National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for uic underground injection

  1. Oregon Underground Injection Control Registration Application...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Form: Oregon Underground Injection Control Registration Application Fees (DEQ Form UIC 1003-GIC) Abstract Required fees and form...

  2. Underground Injection Control Permit Applications for FutureGen 2.0 Morgan County Class VI UIC Wells 1, 2, 3, and 4

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

    Tech/NETL Research | Department of Energy Underground CO2 Storage, Natural Gas Recovery Targeted by Virginia Tech/NETL Research Underground CO2 Storage, Natural Gas Recovery Targeted by Virginia Tech/NETL Research October 20, 2015 - 8:14am Addthis Researchers from Virginia Tech are injecting CO2 into coal seams in three locations in Buchanan County, Va., as part of an NETL-sponsored CO2 storage research project associated with enhanced gas recovery. Researchers from Virginia Tech are

  3. Oregon Underground Injection Control Program Authorized Injection...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Oregon Underground Injection Control Program Authorized Injection Systems Webpage Author Oregon Department of...

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

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

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

  5. Massachusetts Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Massachusetts Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 ...

  6. New Jersey Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) New Jersey Natural Gas ... Injections of Natural Gas into Underground Storage - All Operators New Jersey Underground ...

  7. Hawaii Underground Injection Control Permitting Webpage | Open...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Permitting Webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Hawaii Underground Injection Control Permitting Webpage Author State of Hawaii...

  8. Oregon Underground Injection Control Registration Geothermal...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Form: Oregon Underground Injection Control Registration Geothermal Heating Systems (DEQ Form UICGEO-1004(f)) Abstract Required...

  9. Washington Environmental Permit Handbook - Underground Injection...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Underground Injection Control Registration webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Washington Environmental Permit Handbook -...

  10. EPA - Underground Injection Control Classes of Wells webpage...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Underground Injection Control Classes of Wells webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: EPA - Underground Injection Control Classes of...

  11. Idaho Underground Injection Control Program Webpage | Open Energy...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

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

  12. Vermont Underground Injection Control Rule | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Underground Injection Control Rule Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- RegulationRegulation: Vermont Underground Injection Control...

  13. North Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) North Carolina Natural ... Injections of Natural Gas into Underground Storage - All Operators North Carolina ...

  14. Iowa Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Iowa Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov...

  15. WAC - 173-218 Underground Injection Control Program | Open Energy...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    8 Underground Injection Control Program Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- RegulationRegulation: WAC - 173-218 Underground Injection...

  16. Wisconsin Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Wisconsin Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 ...

  17. Delaware Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 ...

  18. Connecticut Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Connecticut Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 ...

  19. Utah Underground Injection Control Program Webpage | Open Energy...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Injection Control Program Webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Utah Underground Injection Control Program Webpage Abstract Provides...

  20. UIC permitting process for class IID and Class III wells: Protection of drinking water in New York State

    SciTech Connect

    Hillenbrand, C.J.

    1995-09-01

    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region II, Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program regulates injection wells in the State of New York to protect drinking water; UIC regulations can be found under Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations Parts 124, 144, 146 and 147. Operators of solution mining injection wells (UIC Class IIIG) and produced fluid disposal wells (UIC Class IID) are required to obtain an UIC permit for authorization to inject. The permitting process requires submittal of drinking water, geologic and proposed operational data in order to assure that pressure build-up within the injection zone will not compromise confining layers and allow vertical migration of fluid into Underground Sources of Drinking Water (USDW). Additional data is required within an Area of Review (AOR), defined as an area determined by the intersection of the adjusted potentiometric surface produced by injection and a depth 50 feet below the base of the lowermost USDW, or a radius of 1/4 mile around the injection well, whichever is greater. Locations of all wells in the AOR must be identified, and completion reports and plugging reports must be submitted. Requirements are set for maximum injection pressure and flow rates, monitoring of brine properties of the injection well and monitoring of water supply wells in the AOR for possible contamination. Any noncompliance with permit requirements constitutes a violation of the Safe Drinking Water Act and is grounds for enforcement action, including possible revocation of permit. Presently four Class IID wells are authorized under permit in New York State. The Queenston sandstone, Medina sandstone, Salina B, Akron dolomite and Oriskany sandstone have been used for brine disposal; the lower Ordovician-Cambrian section is currently being considered as an injection zone. Over one hundred Class IIIG wells are authorized under permit in New York State and all have been utilized for solution mining of the Syracuse salt.

  1. Hawaii Underground Injection Control Program Webpage | Open Energy...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Program Webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Hawaii Underground Injection Control Program Webpage Author State of Hawaii Department...

  2. Oregon Underground Injection Control Program Webpage | Open Energy...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Oregon Underground Injection Control Program Webpage Abstract Provides overview of regulations...

  3. Oregon Fees for Underground Injection Control Program Fact Sheet...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Fees for Underground Injection Control Program Fact Sheet Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library PermittingRegulatory Guidance - Supplemental Material:...

  4. Hawaii Underground Injection Control Permit Packet | Open Energy...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    PermittingRegulatory Guidance - Supplemental Material: Hawaii Underground Injection Control Permit PacketPermittingRegulatory GuidanceSupplemental Material Author State of...

  5. EPA - Ground Water Discharges (EPA's Underground Injection Control...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Ground Water Discharges (EPA's Underground Injection Control Program) webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: EPA - Ground Water...

  6. WSDE Underground Injection Control Well Registration Form | Open...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Injection Control Well Registration Form Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- Permit ApplicationPermit Application: WSDE Underground...

  7. Idaho Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Idaho Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 ...

  8. Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 ...

  9. Georgia Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Georgia Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 ...

  10. State Assistance with Risk-Based Data Management: Inventory and needs assessment of 25 state Class II Underground Injection Control programs. Phase 1

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1992-07-01

    As discussed in Section I of the attached report, state agencies must decide where to direct their limited resources in an effort to make optimum use of their available manpower and address those areas that pose the greatest risk to valuable drinking water sources. The Underground Injection Practices Research Foundation (UIPRF) proposed a risk-based data management system (RBDMS) to provide states with the information they need to effectively utilize staff resources, provide dependable documentation to justify program planning, and enhance environmental protection capabilities. The UIPRF structured its approach regarding environmental risk management to include data and information from production, injection, and inactive wells in its RBDMS project. Data from each of these well types is critical to the complete statistical evaluation of environmental risk and selected automated functions. This comprehensive approach allows state Underground Injection Control (UIC) programs to effectively evaluate the risk of contaminating underground sources of drinking water, while alleviating the additional work and associated problems that often arise when separate data bases are used. CH2M Hill and Digital Design Group, through a DOE grant to the UIPRF, completed an inventory and needs assessment of 25 state Class II UIC programs. The states selected for participation by the UIPRF were generally chosen based on interest and whether an active Class II injection well program was in place. The inventory and needs assessment provided an effective means of collecting and analyzing the interest, commitment, design requirements, utilization, and potential benefits of implementing a in individual state UIC programs. Personal contacts were made with representatives from each state to discuss the applicability of a RBDMS in their respective state.

  11. Title 40 CFR 144 Underground Injection Control Program | Open...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    44 Underground Injection Control Program Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- Federal RegulationFederal Regulation: Title 40 CFR 144...

  12. AGA Western Consuming Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    AGA Western Consuming Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1994 2,449 542 13,722 29,089 ...

  13. Rhode Island Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Rhode Island Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 97 243 137 1990's 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 10/31/2016 Next Release Date: 11/30/2016 Referring Pages: Injections of

  14. South Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) South Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 48 80 70 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 10/31/2016 Next Release Date: 11/30/2016 Referring Pages: Injections of Natural Gas

  15. Rhode Island Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Rhode Island Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1995 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 10/31/2016 Next Release Date: 11/30/2016 Referring Pages: Injections of Natural Gas into Underground

  16. H.A.R. 11-23 - Underground Injection Control | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    3 - Underground Injection Control Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- RegulationRegulation: H.A.R. 11-23 - Underground Injection...

