in San Diego, California. The stack constructed for the demonstration test at the NAS Miramar consisted of 250 cells. It was manufactured using M-C Power`s patented Internally Manifolded Heat Exchanger (IMHEX{reg_sign}) stack design. The demonstration test at NAS Miramar was designed to operate the 250-kW MCFC stack in a cogeneration mode. This test represented the first attempt to thermally integrate an MCFC stack in a cogeneration system. The test was started on January 10, 1997, and voluntarily terminated on May 12, 1997, after 2,350 hours of operation at temperatures above 1,100 F and at a pressure of three atmospheres. It produced 160 MWh of d.c. power and 346,000 lbs of 110 psig steam for export during 1,566 hours of on-load operations. The test demonstrated a d.c. power output of 206 kW. Most of the balance of the plant (BOP) equipment operated satisfactorily. However, the off-the-shelf automotive turbocharger used for supplying air to the plant failed on numerous occasions and the hot gas blower developed seal leakage problems which impacted continuous plant operations. Overall the demonstration test at NAS Miramar was successful in demonstrating many critical features of the IMHEX technology. Lessons learned from this test will be very useful for improving designs and operations for future MCFC power plants.

  5. Tracer-level radioactive pilot-scale test of in situ vitrification for the stabilization of contaminated soil sites at ORNL

    SciTech Connect

    Spalding, B.P.; Jacobs, G.K.; Naney, M.T. ); Dunbar, N.W. ); Tixier, J.S.; Powell, T.D. )

    1992-11-01

    A field demonstration of in situ vitrification (ISV) was completed in May 1991, and produced approximately 12 Mg of melted earthen materials containing 12.7 mCi of radioactivity within 500 g of sludge in amodel of an old seepage trench waste disposal unit. Past waste disposal operations at Oak Ridge National Laboratory have left several contaminated seepage sites. In planning for remediation of such sites, ISV technology has been identified as a leading candidate because of the high risks associated with any retrieval option and because of the usual high quality of vitreous waste form. Major isotopes placed in the test trench were [sup 137]Cs and [sup 90]Sr, with lesser amounts of [sup 6O]Co, [sup 241]Am, and [sup 239,240]Pu. A total of 29 MWh of electrical power was delivered to the ground over a 5-day period producing a melt depth of 8.5 ft. During melting, 2.4% of the [sup 137]Cs volatilized from the melt into an off-gas containment hood and was captured quantitatively on a high efficiency particulate air filter. No volatilization of [sup 90]Sr, [sup 241]Am, or [sup 239,240]Pu was detected and > 99.993% retention of these isotopes in the melt was estimated. The use of added rare earth tracers (Ce, La, and Nd), as surrogates for transuranic isotopes, led to estimated melt retentions of >99.9995% during the test. The molten material, composed of the native soil and dolomitic limestone used for filling the test trench, reached a processing temperature of 1500[degrees]C. Standardized leaching procedures using Product Consistency Testing indicated that the ISV product has excellent characteristics relative to other vitreous nuclear waste forms.

  6. FINAL REPORT WIND POWER WARM SPRINGS RESERVATION TRIBAL LANDS DOE GRANT NUMBER DE-FG36-07GO17077 SUBMITTED BY WARM SPRINGS POWER & WATER ENTERPRISES A CORPORATE ENTITY OF THE CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF WARM SPRINGS WARM SPRINGS, OREGON

    SciTech Connect

    Jim Manion; Michael Lofting; Wil Sando; Emily Leslie; Randy Goff

    2009-03-30

    Wind Generation Feasibility Warm Springs Power and Water Enterprises (WSPWE) is a corporate entity owned by the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation, located in central Oregon. The organization is responsible for managing electrical power generation facilities on tribal lands and, as part of its charter, has the responsibility to evaluate and develop renewable energy resources for the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs. WSPWE recently completed a multi-year-year wind resource assessment of tribal lands, beginning with the installation of wind monitoring towers on the Mutton Mountains site in 2003, and collection of on-site wind data is ongoing. The study identified the Mutton Mountain site on the northeastern edge of the reservation as a site with sufficient wind resources to support a commercial power project estimated to generate over 226,000 MWh per year. Initial estimates indicate that the first phase of the project would be approximately 79.5 MW of installed capacity. This Phase 2 study expands and builds on the previously conducted Phase 1 Wind Resource Assessment, dated June 30, 2007. In order to fully assess the economic benefits that may accrue to the Tribes through wind energy development at Mutton Mountain, a planning-level opinion of probable cost was performed to define the costs associated with key design and construction aspects of the proposed project. This report defines the Mutton Mountain project costs and economics in sufficient detail to allow the Tribes to either build the project themselves or contract with a developer under the most favorable terms possible for the Tribes.

  7. Estimate of federal relighting potential and demand for efficient lighting products

    SciTech Connect

    Shankle, S.A.; Dirks, J.A.; Elliott, D.B.; Richman, E.E.; Grover, S.E.

    1993-11-01

    The increasing level of electric utility rebates for energy-efficient lighting retrofits has recently prompted concern over the adequacy of the market supply of energy-efficient lighting products (Energy User News 1991). In support of the U.S. Department of Energy`s Federal Energy Management Program, Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) has developed an estimate of the total potential for energy-efficient lighting retrofits in federally owned buildings. This estimate can be used to address the issue of the impact of federal relighting projects on the supply of energy-efficient lighting products. The estimate was developed in 1992, using 1991 data. Any investments in energy-efficient lighting products that occurred in 1992 will reduce the potential estimated here. This analysis proceeds by estimating the existing stock of lighting fixtures in federally owned buildings. The lighting technology screening matrix is then used to determine the minimum life-cycle cost retrofit for each type of existing lighting fixture. Estimates of the existing stock are developed for (1) four types of fluorescent lighting fixtures (2-, 3-, and 4-lamp, F40 4-foot fixtures, and 2-lamp, F96 8-foot fixtures, all with standard magnetic ballasts); (2) one type of incandescent fixture (a 75-watt single bulb fixture); and (3) one type of exit sign (containing two 20-watt incandescent bulbs). Estimates of the existing stock of lighting fixtures in federally owned buildings, estimates of the total potential demand for energy-efficient lighting products if all cost-effective retrofits were undertaken immediately, and total potential annual energy savings (in MWh and dollars), the total investment required to obtain the energy savings and the present value of the efficiency investment, are presented.

  8. PRELIMINARY TECHNICAL AND ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY STUDY ON THE INTEGRATION OF A PROCESS UTILIZING LOW-ENERGY SOLVENTS FOR CARBON DIOXIDE CAPTURE ENABLED BY A COMBINATION OF ENZYMES AND ULTRASONICS WITH A SUBCRITICAL PC POWER PLANT

    SciTech Connect

    Swaminathan, Saravanan; Kuczynska, Agnieszka; Hume, Scott; Mulgundmath, Vinay; Freeman, Charles; Bearden, Mark; Remias, Joe; Ambedkar, Balraj; Salmon, Sonja; House, Alan

    2012-11-01

    The results of the preliminary techno-economic assessment for integrating a process utilizing low-energy solvents for carbon dioxide (CO2) capture enabled by a combination of enzymes and ultrasonics with a subcritical pulverized coal (PC) power plant are presented. Four cases utilizing the enzyme-activated solvent are compared using different methodologies of regeneration against the DOE/NETL reference MEA case. The results are shown comparing the energy demand for post-combustion CO2 capture and the net higher heating value (HHV) efficiency of the power plant integrated with the post-combustion capture (PCC) plant. A levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) assessment was performed showing the costs of the options presented in the study. The key factors contributing to the reduction of LCOE were identified as enzyme make-up rate and the capability of the ultrasonic regeneration process. The net efficiency of the integrated PC power plant with CO2 capture changes from 24.9% with the reference Case 10 plant to between 24.34% and 29.97% for the vacuum regeneration options considered, and to between 26.63% and 31.41% for the ultrasonic regeneration options. The evaluation also shows the effect of the critical parameters on the LCOE, with the main variable being the initial estimation of enzyme dosing rate. The LCOE ($/MWh) values range from 112.92 to 125.23 for the vacuum regeneration options and from 108.9 to 117.50 for the ultrasonic regeneration cases considered in comparison to 119.6 for the reference Case 10. A sensitivity analysis of the effect of critical parameters on the LCOE was also performed. The results from the preliminary techno-economic assessment show that the proposed technology can be investigated further with a view to being a viable alternative to conventional CO2 scrubbing technologies.

  9. TidGen Power System Commercialization Project

    SciTech Connect

    Sauer, Christopher R.; McEntee, Jarlath

    2013-12-30

    Company on January 1, 2013 for up to 5 megawatts at a price of $215/MWh, escalating at 2.0% per year.