  17. AGA Producing Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) AGA Producing Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1994 20,366 29,330 55,297 93,538 129,284 83,943 104,001 98,054 88,961 65,486 49,635 27,285 1995 24,645 25,960 57,833 78,043 101,019 100,926 77,411 54,611 94,759 84,671 40,182 33,836 1996 34,389 48,922 38,040 76,100 98,243 88,202 88,653 109,284 125,616 91,618 37,375

  18. East Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) East Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013 16,843 6,411 17,023 86,311 133,867 127,512 86,944 99,113 102,640 71,127 33,857 19,392 2014 9,107 10,259 22,569 71,857 144,145 132,960 120,491 118,493 122,207 94,669 33,103 25,810 2015 8,399 5,034 16,192 88,291 149,749 130,181 108,902 114,713 101,145 71,500 40,008 27,824 2016 8,190 15,514

  19. EPA - UIC Well Classifications | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Well Classifications Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: EPA - UIC Well Classifications Author Environmental Protection Agency Published...

  20. UAC R371-7 - Underground Injection Control Program | Open Energy...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    71-7 - Underground Injection Control Program Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- RegulationRegulation: UAC R371-7 - Underground...

  1. ,"U.S. Natural Gas Salt Underground Storage Activity-Injects...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...dnavnghistn5440us2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ... 1: U.S. Natural Gas Salt Underground Storage Activity-Injects (MMcf)" ...

  2. University of Illinois Chicago UIC | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Chicago UIC Jump to: navigation, search Name: University of Illinois - Chicago (UIC) Place: Chicago, Illinois Zip: 60607-7113 Product: Public research university with a research...

  3. The implications of UIC and NPDES regulations on selection of disposal options for spent geothermal brine

    SciTech Connect

    1982-07-01

    This document reviews and evaluates the various options for the disposal of geothermal wastewater with respect to the promulgated regulations for the protection of surface and groundwaters. The Clean Water Act of 1977 and the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments are especially important when designing disposal systems for geothermal fluids. The former promulgates regulations concerning the discharge of wastewater into surface waters, while the latter is concerned with the protection of ground water aquifers through the establishment of underground injection control (UIC) programs. There is a specific category for geothermal fluid discharge if injection is to be used as a method of disposal. Prior to February 1982, the UIC regulations required geothermal power plant to use Class III wells and direct use plants to use Class V wells. More stringent regulatory requirements, including construction specification and monitoring, are imposed on the Class III wells. On February 3, 1982, the classification of geothermal injection wells was changed from a Class III to Class V on the basis that geothermal wells do not inject for the extraction of minerals or energy, but rather they are used to inject brines, from which heat has been extracted, into formations from which they were originally taken. This reclassification implies that a substantial cost reduction will be realized for geothermal fluid injection primarily because well monitoring is no longer mandatory. The Clean Water Act of 1977 provides the legal basis for regulating the discharge of liquid effluent into the nation's surface waters, through a permitting system called the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Discharge quantities, rates, concentrations and temperatures are regulated by the NPDES permits. These permits systems are based upon effluent guidelines developed by EPA on an industry by industry basis. For geothermal energy industry, effluent guidelines have not been formulated and are not

  4. ,"U.S. Natural Gas Non-Salt Underground Storage Injections (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...dnavnghistn5540us2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ... 1: U.S. Natural Gas Non-Salt Underground Storage Injections (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5540US2" ...

  5. South Central Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 43,713 72,210 68,273 129,736 166,816 139,578 127,533 106,014 152,936 188,366...

  6. Mountain Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 3,332 3,794 5,368 10,280 21,621 24,914 25,040 22,154 20,026 18,254 8,894...

  7. WSDE Online System for Registering UIC Wells webpage | Open Energy...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    developers to register their UIC wells online. Author Washington State Department of Ecology Published Washington State Department of Ecology, 2014 DOI Not Provided Check for DOI...

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

    ScienceCinema

    Oldenburg, Curtis M [LBNL Earth Sciences Division

    2016-07-12

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

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

    SciTech Connect

    Oldenburg, Curtis M

    2009-07-21

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

  10. ,"Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Injections All Operators (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)",1,"Annual",1975 ,"Release Date:","10/31/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","11/30/2016" ,"Excel File

  11. ,"Connecticut Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Injections All Operators (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Connecticut Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)",1,"Annual",1996 ,"Release Date:","10/31/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","11/30/2016" ,"Excel File

  12. ,"Delaware Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Injections All Operators (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Delaware Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)",1,"Annual",1975 ,"Release Date:","10/31/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","11/30/2016" ,"Excel File

  13. ,"Georgia Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Injections All Operators (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Georgia Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)",1,"Annual",1975 ,"Release Date:","10/31/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","11/30/2016" ,"Excel File

  14. ,"Idaho Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Injections All Operators (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Idaho Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)",1,"Annual",1975 ,"Release Date:","10/31/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","11/30/2016" ,"Excel File

  15. ,"Massachusetts Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Injections All Operators (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Massachusetts Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)",1,"Annual",1975 ,"Release Date:","10/31/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","11/30/2016" ,"Excel File

  16. ,"Wisconsin Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Injections All Operators (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Wisconsin Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)",1,"Annual",1973 ,"Release Date:","10/31/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","11/30/2016" ,"Excel File

  17. ,"New Jersey Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Injections All Operators (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Jersey Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)",1,"Annual",1996 ,"Release Date:","10/31/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","11/30/2016" ,"Excel File

  18. ,"North Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Injections All Operators (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","North Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)",1,"Annual",1996 ,"Release Date:","10/31/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","11/30/2016" ,"Excel File

  19. ,"South Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Injections All Operators (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","South Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)",1,"Annual",1975 ,"Release Date:","10/31/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","11/30/2016" ,"Excel File

  20. Injection of FGD Grout to Abate Acid Mine Drainage in Underground Coal Mines

    SciTech Connect

    Mafi, S.; Damian, M.T.; Senita, R.E.; Jewitt, W.C.; Bair, S.; Chin, Y.C.; Whitlatch, E.; Traina, S.; Wolfe, W.

    1997-07-01

    Acid Mine Drainage (AMD) from abandoned underground coal mines in Ohio is a concern for both residents and regulatory agencies. Effluent from these mines is typically characterized by low pH and high iron and sulfate concentrations and may contaminate local drinking-water supplies and streams. The objective of this project is to demonstrate the technical feasibility of injecting cementitious alkaline materials, such as Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD) material to mitigate current adverse environmental impacts associated with AMD in a small, abandoned deep mine in Coshocton County Ohio. The Flue Gas Desulfurization material will be provided from American Electric Power`s (AEP) Conesville Plant. It will be injected as a grout mix that will use Fixated Flue Gas Desulfurization material and water. The subject site for this study is located on the border of Coshocton and Muskingum Counties, Ohio, approximately 1.5 miles south-southwest of the town of Wills Creek. The study will be performed at an underground mine designated as Mm-127 in the Ohio Department of Natural Resources register, also known as the Roberts-Dawson Mine. The mine operated in the mid-1950s, during which approximately 2 million cubic feet of coal was removed. Effluent discharging from the abandoned mine entrances has low pH in the range of 2.8-3.0 that drains directly into Wills Creek Lake. The mine covers approximately 14.6 acres. It is estimated that 26,000 tons of FGD material will be provided from AEP`s Conesville Power Plant located approximately 3 miles northwest of the subject site.

  1. State and national energy environmental risk analysis systems for underground injection control. Final report, April 7, 1992--May 31, 1995

    SciTech Connect

    1995-05-01

    The purpose of this effort is to develop and demonstrate the concept of a national Energy and Environmental Risk Analysis System that could support DOE policy analysis and decision-making. That effort also includes the development and demonstration of a methodology for assessing the risks of groundwater contamination from underground injection operations. EERAS is designed to enhance DOE`s analytical capabilities by working with DOE`s existing resource analysis models for oil and gas. The full development of EERAS was not planned as part of this effort. The design and structure for the system were developed, along with interfaces that facilitate data input to DOE`s other analytical tools. The development of the database for EERAS was demonstrated with the input of data related to underground injection control, which also supported the risk assessment being performed. The utility of EERAS has been demonstrated by this effort and its continued development is recommended. Since the absolute risk of groundwater contamination due to underground injection is quite low, the risk assessment methodology focuses on the relative risk of groundwater contamination. The purpose of this methodology is to provide DOE with an enhanced understanding of the relative risks posed nationwide as input to DOE decision-making and resource allocation. Given data problems encountered, a broad assessment of all oil reservoirs in DOE`s resource database was not possible. The methodology was demonstrated using a sample of 39 reservoirs in 15 states. While data difficulties introduce substantial uncertainties, the results found are consistent with expectations and with prior analyses. Therefore the methodology for performing assessments appears to be sound. Recommendations on steps that can be taken to resolve uncertainties or obtain improved data are included in the report.