  10. Demontration of Integrated Optimization Software at the Baldwin Energy Complex

    SciTech Connect

    Rob James; John McDermott; Sanjay Patnaik; Steve Piche`

    2009-01-07

    This project encompassed the design, development, and demonstration of integrated online optimization systems at Dynegy Midwest Generation's Baldwin Energy Complex (BEC) located in Baldwin, Illinois. The overall project objective was to improve coal-based generation's emission profile, efficiency, maintenance requirements and plant asset life in order to enhance the long-term viability of the United States abundant coal resources. Five separate but integrated optimization products were developed, addressing combustion, sootblowing, SCR operations, overall unit thermal performance, and plant-wide availability optimization. Optimization results are inherently unit-specific and cannot be known for a particular generating unit in advance. However, NeuCo believed that the following were reasonable targets for the completed, integrated set of products: Furnace NOx reduction improvement by 5%, Heat rate improvement by 1.5%, Increase of annual Available MWh by 1.5%, Commensurate reductions in greenhouse gases, mercury, and particulates; and Commensurate increases in profitability from lower costs, improved reliability, and greater commercial availability. The goal during Phase I was to establish each system and demonstrate their integration in unified plant optimization. Efforts during Phase I focused on: (1) developing, deploying, integrating, and testing prototypes for each of the five products; (2) identifying and addressing issues required for the products to integrate with plant operations; and (3) systematically collecting and assimilating feedback to improve subsequent product releases. As described in the Phase II continuation application NeuCo successfully achieved the goal for Phase I. The goal of Phase II was to improve upon the products installed and tested in Phase I and to quantify the benefits of the integrated system. As this report documents, NeuCo has also successfully achieved the goal for Phase II. The overall results of the project, compared with the

  11. Recovery Act: Johnston Rhode Island Combined Cycle Electric Generating Plant Fueled by Waste Landfill Gas

    SciTech Connect

    Galowitz, Stephen

    2013-06-30

    systems, the Project established new national standards for best available control technology (BACT). 3) The Project will annually produce 365,292 MWh's of clean energy. 4) By destroying the methane in the landfill gas, the Project will generate CO{sub 2} equivalent reductions of 164,938 tons annually. The completed facility produces 28.3 MWnet and operates 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

  12. RECOVERY AND UTILIZATION OF COALMINE METHANE: PILOT-SCALE DEMONSTRATION PHASE

    SciTech Connect

    George Steinfeld; Jennifer Hunt

    2004-09-28

    A fuel cell demonstration was conducted on coalmine methane to demonstrate the utilization of methane emissions associated with underground coal mining operations in a carbonate Direct FuelCell{reg_sign} (DFC{reg_sign}) power plant. FuelCell Energy (FCE) conducted the demonstration with support from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) and in cooperation with Northwest Fuel Development, the operator of the Rose Valley test site in Hopedale, Ohio. The fuel cell power plant, a first generation sub megawatt power plant, was operated on CMM between August 1, 2003 and December 13, 2003. The direct fuel cell operated on low-Btu CMM with 42% methane content and achieved performance levels comparable to natural gas on a Btu feed basis. During this period 1456 hours on-load operation was achieved. The total power generated using CMM was 134 megawatt-hours (MWh) of electricity. The power generated was connected to the American Electric Power grid by a 69-kilovolt (kV) transformer. The maximum power level achieved was 140 kW. Efficiency of power generation was 40% based on the lower heating value (LHV) of the CMM. Compression and drying of the CMM resulted in additional parasitic load, which reduced the overall efficiency to 36 % LHV. In future applications, on-board compression and utilization of the saturated CMM without drying will be investigated in order to reduce the auxiliary power requirements. By comparison, the internal combustion engines operating on CMM at the Hopedale site operate at an over efficiency of 20%. The over-all efficiency for the fuel cell is therefore 80% higher than the internal combustion engine (36% vs. 20%). Future operation of a 250 kW Fuel Cell Power Plant on CMM will utilize 18,400,000 cubic feet of methane per year. This will be equivalent to: (a) avoiding 7428 metric tons of CO{sub 2} emissions, (b) avoiding 16.4 million pounds of CO{sub 2} emissions, (c) removing 1640 cars off the road for one