  2. Geomechanical effects on CO{sub 2} leakage through fault zones during large-scale underground injection

    SciTech Connect

    Rinaldi, A.P.; Rutqvist, J.; Cappa, F.

    2013-09-01

    The importance of geomechanics—including the potential for faults to reactivate during large scale geologic carbon sequestration operations—has recently become more widely recognized. However, notwithstanding the potential for triggering notable (felt) seismic events, the potential for buoyancy-driven CO{sub 2} to reach potable groundwater and the ground surface is actually more important from public safety and storage-efficiency perspectives. In this context, this work extends the previous studies on the geomechanical modeling of fault responses during underground carbon dioxide injection, focusing on the short-term integrity of the sealing caprock, and hence on the potential for leakage of either brine or CO{sub 2} to reach the shallow groundwater aquifers during active injection. We consider stress/strain-dependent permeability and study the leakage through the fault zone as its permeability changes during a reactivation, also causing seismicity. We analyze several scenarios related to the volume of CO{sub 2} injected (and hence as a function of the overpressure), involving both minor and major faults, and analyze the profile risks of leakage for different stress/strain-permeability coupling functions. We conclude that whereas it is very difficult to predict how much fault permeability could change upon reactivation, this process can have a significant impact on the leakage rate. Moreover, our analysis shows that induced seismicity associated with fault reactivation may not necessarily open up a new flow path for leakage. Results show a poor correlation between magnitude and amount of fluid leakage, meaning that a single event is generally not enough to substantially change the permeability along the entire fault length. Consequently, even if some changes in permeability occur, this does not mean that the CO{sub 2} will migrate up along the entire fault, breaking through the caprock to enter the overlying aquifer.

  3. RAPID/Roadmap/14-NM-c | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Geothermal Hydropower Solar Tools Contribute Contact Us Underground Injection Control Permit (14-NM-c) The Underground Injection Control (UIC) Permit process in New Mexico...

  4. Rapid Qualitative Risk Assessment for Contaminant Leakage From Coal Seams During Underground Coal Gasification and CO2 Injection

    SciTech Connect

    Friedmann, S J

    2004-07-02

    One of the major risks associated with underground coal gasification is contamination of local aquifers with a variety of toxic compounds. It is likely that the rate, volume, extent, and concentrations of contaminant plumes will depend on the local permeability field near the point of gasification. This field depends heavily on the geological history of stratigraphic deposition and the specifics of stratigraphic succession. Some coals are thick and isolated, whereas others are thinner and more regionally expressed. Some coals are overlain by impermeable units, such as marine or lacustrine shales, whereas others are overlain by permeable zones associated with deltaic or fluvial successions. Rapid stratigraphic characterization of the succession provides first order information as to the general risk of contaminant escape, which provides a means of ranking coal contaminant risks by their depositional context. This risk categorization could also be used for ranking the relative risk of CO{sub 2} escape from injected coal seams. Further work is needed to verify accuracy and provide some quantification of risks.

  5. Issues Related to Seismic Activity Induced by the Injection of CO2 in Deep Saline Aquifers

    SciTech Connect

    Sminchak, Joel; Gupta, Neeraj; Byrer, Charles; Bergman, Perry

    2001-05-31

    Case studies, theory, regulation, and special considerations regarding the disposal of carbon dioxide (CO2) into deep saline aquifers were investigated to assess the potential for induced seismic activity. Formations capable of accepting large volumes of CO2 make deep well injection of CO2 an attractive option. While seismic implications must be considered for injection facilities, induced seismic activity may be prevented through proper siting, installation, operation, and monitoring. Instances of induced seismic activity have been documented at hazardous waste disposal wells, oil fields, and other sites. Induced seismic activity usually occurs along previously faulted rocks and may be investigated by analyzing the stress conditions at depth. Seismic events are unlikely to occur due to injection in porous rocks unless very high injection pressures cause hydraulic fracturing. Injection wells in the United States are regulated through the Underground Injection Control (UIC) program. UIC guidance requires an injection facility to perform extensive characterization, testing, and monitoring. Special considerations related to the properties of CO2 may have seismic ramifications to a deep well injection facility. Supercritical CO2 liquid is less dense than water and may cause density-driven stress conditions at depth or interact with formation water and rocks, causing a reduction in permeability and pressure buildup leading to seismic activity. Structural compatibility, historical seismic activity, cases of seismic activity triggered by deep well injection, and formation capacity were considered in evaluating the regional seismic suitability in the United States. Regions in the central, midwestern, and southeastern United States appear best suited for deep well injection. In Ohio, substantial deep well injection at a waste disposal facility has not caused seismic events in a seismically active area. Current

  6. Pore Models Track Reactions in Underground Carbon Capture

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

    extract from saline aquifers deep underground. The goal is to learn what will happen when fluids pass through the material should power plants inject carbon dioxide underground. ...

  7. Dynamic Underground Stripping Project

    SciTech Connect

    Aines, R.; Newmark, R.; McConachie, W.; Udell, K.; Rice, D.; Ramirez, A.; Siegel, W.; Buettner, M.; Daily, W.; Krauter, P.; Folsom, E.; Boegel, A.J.; Bishop, D.; Udell, K.

    1992-01-01

    LLNL is collaborating with the UC Berkeley College of Engineering to develop and demonstrate a system of thermal remediation and underground imaging techniques for use in rapid cleanup of localized underground spills. Called ``Dynamic Stripping`` to reflect the rapid and controllable nature of the process, it will combine steam injection, direct electrical heating, and tomographic geophysical imaging in a cleanup of the LLNL gasoline spill. In the first 8 months of the project, a Clean Site engineering test was conducted to prove the field application of the techniques before moving the contaminated site in FY 92.

  8. Underground CO2 Storage, Natural Gas Recovery Targeted by Virginia...

    Energy.gov [DOE] (indexed site)

    of injecting captured carbon dioxide (CO2) into organic-rich rocks, deep underground, to permanently store the greenhouse gas while simultaneously recovering natural gas. ...

  9. Evaluation of injection well risk management potential in the Williston Basin

    SciTech Connect

    1989-09-01

    The UIC regulations promulgated by the EPA under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) provide the EPA, or an EPA approved state agency, with authority to regulate subsurface injection of fluids to protect USDWs. Oil and gas producing industry interests are concerned primarily with Class 2 wells whose uses as defined by UIC regulations are: disposal of fluids brought to the surface and liquids generated in connection with oil and gas production (SWD); injection of fluids for enhanced oil recovery (EOR); and storage of liquid hydrocarbons. The Williston Basin was chosen for the pilot study of the feasibility of using the risk approach in managing Class 2 injection operations for the following reasons: it is one of the nine geologic basins which was classified as having a significant potential for external casing corrosion, which permitted an evaluation of the effectiveness of the injection well corrosion control measures used by industry; there are 731 active, 22 shut in and 203 temporarily abandoned SWD and water injection wells in the basin; and the basin covers three states. The broad objective of the Williston Basin study is to define requirements and to investigate the feasibility of incorporating risk management into administration of the UIC program. The study does not address the reporting aspects of UIC regulatory and compliance activities but the data base does contain essentially all the information required to develop the reports needed to monitor those activities. 16 refs., 10 figs., 11 tabs.

  10. Pore Models Track Reactions in Underground Carbon Capture

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

    Pore Models Track Reactions in Underground Carbon Capture Pore Models Track Reactions in Underground Carbon Capture September 25, 2014 trebotich2 Computed pH on calcite grains at 1 micron resolution. The iridescent grains mimic crushed material geoscientists extract from saline aquifers deep underground to study with microscopes. Researchers want to model what happens to the crystals' geochemistry when the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide is injected underground for sequestration. Image courtesy of

  11. Dynamic Underground Stripping Demonstration Project

    SciTech Connect

    Aines, R.; Newmark, R.; McConachie, W.; Rice, D.; Ramirez, A.; Siegel, W.; Buettner, M.; Daily, W.; Krauter, P.; Folsom, E.; Boegel, A.J.; Bishop, D. ); udel, K. . Dept. of Mechanical Engineering)

    1992-03-01

    LLNL is collaborating with the UC Berkeley College of Engineering to develop and demonstrate a system of thermal remediation and underground imaging techniques for use in rapid cleanup of localized underground spills. Called Dynamic Stripping'' to reflect the rapid and controllable nature of the process, it will combine steam injection, direct electrical heating, and tomographic geophysical imaging in a cleanup of the LLNL gasoline spill. In the first 8 months of the project, a Clean Site engineering test was conducted to prove the field application of the techniques before moving to the contaminated site in FY 92.