  13. Life cycle assessment of base-load heat sources for district heating system options

    SciTech Connect

    Ghafghazi, Saeed; Sowlati, T.; Sokhansanj, Shahabaddine; Melin, Staffan

    2011-03-01

    Purpose There has been an increased interest in utilizing renewable energy sources in district heating systems. District heating systems are centralized systems that provide heat for residential and commercial buildings in a community. While various renewable and conventional energy sources can be used in such systems, many stakeholders are interested in choosing the feasible option with the least environmental impacts. This paper evaluates and compares environmental burdens of alternative energy source options for the base load of a district heating center in Vancouver, British Columbia (BC) using the life cycle assessment method. The considered energy sources include natural gas, wood pellet, sewer heat, and ground heat. Methods The life cycle stages considered in the LCA model cover all stages from fuel production, fuel transmission/transportation, construction, operation, and finally demolition of the district heating system. The impact categories were analyzed based on the IMPACT 2002+ method. Results and discussion On a life-cycle basis, the global warming effect of renewable energy options were at least 200 kgeqCO2 less than that of the natural gas option per MWh of heat produced by the base load system. It was concluded that less than 25% of the upstream global warming impact associated with the wood pellet energy source option was due to transportation activities and about 50% of that was resulted from wood pellet production processes. In comparison with other energy options, the wood pellets option has higher impacts on respiratory of inorganics, terrestrial ecotoxicity, acidification, and nutrification categories. Among renewable options, the global warming impact of heat pump options in the studied case in Vancouver, BC, were lower than the wood pellet option due to BC's low carbon electricity generation profile. Ozone layer depletion and mineral extraction were the highest for the heat pump options due to extensive construction required for these

  14. State and Local Government Partnership

    SciTech Connect

    Barton, Alexander; Rinebold, Joel; Aresta, Paul

    2012-03-30

    The State and Local Government Partnership project has built relationships between the Department of Energy (DOE), regional states, and municipalities. CCAT implemented this project using a structure that included leadership by the DOE. Outreach was undertaken through collaborative meetings, workshops, and briefings; the development of technical models and local energy plans; support for state stakeholder groups; and implementation of strategies to facilitate the deployment of hydrogen and fuel cell technologies. The final guidance documents provided to stakeholders consisted of individual strategic state “Roadmaps” to serve as development plans. These “Roadmaps” confirm economic impacts, identify deployment targets, and compare policies and incentives for facility development in each of the regional states. The partnerships developed through this project have improved the exchange of knowledge between state and local government stakeholders and is expected to increase the deployment of hydrogen and fuel cell technologies in early market applications, consistent with the DOE’s market transformation efforts. Technically accurate and objective information was, and continues to be, provided to improve public and stakeholder perceptions regarding the use of hydrogen and fuel cell technologies. Based on the “Roadmaps” and studies conducted for this project, there is the potential to generate approximately 10.75 million megawatt hours (MWh) of electricity annually from hydrogen and fuel cell technologies at potential host sites in the Northeast regional states, through the development of 1,364 to 1,818 megawatts (MW) of fuel cell electric generation capacity. Currently, the region has approximately 1,180 companies that are part of the growing hydrogen and fuel cell industry supply chain in the region. These companies are estimated to have over $1 billion in annual revenue and investment, contribute more than $51 million in annual state and local tax revenue

  15. Electric Power Generation from Low to Intermediate Temperature Resources

    SciTech Connect

    Gosnold, William D.

    2015-06-18

    with ORC technology. Average co-produced water for 10,480 wells is 3.2 gallons per minute (gpm). Even excluding the tight formations, Bakken and Three Forks, average co-produced water for the remaining 3,337 is only 5 gpm. The output of the highest producing well is 184 gpm and the average of the top 100 wells is 52 gpm. Due to the depth of the oil producing formations in the Williston Basin, typically 3 km or greater, pumps are operated slowly to prevent watering out thus total fluid production is purposefully maintained at low volumes. There remain potential possibilities for development of geothermal fluids in the Williston Basin. Unitized fields in which water production from several tens of wells is collected at a single site are good possibilities for development. Water production in the unitized fields is greater than 1000 gpm is several areas. A similar possibility occurs where infill-drilling between Bakken and Three Forks horizontal wells has created areas where large volumes of geothermal fluids are available on multi-well pads and in unitized fields. Although the Bakken produces small amounts of water, the water/oil ration is typically less than 1, the oil and water mix produced at the well head can be sent through the heat exchanger on an ORC. It is estimated that several tens of MWh of power could be generated by a distributed system of ORC engines in the areas of high-density drilling in the Bakken Formation. Finally, horizontal drilling in water bearing formations is the other possibility. Several secondary recovery water-flood projects in the basin are producing water above 100 ⁰C at rates of 300 gpm to 850 gpm. Those systems also could produce several tens of MWh of power with ORC technology. Objective 3 of the project was highly successful. The program has produced 5 PhDs, 7 MS, and 3 BS students with theses in geothermal energy. The team has involved 7 faculty in 4 different engineering and science disciplines, ChE, EE, GE, and Geol. The team has