  12. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    335,966 303,286 315,183 321,757 265,901 332,183 293,596 364,262 372,402 357,234 1980's 212,048 360,752 405,477 284,948 362,878 350,022 249,028 335,166 377,046 572,180 1990's ...

  13. Underground Coal Gasification Program

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center

    1994-12-01

    CAVSIM is a three-dimensional, axisymmetric model for resource recovery and cavity growth during underground coal gasification (UCG). CAVSIM is capable of following the evolution of the cavity from near startup to exhaustion, and couples explicitly wall and roof surface growth to material and energy balances in the underlying rubble zones. Growth mechanisms are allowed to change smoothly as the system evolves from a small, relatively empty cavity low in the coal seam to a large,more » almost completely rubble-filled cavity extending high into the overburden rock. The model is applicable to nonswelling coals of arbitrary seam thickness and can handle a variety of gas injection flow schedules or compositions. Water influx from the coal aquifer is calculated by a gravity drainage-permeation submodel which is integrated into the general solution. The cavity is considered to consist of up to three distinct rubble zones and a void space at the top. Resistance to gas flow injected from a stationary source at the cavity floor is assumed to be concentrated in the ash pile, which builds up around the source, and also the overburden rubble which accumulates on top of this ash once overburden rock is exposed at the cavity top. Char rubble zones at the cavity side and edges are assumed to be highly permeable. Flow of injected gas through the ash to char rubble piles and the void space is coupled by material and energy balances to cavity growth at the rubble/coal, void/coal and void/rock interfaces. One preprocessor and two postprocessor programs are included - SPALL calculates one-dimensional mean spalling rates of coal or rock surfaces exposed to high temperatures and generates CAVSIM input: TAB reads CAVSIM binary output files and generates ASCII tables of selected data for display; and PLOT produces dot matrix printer or HP printer plots from TAB output.« less

  14. Vitrified underground structures

    DOEpatents

    Murphy, Mark T.; Buelt, James L.; Stottlemyre, James A.; Tixier, Jr., John S.

    1992-01-01

    A method of making vitrified underground structures in which 1) the vitrification process is started underground, and 2) a thickness dimension is controlled to produce substantially planar vertical and horizontal vitrified underground structures. Structures may be placed around a contaminated waste site to isolate the site or may be used as aquifer dikes.

  15. Going underground. [Review

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1980-10-01

    Underground space is increasingly used for energy-saving and secure storage that is often less expensive and more aesthetically pleasing than conventional facilities. Petroleum, pumped hydro, water, and sewage are among the large-scale needs that can be met by underground storage. Individual buildings can store chilled water underground for summer cooling. Windowless aboveground buildings are suitable and even more efficient if they are underground. The discovery of ancient underground cities indicates that the concept can be reapplied to relieve urban centers and save energy as is already done to a large extent in China and elsewhere. A national commitment to solar energy will benefit from increased use of underground space. Kansas City is among several cities which are developing the subsurface with success, businesses and schools having found the underground environment to have many benefits. More construction experience is needed, however, to help US lenders overcome their reluctance to finance earth-sheltered projects. (DCK)

  16. Underground laboratories in Asia

    SciTech Connect

    Lin, Shin Ted; Yue, Qian

    2015-08-17

    Deep underground laboratories in Asia have been making huge progress recently because underground sites provide unique opportunities to explore the rare-event phenomena for the study of dark matter searches, neutrino physics and nuclear astrophysics as well as the multi-disciplinary researches based on the low radioactive environments. The status and perspectives of Kamioda underground observatories in Japan, the existing Y2L and the planned CUP in Korea, India-based Neutrino Observatory (INO) in India and China JinPing Underground Laboratory (CJPL) in China will be surveyed.

  17. Working Gas in Underground Storage Figure

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Gas in Underground Storage Figure Working Gas in Underground Storage Compared with 5-Year Range Graph...

  18. Builders go underground

    SciTech Connect

    McGrath, D.J.

    1982-01-01

    The appeal of earth-sheltered housing increased last year when 1000 new underground houses brought the national total to about 5000. Innovative construction and management techniques help, such as the Terra-Dome's moldset and equipment, which the company sells to builders under a license arrangement. Attention is given to aesthetic appeal as well as to energy savings. The Everstrong company builds all-wood underground houses to cut down on humidity and increase resistance to natural disasters. Tight mortgage money has been a serious problem for underground as well as conventional builders. (DCK)

  19. Overview of the Dynamic Underground Stripping demonstration project

    SciTech Connect

    Aines, R.; Newmark, R.; McConachie, W.; Rice, D.; Ramirez, A.; Siegel, W.; Buettner, M.; Daily, W.; Krauter, P.; Folsom, E.; Boegel, A.J.; Bishop, D.; Udell, K.

    1992-08-01

    Dynamic Underground Stripping is a limited-scope demonstration of a system of thermal remediation and underground imaging techniques for use in rapid cleanup of localized underground spills. Called ``Dynamic Stripping`` to reflect the rapid and controllable nature of the process, it combines steam injection, direct electrical heating, and tomographic geophysical imaging in a cleanup of the LLNL gasoline spill. The system is targeted toward the removal of free-phase organics of all kinds. The LLNL gasoline spill is a convenient test site because much of the gasoline has been trapped below the water table, mimicking the behavior of dense organic liquids.

  20. Dynamic underground stripping to remediate a deep hydrocarbon spill

    SciTech Connect

    Yow, J.L. Jr.; Aines, R.D.; Newmark, R.L.

    1995-09-01

    Dynamic Underground Stripping is a combination of in situ steam injection, electrical resistance heating, and fluid extraction for rapid removal and recovery of subsurface contaminants such as solvents or fuels. Underground imaging and other measurement techniques monitor the system in situ for process control. Field tests at a deep gasoline spill at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory recovered over 26,500 liters (7000 gallons) of gasoline during several months of field operations. Preliminary analysis of system cost and performance indicate that Dynamic Underground Stripping compares favorably with conventional pump-and-treat methods and vacuum extraction schemes for removing non-aqueous phase liquids (NAPLs) such as gasoline from deep subsurface plumes.

  1. Overview of the Dynamic Underground Stripping demonstration project

    SciTech Connect

    Aines, R.; Newmark, R.; McConachie, W.; Rice, D.; Ramirez, A.; Siegel, W.; Buettner, M.; Daily, W.; Krauter, P.; Folsom, E.; Boegel, A.J.; Bishop, D. ); Udell, K. . Dept. of Mechanical Engineering)

    1992-08-01

    Dynamic Underground Stripping is a limited-scope demonstration of a system of thermal remediation and underground imaging techniques for use in rapid cleanup of localized underground spills. Called Dynamic Stripping'' to reflect the rapid and controllable nature of the process, it combines steam injection, direct electrical heating, and tomographic geophysical imaging in a cleanup of the LLNL gasoline spill. The system is targeted toward the removal of free-phase organics of all kinds. The LLNL gasoline spill is a convenient test site because much of the gasoline has been trapped below the water table, mimicking the behavior of dense organic liquids.

  2. Science @WIPP: Underground Laboratory

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

    WIPP Underground Laboratory Double Beta Decay Dark Matter Biology Repository Science Renewable Energy Underground Laboratory The deep geologic repository at WIPP provides an ideal environment for experiments in many scientific disciplines, including particle astrophysics, waste repository science, mining technology, low radiation dose physics, fissile materials accountability and transparency, and deep geophysics. The designation of the Carlsbad Department of Energy office as a "field"

  3. Midwest Underground Technology | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Underground Technology Jump to: navigation, search Name Midwest Underground Technology Facility Midwest Underground Technology Sector Wind energy Facility Type Small Scale Wind...

  4. Working Gas in Underground Storage Figure

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Working Gas in Underground Storage Figure Working Gas in Underground Storage Figure Working Gas in Underground Storage Compared with 5-Year Range Graph....

  5. Underground physics with DUNE

    SciTech Connect

    Kudryavtsev, Vitaly A.

    2016-01-01

    The Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (DUNE) is a project to design, construct and operate a next-generation long-baseline neutrino detector with a liquid argon (LAr) target capable also of searching for proton decay and supernova neutrinos. It is a merger of previous efforts of the LBNE and LBNO collaborations, as well as other interested parties to pursue a broad programme with a staged 40-kt LAr detector at the Sanford Underground Research Facility (SURF) 1300 km from Fermilab. This programme includes studies of neutrino oscillations with a powerful neutrino beam from Fermilab, as well as proton decay and supernova neutrino burst searches. In this study, we will focus on the underground physics with DUNE.

  6. Underground physics with DUNE

    DOE PAGES [OSTI]

    Kudryavtsev, Vitaly A.

    2016-01-01

    The Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (DUNE) is a project to design, construct and operate a next-generation long-baseline neutrino detector with a liquid argon (LAr) target capable also of searching for proton decay and supernova neutrinos. It is a merger of previous efforts of the LBNE and LBNO collaborations, as well as other interested parties to pursue a broad programme with a staged 40-kt LAr detector at the Sanford Underground Research Facility (SURF) 1300 km from Fermilab. This programme includes studies of neutrino oscillations with a powerful neutrino beam from Fermilab, as well as proton decay and supernova neutrino burst searches.more » In this study, we will focus on the underground physics with DUNE.« less

  7. The WIPP Underground Ventilation System

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

    , 2014 The WIPP Underground Ventilation System Since February, there has been considerable coverage about the WIPP Underground Ventilation System. On February 14, the ventilation system worked as designed, protecting human health and the environment. In normal exhaust mode, the ventilation system provides a continuous flow of fresh air to the underground tunnels and rooms that make up the disposal facility at WIPP. Air is supplied to the underground facility, located 2,150 feet below the

  8. Underground barrier construction apparatus with soil-retaining shield

    DOEpatents

    Gardner, B.M.; Smith, A.M.; Hanson, R.W.; Hodges, R.T.

    1998-08-04

    An apparatus is described for building a horizontal underground barrier by cutting through soil and depositing a slurry, preferably one which cures into a hardened material. The apparatus includes a digging means for cutting and removing soil to create a void under the surface of the ground, a shield means for maintaining the void, and injection means for inserting barrier-forming material into the void. In one embodiment, the digging means is a continuous cutting chain. Mounted on the continuous cutting chain are cutter teeth for cutting through soil and discharge paddles for removing the loosened soil. This invention includes a barrier placement machine, a method for building an underground horizontal containment barrier using the barrier placement machine, and the underground containment system. Preferably the underground containment barrier goes underneath and around the site to be contained in a bathtub-type containment. 17 figs.

  9. Underground barrier construction apparatus with soil-retaining shield

    DOEpatents

    Gardner, Bradley M.; Smith, Ann Marie; Hanson, Richard W.; Hodges, Richard T.

    1998-01-01

    An apparatus for building a horizontal underground barrier by cutting through soil and depositing a slurry, preferably one which cures into a hardened material. The apparatus includes a digging means for cutting and removing soil to create a void under the surface of the ground, a shield means for maintaining the void, and injection means for inserting barrier-forming material into the void. In one embodiment, the digging means is a continuous cutting chain. Mounted on the continuous cutting chain are cutter teeth for cutting through soil and discharge paddles for removing the loosened soil. This invention includes a barrier placement machine, a method for building an underground horizontal containment barrier using the barrier placement machine, and the underground containment system. Preferably the underground containment barrier goes underneath and around the site to be contained in a bathtub-type containment.

  10. Working Gas in Underground Storage Figure

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Working Gas in Underground Storage Figure Working Gas in Underground Storage Compared with 5-Year Range Graph.

  11. Economical wind protection - underground

    SciTech Connect

    Kiesling, E.W.

    1980-01-01

    Earth-sheltered buildings inherently posess near-absolute occupant protection from severe winds. They should sustain no structural damage and only minimal facial damage. Assuming that the lower-hazard risk attendant to this type of construction results in reduced insurance-premium rates, the owner accrues economic benefits from the time of construction. Improvements to aboveground buildings, in contrast, may not yield early economic benefits in spite of a favorable benefit-to-cost ratio. This, in addition to sensitivity to initial costs, traditionalism in residential construction, and lack of professional input to design, impede the widespread use of underground improvements and the subsequent economic losses from severe winds. Going underground could reverse the trend. 7 references.

  12. LUNA: Nuclear astrophysics underground

    SciTech Connect

    Best, A.

    2015-02-24

    Underground nuclear astrophysics with LUNA at the Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso spans a history of 20 years. By using the rock overburden of the Gran Sasso mountain chain as a natural cosmic-ray shield very low signal rates compared to an experiment on the surface can be tolerated. The cross sectons of important astrophysical reactions directly in the stellar energy range have been successfully measured. In this proceeding we give an overview over the key accomplishments of the experiment and an outlook on its future with the expected addition of an additional accelerator to the underground facilities, enabling the coverage of a wider energy range and the measurement of previously inaccessible reactions.

  13. Underground waste barrier structure

    DOEpatents

    Saha, Anuj J.; Grant, David C.

    1988-01-01

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

  14. Underground and Ventilation System

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

    November 6, 2014 Agenda * Opening Comments - Mayor Dale Janway * Introductions / Guidelines - Tim Runyon (Moderator) * Update on CBFO and WIPP activities - Joe Franco * Recovery Status - Tammy Reynolds * Update on NMED environmental monitoring - Dr. Martin Simon * Audience Questions * In house * Internet * Closing Comments - Joe Franco 2 UPDATE ON CBFO AND WIPP ACTIVITIES Joe Franco, CBFO Manager 3 Recent WIPP Activities * Overall progress at WIPP * 100 th entry into the underground * Personnel

  15. Dynamic underground stripping demonstration project

    SciTech Connect

    Newmark, R.L.

    1992-04-01

    LLNL is collaborating with the UC Berkeley College of Engineering to develop and demonstrate a system of thermal remediation techniques for rapid cleanup of localized underground spills. Called dynamic stripping to reflect the rapid and controllable nature of the process, it will combine steam injection, direct electrical heating, and tomographic geophysical imaging in a cleanup of the LLNL gasoline spill. In the first eight months of the project, a Clean Site engineering test was conducted to prove the field application of the techniques. Tests then began on the contaminated site in FY 1992. This report describes the work at the Clean Site, including design and performance criteria, test results, interpretations, and conclusions. We fielded 'a wide range of new designs and techniques, some successful and some not. In this document, we focus on results and performance, lessons learned, and design and operational changes recommended for work at the contaminated site. Each section focuses on a different aspect of the work and can be considered a self-contained contribution.

  16. Dynamic underground stripping: steam and electric heating for in situ decontamination of soils and groundwater

    DOEpatents

    Daily, William D.; Ramirez, Abelardo L.; Newmark, Robin L.; Udell, Kent; Buetnner, Harley M.; Aines, Roger D.

    1995-01-01

    A dynamic underground stripping process removes localized underground volatile organic compounds from heterogeneous soils and rock in a relatively short time. This method uses steam injection and electrical resistance heating to heat the contaminated underground area to increase the vapor pressure of the contaminants, thus speeding the process of contaminant removal and making the removal more complete. The injected steam passes through the more permeable sediments, distilling the organic contaminants, which are pumped to the surface. Large electrical currents are also applied to the contaminated area, which heat the impermeable subsurface layers that the steam has not penetrated. The condensed and vaporized contaminants are withdrawn by liquid pumping and vacuum extraction. The steam injection and electrical heating steps are repeated as necessary. Geophysical imaging methods can be used to map the boundary between the hot, dry, contamination-free underground zone and the cool, damp surrounding areas to help monitor the dynamic stripping process.

  17. Dynamic underground stripping: steam and electric heating for in situ decontamination of soils and groundwater

    DOEpatents

    Daily, W.D.; Ramirez, A.L.; Newmark, R.L.; Udell, K.; Buetnner, H.M.; Aines, R.D.

    1995-09-12

    A dynamic underground stripping process removes localized underground volatile organic compounds from heterogeneous soils and rock in a relatively short time. This method uses steam injection and electrical resistance heating to heat the contaminated underground area to increase the vapor pressure of the contaminants, thus speeding the process of contaminant removal and making the removal more complete. The injected steam passes through the more permeable sediments, distilling the organic contaminants, which are pumped to the surface. Large electrical currents are also applied to the contaminated area, which heat the impermeable subsurface layers that the steam has not penetrated. The condensed and vaporized contaminants are withdrawn by liquid pumping and vacuum extraction. The steam injection and electrical heating steps are repeated as necessary. Geophysical imaging methods can be used to map the boundary between the hot, dry, contamination-free underground zone and the cool, damp surrounding areas to help monitor the dynamic stripping process. 4 figs.