  16. Kauai Island Utility Cooperative energy storage study.

    SciTech Connect

    Akhil, Abbas Ali; Yamane, Mike; Murray, Aaron T.

    2009-06-01

    Sandia National Laboratories performed an assessment of the benefits of energy storage for the Kauai Island Utility Cooperative. This report documents the methodology and results of this study from a generation and production-side benefits perspective only. The KIUC energy storage study focused on the economic impact of using energy storage to shave the system peak, which reduces generator run time and consequently reduces fuel and operation and maintenance (O&M) costs. It was determined that a 16-MWh energy storage system would suit KIUC's needs, taking into account the size of the 13 individual generation units in the KIUC system and a system peak of 78 MW. The analysis shows that an energy storage system substantially reduces the run time of Units D1, D2, D3, and D5 - the four smallest and oldest diesel generators at the Port Allen generating plant. The availability of stored energy also evens the diurnal variability of the remaining generation units during the off- and on-peak periods. However, the net economic benefit is insufficient to justify a load-leveling type of energy storage system at this time. While the presence of storage helps reduce the run time of the smaller and older units, the economic dispatch changes and the largest most efficient unit in the KIUC system, the 27.5-MW steam-injected combustion turbine at Kapaia, is run for extra hours to provide the recharge energy for the storage system. The economic benefits of the storage is significantly reduced because the charging energy for the storage is derived from the same fuel source as the peak generation source it displaces. This situation would be substantially different if there were a renewable energy source available to charge the storage. Especially, if there is a wind generation resource introduced in the KIUC system, there may be a potential of capturing the load-leveling benefits as well as using the storage to dampen the dynamic instability that the wind generation could introduce into

  17. Yakima Tributary Access and Habitat Program, 2002-2003 Annual Report.

    SciTech Connect

    Myra, D.; Ready, C.

    2003-12-01

    made larger by complementary funding through NRSC EQIP, Irrigation Efficiencies, WA State Salmon Recovery Funding Board and other local, state and federal programs. Projects completed FY-03: The Cooke Creek siphon and screen/bypass was completed on time and within budget. The Rosbach Farms project was completed in cooperation with the NRCS Environmental Quality Incentives Program and the KCCD's Irrigation Efficiencies Program. Tributary survey teams were trained and surveys of tributaries in Yakima and Kittitas counties commenced in December of 2002. By the end of September 2003 Cowiche Creek in Yakima County was completed as well as Coleman, Reecer, Currier, Dry, Cabin, Indian, and Jack Creeks in Kittitas County. A screen was installed on the Hernandez/Ringer diversion in cooperation with the NRCS office in Kittitas County. YTAHP submitted six applications to the Salmon Recovery Funding Board and three were selected and funded. Another Salmon Recovery Funding Board project awarded in 2000 to the Yakama Nation was transferred to the KCCD. Two miles of fencing of riparian zones on the north fork Ahtanum was completed by the North Yakima Conservation District in cooperation with the Department of Natural Resources and the Ahtanum Irrigation District and funded by US fish and Wildlife as part of YTAHP's outreach partnering. Completion of this year's effort has provided significant inroads to working on the private lands in two counties which will be vital to future efforts by YTAHP and others to protect and enhance Yakima River Basin habitat. 2003 saw the migration of the WEB site from MWH to the Kittitas County Conservation District and can be accessed at www.kccd.net.