  18. New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) New York Natural Gas Underground Storage ... Underground Natural Gas in Storage - All Operators New York Underground Natural Gas ...

  19. New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage ... Underground Natural Gas in Storage - All Operators New Mexico Underground Natural Gas ...

  20. Dynamic Underground Stripping Demonstration Project. Interim progress report, 1991

    SciTech Connect

    Aines, R.; Newmark, R.; McConachie, W.; Rice, D.; Ramirez, A.; Siegel, W.; Buettner, M.; Daily, W.; Krauter, P.; Folsom, E.; Boegel, A.J.; Bishop, D.; udel, K.

    1992-03-01

    LLNL is collaborating with the UC Berkeley College of Engineering to develop and demonstrate a system of thermal remediation and underground imaging techniques for use in rapid cleanup of localized underground spills. Called ``Dynamic Stripping`` to reflect the rapid and controllable nature of the process, it will combine steam injection, direct electrical heating, and tomographic geophysical imaging in a cleanup of the LLNL gasoline spill. In the first 8 months of the project, a Clean Site engineering test was conducted to prove the field application of the techniques before moving to the contaminated site in FY 92.

  1. Underground CO2 Storage, Natural Gas Recovery Targeted by Virginia

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

    Tech/NETL Research | Department of Energy Underground CO2 Storage, Natural Gas Recovery Targeted by Virginia Tech/NETL Research Underground CO2 Storage, Natural Gas Recovery Targeted by Virginia Tech/NETL Research October 20, 2015 - 8:14am Addthis Researchers from Virginia Tech are injecting CO2 into coal seams in three locations in Buchanan County, Va., as part of an NETL-sponsored CO2 storage research project associated with enhanced gas recovery. Researchers from Virginia Tech are

  2. WIPP Begins Underground Decontamination Activities

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

    used underground to direct or block ventilation flow in open panels. It is a low permeability polyethylene (plastic) cloth. These activities will continue for the next several...

  3. Underground house book

    SciTech Connect

    Campbell, S.

    1980-01-01

    Aesthetics, attitudes, and acceptance of earth-covered buildings are examined initially, followed by an examination of land, money, water, earth, design, heat, and interior factors. Contributions made by architect Frank Lloyd Wright are discussed and reviewed. Contemporary persons, mostly designers, who contribute from their experiences with underground structures are Andy Davis; Rob Roy; Malcolm Wells; John Barnard, Jr.; Jeff Sikora; and Don Metz. A case study to select the site, design, and prepare to construct Earthtech 6 is described. Information is given in appendices on earth-protected buildings and existing basements; financing earth-sheltered housing; heating-load calculations and life-cycle costing; and designer names and addresses. (MCW)

  4. Underground coal gasification. Presentations

    SciTech Connect

    2007-07-01

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

  5. A Guidance Document for Kentucky's Oil and Gas Operators

    SciTech Connect

    Bender, Rick

    2002-03-18

    The accompanying report, manual and assimilated data represent the initial preparation for submission of an Application for Primacy under the Class II Underground Injection Control (UIC) program on behalf of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. The purpose of this study was to identify deficiencies in Kentucky law and regulation that would prevent the Kentucky Division of Oil and Gas from receiving approval of primacy of the UIC program, currently under control of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in Atlanta, Georgia.

  6. Multinational underground nuclear parks

    SciTech Connect

    Myers, C.W.; Giraud, K.M.

    2013-07-01

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

  7. Underground Storage Tanks: New Fuels and Compatibility

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

    July 29, 2014 Ryan Haerer EPA Office of Underground Storage Tanks 1 Storing High Octane ... The Underground Storage Tank Universe EPA: Protect Human Health and the Environment ...

  8. ,"Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ... 11:44:46 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ...

  9. ,"West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Data for" ,"Data 1","West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage ... AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage ...

  10. ,"Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage ... 11:44:05 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:41 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Minnesota Natural Gas in ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:40 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Michigan Natural Gas in ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:38 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Louisiana Natural Gas in ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:50 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Oklahoma Natural Gas in ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:54 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Tennessee Natural Gas in ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:26 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Alaska Natural Gas in ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:43 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Missouri Natural Gas in ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:28 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Arkansas Natural Gas in ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:40 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Maryland Natural Gas in ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:49 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Ohio Natural Gas in ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:34 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Illinois Natural Gas in ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:46 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Nebraska Natural Gas in ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:30:00 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Wyoming Natural Gas in ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:56 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Utah Natural Gas in ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:37 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Kentucky Natural Gas in ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:57 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Virginia Natural Gas in ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:29 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","California Natural Gas in ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:44 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Mississippi Natural Gas in ...

  9. ,"Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals ...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Net ... 7:00:48 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Net ...

  10. ,"Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ... 7:00:58 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ...

  11. ,"Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage ... 7:00:37 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage ...

  12. Lower 48 States Working Natural Gas Total Underground Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    (Million Cubic Feet) Total Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Lower 48 States Total Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011 50,130 81,827 167,632 312,290 457,725 420,644 359,267 370,180 453,548 436,748 221,389 90,432 2012 74,854 56,243 240,351 263,896 357,965 323,026 263,910 299,798 357,109 327,767 155,554 104,953 2013 70,853 41,928 100,660 271,236 466,627 439,390 372,472

  13. Dynamic Underground Stripping: In situ steam sweeping and electrical heating to remediate a deep hydrocarbon spill

    SciTech Connect

    Yow, J.L. Jr.; Aines, R.D.; Newmark, R.L.; Udell, K.S.; Ziagos, J.P.

    1994-07-01

    Dynamic Underground Stripping is a combination of in situ steam injection, electrical resistance heating, and fluid extraction for rapid removal and recovery of subsurface contaminants such as solvents or fuels. Underground imaging and other measurement techniques monitor the system in situ for process control. Field tests at a deep gasoline spill at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory recovered over 7000 gallons of gasoline during several months of field operations. Preliminary analysis of system cost and performance indicate that Dynamic Underground Stripping compares favorably with conventional pump-and-treat and vacuum extraction schemes for removing non-aqueous phase liquids such as gasoline from deep subsurface plumes.

  14. Underground pumped hydroelectric storage

    SciTech Connect

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

    1984-07-01

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

  15. Midwest Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 7,437 14,235 22,615 66,408 136,813 155,687 156,839 166,332 149,212 119,162 35,641 16,420 2015 7,171 4,815 20,994 74,813 ...

  16. Colorado Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 538 235 252 265 1,274 4,266 6,279 5,212 5,012 1,957 1,734 650 1991 992 654 483 61 2,494 3,876 4,219 4,449 5,296 3,296 ...

  17. Michigan Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    76,718 72,178 53,824 26,587 11,504 2,212 1991 1,032 3,107 15,520 34,937 50,769 ... 55,631 32,359 9,649 4,881 2009 2,827 3,212 12,072 48,476 76,810 78,890 79,555 63,194 ...

  18. AGA Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    36,048 85,712 223,991 260,731 242,718 212,493 214,385 160,007 37,788 12,190 1996 ... 1999 18,032 8,946 26,228 111,081 229,212 205,889 185,349 217,043 223,192 146,647 ...

  19. Tennessee Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 2,140 1970's 1,606 1,750 2,325 1990's 0 453 599 2000's 273 556 63 336 262 0 2010's 665

  20. Tennessee Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1998 0 0 0 0 0 0 134 112 102 103 2 0 1999 6 0 0 0 143 107 76 104 105 57 0 0 2000 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 114 86 21 2001 0 0 0 103 113 32 63 47 62 100 32 4 2002 50 3 6 2 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 2003 0 0 0 0 42 76 75 95 2 46 0 0 2004 2 0 0 33 32 46 63 55 6 25 0 0 2005 0 2015 4 3 26 56 61 57 69 67 72 93 102 55 2016 3 25 37 19 27 38

  1. Texas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 34,836 31,597 33,943 1970's 36,805 36,850 87,251 46,592 54,705 54,333 61,110 85,913 91,373 82,325 1980's 109,242 124,439 141,811 135,309 145,916 125,560 121,631 121,245 146,758 161,181 1990's 175,039 170,908 340,602 221,412 310,273 274,724 305,914 312,254 344,461 291,802 2000's 311,995 482,270 363,682 415,541 395,115 345,945 356,273 362,593 401,600 435,089 2010's 460,453 437,440 378,438 394,375 474,392 494,37

  2. Texas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 17,004 8,785 10,204 19,677 17,706 20,683 10,352 12,126 22,756 13,644 6,455 1991 15,296 7,922 10,668 19,418 15,195 17,722 9,489 19,572 16,485 9,703 16,161 13,277 1992 28,613 14,959 26,061 25,971 36,754 40,361 32,383 37,832 33,591 24,896 15,309 23,871 1993 10,338 4,336 10,991 24,985 30,856 19,793 22,155 23,862 26,751 20,149 16,519 10,678 1994 9,151 9,187 22,843 31,648 45,809 29,041 34,716 32,744 34,998 26,664 23,258 10,215 1995 12,078

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 219,010 235,415 244,892 1970's 335,966 303,286 315,183 321,757 265,901 332,183 293,596 364,262 372,402 357,234 1980's 212,048 360,752 405,477 284,948 362,878 350,022 249,028 335,166 377,046 572,180 1990's 388,569 707,371 383,762 381,711 339,512 332,608 376,290 312,787 328,118 319,041 2000's 370,957 398,034 318,381 413,078 368,897 385,186 337,341 372,938 377,401 380,986 2010's 335,068 371,341 291,507

  4. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 13,295 9,924 21,742 28,238 51,655 57,413 51,832 54,045 43,121 22,964 20,337 14,002 1991 73,993 63,063 44,655 46,683 64,031 52,754 59,771 61,123 70,362 55,270 57,416 58,249 1992 7,189 3,229 6,490 28,679 50,918 60,273 46,504 57,126 51,685 38,133 24,553 8,982 1993 5,815 1,906 9,046 31,461 62,602 58,643 54,419 47,350 54,543 27,811 19,970 8,144 1994 772 4,575 12,272 40,407 57,110 58,758 53,083 45,208 27,767 23,356 8,648 7,555 1995

  5. New Mexico Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 383 74 383 1970's 398 5,067 12,589 4,160 1,005 2,378 472 39 1980's 2,871 2,801 19,894 2,500...

  6. Louisiana Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 47,474 33,037 58,753 1970's 110,680 132,263 84,201 151,287 81,960 149,966 132,724 144,053 ...

  7. Arkansas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 0 0 0 46 104 473 527 481 279 28 0 0 1991 0 0 0 72 132 339 487 14 0 0 0 0 1992 0 0 0 0 0 510 852 665 434 0 0 0 1993 0 0 0 0 ...

  8. Louisiana Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 47,474 33,037 58,753 1970's 110,680 132,263 84,201 151,287 81,960 149,966 132,724 144,053 155,450 140,433 1980's 134,386 212,267 177,194 148,679 193,096 184,351 174,222 188,110 194,251 178,222 1990's 200,183 178,002 193,051 229,568 224,525 209,575 249,153 302,324 321,681 261,763 2000's 242,566 351,853 282,824 314,609 296,365 273,161 291,259 272,581 287,449 315,872 2010's 343,090 342,092 270,858 328,452

  9. Louisiana Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 17,712 15,346 15,364 11,228 15,333 18,647 19,527 17,703 19,665 19,333 15,705 14,621 1991 2,280 4,842 12,957 13,291 22,317 22,447 17,260 17,261 23,603 27,512 9,950 4,281 1992 7,699 4,109 13,109 16,478 29,243 21,440 20,695 21,713 23,276 24,685 7,374 3,230 1993 4,314 1,638 8,805 14,315 34,776 33,317 27,192 28,570 32,062 21,236 21,232 2,111 1994 3,737 9,288 9,922 26,592 34,270 23,811 30,757 28,317 24,211 15,673 13,387 4,560 1995

  10. Maryland Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 12,465 10,520 5,281 1970's 10,421 11,746 7,920 11,328 11,016 6,830 19,012 16,820 19,121 19,715 1980's 16,907 18,753 19,476 16,298 16,154 17,362 16,330 16,539 14,653 18,548 1990's 19,431 22,508 19,502 15,314 15,316 15,610 17,448 15,510 14,627 18,802 2000's 15,341 19,786 15,445 19,166 16,347 18,026 14,947 20,309 16,517 15,088 2010's 14,384 15,592 10,582 14,165 20,362 17,373

  11. Michigan Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 222,800 255,365 257,737 1970's 344,524 296,475 275,460 299,766 287,776 322,960 342,010 372,262 390,610 424,176 1980's 290,497 354,911 371,216 227,107 379,036 325,729 366,672 268,325 341,649 414,819 1990's 415,309 354,996 390,465 476,312 470,220 377,121 503,138 424,651 391,041 343,675 2000's 402,150 543,881 312,348 519,235 475,423 404,258 386,208 410,421 467,589 462,022 2010's 393,814 457,240 307,948

  12. Mississippi Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 4,701 6,904 7,493 1970's 12,489 8,149 83,548 29,089 25,439 27,345 50,545 65,693 63,032 60,597 1980's 59,653 42,916 43,834 44,467 54,186 54,105 38,678 43,550 41,780 50,478 1990's 53,161 48,054 55,105 55,903 64,972 74,821 88,684 63,216 69,268 48,217 2000's 63,917 68,987 72,418 79,014 90,316 114,658 108,823 148,487 160,388 127,212 2010's 145,854 124,165 129,889 145,082 199,696 202,642

  13. Mississippi Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 1,750 3,607 4,330 6,127 5,544 4,224 6,928 5,497 4,867 4,368 3,234 2,683 1991 2,109 2,492 4,207 6,639 5,633 3,362 3,437 4,256 5,869 4,885 3,369 1,795 1992 1,096 3,138 2,980 2,951 5,887 9,079 6,978 4,305 7,046 4,637 4,536 2,471 1993 1,673 667 3,918 4,615 8,370 7,306 6,934 4,554 6,921 3,167 5,034 2,746 1994 3,660 5,153 6,296 6,337 5,829 3,779 7,746 7,154 4,569 5,564 4,790 4,095 1995 4,471 3,625 5,571 7,565 8,877 4,334 6,975 6,763

  14. Missouri Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 1,544 12 1,155 1,115 0 0 0 287 512 228 21 442 1991 669 0 0 2,142 701 120 299 306 216 222 225 70 1992 0 0 0 1,579 439 155 273 224 214 197 0 0 1993 0 0 0 1,558 1,054 462 108 323 211 221 556 218 1994 528 57 98 0 1,549 1,361 322 318 276 219 240 29 1995 0 191 610 59 669 0 0 376 484 144 180 65 1996 358 1,295 1,377 410 1,326 268 247 213 212 218 161 484 1997 1,025 621 88 466 1,207 121 440 387 248 223 254 0 1998 303 167 471 36 595 0 0

  15. Montana Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 19,919 17,398 20,409 1970's 20,891 18,668 8,801 16,969 19,791 13,090 12,507 15,908 16,351 23,254 1980's 29,751 30,147 25,180 33,262 39,814 36,786 22,084 22,894 13,782 10,479 1990's 14,648 12,392 11,708 10,894 14,690 18,054 19,871 18,219 23,876 20,232 2000's 15,571 33,998 39,809 35,082 31,339 29,118 42,492 26,512 18,394 57,631 2010's 35,577 17,582 26,813 21,426 15,290 19,82

  16. Montana Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 137 138 399 945 1,030 1,589 2,636 2,459 2,918 1,868 224 305 1991 49 400 337 661 1,912 1,830 2,316 2,077 1,390 1,069 208 144 1992 94 209 651 983 2,344 1,142 1,727 1,673 1,209 1,045 508 123 1993 282 135 618 768 1,156 889 1,969 1,580 1,608 1,404 175 310 1994 267 118 585 1,090 1,929 2,511 1,794 1,632 2,256 1,750 409 348 1995 225 467 966 1,330 1,775 2,542 3,316 3,925 2,132 871 325 180 1996 171 319 392 1,087 1,169 3,866 3,549 3,819