  18. Development and Evaluation of a Novel Integrated Vacuum Carbonate Absorption Process

    SciTech Connect

    Lu, Yongqi; Rostam-Abadi, Massoud; Ye, Xinhuai; Zhang, Shihan; Ruhter, David; Khodayari, Arezoo; Rood, Mark

    2012-04-30

    months at 50{degrees}C (122{degrees}F). Enzyme immobilization improved the CA enzyme?s thermal stability by up to three times compared to its free counterpart. 3) Two process modifications were proposed to improve the technical performance of the IVCAP for combined SO{sub 2} removal and CO{sub 2} capture. The results from a techno-economic study of a 528 MWe (gross) pulverized coal-fired, subcritical steam power plant revealed that the cost of CO{sub 2} avoidance with the IVCAP was about 30% lower than conventional MEA-based processes. The levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) of the IVCAP ranged from $40 to 46/MWh, an increase of 60 to 70% compared to a reference power plant without CO{sub 2} capture. The overall conclusion of this study is that the IVCAP is a technically feasible and economically more attractive process than available MEA-based processes. A scale-up study using the slipstream of an actual coal-derived flue gas and development of a more stable CA enzyme are recommended for future studies.

  19. COMMERCIALIZATION OF AN ATMOSPHERIC IRON-BASED CDCL PROCESS FOR POWER PRODUCTION. PHASE I: TECHNOECONOMIC ANALYSIS

    SciTech Connect

    Vargas, Luis

    2013-11-01

    Coal Direct Chemical Looping (CDCL) is an advanced oxy-combustion technology that has potential to enable substantial reductions in the cost and energy penalty associated with carbon dioxide (CO2) capture from coal-fired power plants. Through collaborative efforts, the Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group (B&W) and The Ohio State University (OSU) developed a conceptual design for a 550 MWe (net) supercritical CDCL power plant with greater than 90% CO2 capture and compression. Process simulations were completed to enable an initial assessment of its technical performance. A cost estimate was developed following DOE’s guidelines as outlined in NETL’s report “Quality Guidelines for Energy System Studies: Cost Estimation Methodology for NETL Assessments of Power Plant Performance”, (2011/1455). The cost of electricity for the CDCL plant without CO2 Transportation and Storage cost resulted in $ $102.67 per MWh, which corresponds to a 26.8 % increase in cost of electricity (COE) when compared to an air-fired pulverized-coal supercritical power plant. The cost of electricity is strongly depending on the total plant cost and cost of the oxygen carrier particles. The CDCL process could capture further potential savings by increasing the performance of the particles and reducing the plant size. During the techno-economic analysis, the team identified technology and engineering gaps that need to be closed to bring the technology to commercialization. The technology gaps were focused in five critical areas: (i) moving bed reducer reactor, (ii) fluidized bed combustor, (iii) particle riser, (iv) oxygen-carrier particle properties, and (v) process operation. The key technology gaps are related to particle performance, particle manufacturing cost, and the operation of the reducer reactor. These technology gaps are to be addressed during Phase II of project. The project team is proposing additional lab testing to be completed on the particle and a 3MWth pilot facility

  20. State Policies Provide Critical Support for Renewable Electricity

    SciTech Connect

    Barbose, Galen; Wiser, Ryan; Bolinger, Mark

    2008-07-15

    implementation of RPS policies. To date, wind energy has been the primary beneficiary of state RPS policies, representing approximately 83% of RPS-driven renewable capacity growth in the West through 2007. Geothermal energy occupies a distant second place, providing 7% of RPS-driven new renewable capacity in the West since the late 1990s, though geothermal's contribution on an energy (MWh) basis is higher. Looking to the future, a sizable quantity of renewable capacity beyond pre-RPS levels will be needed to meet state RPS mandates: about 25,000 MW by 2025 within the Western U.S. Geothermal energy is beginning to provide an increasingly significant contribution, as evidenced by the spate of new projects recently announced to meet state RPS requirements. Most of this activity has been driven by the RPS policies in California and Nevada, where the Geothermal Energy Association has identified 47 new geothermal projects, totaling more than 2,100 MW, in various stages of development. Additional geothermal projects in Arizona, New Mexico, Oregon, and Washington are also under development to meet those states RPS requirements. The other major state policy driver for renewable electricity growth, particularly in the West, is integrated resource planning (IRP). IRP was first formalized as a practice in the 1980s, but the practice was suspended in some states as electricity restructuring efforts began. A renewed interest in IRP has emerged in the past several years, however, with several Western states (California, Montana, and New Mexico) reestablishing IRP and others developing new rules to strengthen their existing processes. In its barest form, IRP simply requires that utilities periodically submit long-term resource procurement plans in which they evaluate alternative strategies for meeting their resource needs over the following ten to twenty years. However, many states have developed specific requirements for the IRP process that directly or indirectly support renewable energy. The