  17. Nebraska Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 5,012 2,959 4,838 1970's 3,074 5,982 8,837 5,280 5,667 5,459 4,508 7,053 9,995 10,087 1980's 6,557 7,198 7,455 3,869 5,628 6,848 5,748 6,241 7,615 6,952 1990's 7,395 8,916 10,254 14,485 12,524 3,872 8,423 6,659 5,264 5,802 2000's 3,763 8,303 5,735 5,334 8,454 8,412 7,760 10,860 9,155 8,936 2010's 8,146 10,482 6,349 9,578 9,998 8,058

  18. Nebraska Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 0 29 194 1,042 1,483 1,696 30 778 1,165 695 281 4 1991 5 0 112 1,421 2,977 2,197 163 265 1,023 340 412 0 1992 0 108 275 703 1,637 2,634 2,118 1,220 1,200 360 0 0 1993 0 0 162 1,050 2,814 4,060 2,435 1,851 1,518 586 0 10 1994 0 0 582 1,280 2,156 1,045 2,245 933 2,230 1,100 938 15 1995 27 148 490 478 727 920 346 207 408 120 0 0 1996 - 101 14 530 1,650 1,984 1,325 1,416 875 213 289 25 1997 302 267 721 615 796 885 271 1,005 1,123

  19. New York Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 42,344 44,978 41,874 1970's 45,802 48,026 32,777 40,277 56,403 43,207 42,565 53,768 51,620 46,439 1980's 41,857 57,610 55,213 43,106 59,702 48,748 49,185 42,616 56,332 53,490 1990's 63,690 63,411 62,265 68,532 66,627 60,947 76,475 67,135 63,298 57,442 2000's 61,763 66,179 64,381 79,757 71,554 69,022 68,290 75,186 69,946 89,822 2010's 99,802 92,660 75,635 79,917 94,858 87,575

  20. Ohio Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 142,717 169,955 168,142 1970's 182,405 188,916 163,884 179,078 152,580 183,032 146,228 188,721 199,851 193,251 1980's 169,268 177,387 193,275 129,541 156,006 138,801 163,093 143,588 162,801 132,898 1990's 154,452 134,060 160,009 175,630 191,660 161,350 198,642 200,327 191,831 182,142 2000's 179,728 206,841 174,175 193,194 186,313 176,524 150,608 180,397 185,095 175,526 2010's 178,746 182,167 146,552 166,098

  1. Ohio Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 2,095 2,783 8,487 12,731 23,624 20,221 19,895 19,615 18,355 13,780 9,089 3,777 1991 474 569 2,278 13,918 24,470 20,782 18,348 18,211 16,615 12,371 5,205 819 1992 46 383 775 11,319 27,233 30,305 29,147 24,617 16,672 14,358 4,364 790 1993 152 278 1,376 10,017 30,894 32,804 30,187 28,001 26,720 12,055 3,036 109 1994 1,075 1,772 2,164 19,428 30,107 32,303 33,898 27,173 22,437 13,196 7,269 837 1995 617 1,176 1,782 7,066 28,599 32,073 31,206

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 4,366 3,193 6,903 5,872 11,548 13,440 11,689 10,380 8,709 8,453 8,353 2,367 1991 26 3,253 7,982 15,800 16,462 10,864 4,815 6,272 10,749 9,706 3,437 4,853 1992 1,358 3,452 5,980 8,163 10,270 11,596 17,116 11,326 13,627 11,199 2,570 812 1993 1,709 2,183 3,139 17,592 30,401 25,865 16,422 17,249 15,631 12,044 1,415 7,600 1994 692 1,521 7,130 20,751 26,772 15,711 17,419 13,891 9,370 6,950 2,330 1,038 1995 1,144 1,218 4,867 9,018

  3. Oregon Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 189 5 46 1980's 4,148 4,944 1990's 5,894 5,853 6,114 6,202 5,956 4,447 4,416 6,259 5,673 7,605 2000's 8,892 10,487 16,746 10,194 9,101 13,138 12,449 13,195 15,088 10,570 2010's 8,658 11,976 8,732 12,176 15,858 9,061

  4. Oregon Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 0 0 0 1,181 1,508 1,244 764 636 372 188 0 0 1991 0 0 0 0 713 1,554 1,458 1,092 674 339 23 0 1992 0 0 0 0 1,572 1,540 1,194 1,010 453 195 0 149 1993 0 0 0 0 1,636 1,291 1,175 1,036 575 487 0 0 1994 0 0 0 0 1,216 1,506 1,202 1,081 688 264 0 0 1995 0 182 0 867 1,179 1,034 695 0 490 0 0 0 1996 - - - - 841 1,365 1,318 509 121 262 - - 1997 0 24 0 0 1,300 1,681 1,301 1,178 411 97 267 0 1998 0 0 0 0 0 1,968 1,188 1,143 1,141 28 0 205 1999 0 0 0 0

  5. West Virginia Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 2,636 3,056 7,714 11,094 19,622 17,419 16,104 16,323 13,930 7,415 6,785 4,120 1991 843 2,207 5,193 12,543 15,471 16,359 ...

  6. Illinois Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 2,189 271 2,720 9,668 32,390 37,507 29,406 35,531 34,922 20,388 6,532 1,553 1991 4,412 442 309 9,233 31,471 30,144 30,332 ...

  7. Minnesota Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    1990's 1,256 1,285 1,372 1,762 1,556 1,478 1,655 1,417 1,291 1,384 2000's 1,375 1,669 1,218 1,521 1,471 1,418 1,255 1,380 1,493 1,405 2010's 1,046 1,454 1,010 1,451 1,549 1,044

  8. Utah Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    1,210 2,719 3,032 3,970 3,612 3,759 4,834 3,898 3,111 506 182 1993 0 6 93 168 6,607 6,471 5,034 5,017 4,968 5,083 501 541 1994 45 195 3,861 2,050 6,133 4,069 5,508 6,269 8,509 ...

  9. Pacific Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 4,011 3,540 14,172 43,546 58,466 51,172 32,264 32,879 23,448 31,224 15,841 14,871 2015 5,947...

  10. Washington Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 1,270 974 1,827 1970's 6,688 7,442 9,608 8,598 7,993 12,009 13,858 15,540 7,358 14,332 1980's...

  11. Kansas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 7,635 3,835 6,654 5,480 4,038 7,424 13,042 13,023 16,981 12,047 11,053 6,933 1991 5,647 10,096 7,403 7,023 8,901 9,815 ...

  12. Alabama Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 536 577 1970's 1,153 992 568 1,070 410 434 1990's 694 1,375 3,349 2,022 2,220 2,646 2000's 2,022 3,913 3,785 10,190 12,734 15,572 20,604 20,009 31,208 21,020 2010's 23,026 22,766 21,195 17,966 34,286 33,004

  13. Alabama Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1994 8 12 26 71 106 95 103 93 85 55 25 14 1995 0 122 0 0 44 42 41 252 592 156 24 101 1996 231 185 141 192 390 670 318 395 440 166 63 160 1997 297 101 63 168 271 161 108 286 262 251 27 27 1998 26 0 81 245 188 623 25 203 139 613 76 0 1999 0 0 14 645 547 213 333 202 459 0 166 67 2000 48 534 44 51 232 606 166 0 0 42 12 286 2001 411 304 85 323 207 618 250 293 370 414 529 109 2002 711 278 182 349 240 54 357 139 106 318 515 536 2003 242 818

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 15,054 11,675 9,161

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013 1,120 2,185 1,860 933 1,065 1,131 977 1,518 1,981 1,627 367 291 2014 701 337 1,062 1,084 903 2,078 831 997 774 678 976 1,255 2015 1,039 982 589 621 618 611 865 857 682 824 756 717 2016 496 748 752 1,540 2,065 1,970 2,123 2,139

  16. Arkansas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 1,317 1,210 1,168 1970's 1,467 1,674 1,316 2,218 1,783 1,555 1,033 1,462 1,572 2,081 1980's 1,107 1,690 1,854 241 1,817 4,359 1,871 398 1,522 1,299 1990's 1,938 1,044 2,461 272 3,249 5,368 7,152 6,665 6,951 5,784 2000's 3,943 5,806 3,210 5,757 4,457 4,394 4,789 5,695 5,023 4,108 2010's 4,672 4,628 2,848 3,112 3,398 3,318

  17. California Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 71,148 58,085 77,617 1970's 80,260 89,373 118,758 92,331 129,945 105,167 107,749 109,760 108,432 100,522 1980's 93,556 99,397 112,916 97,424 103,983 124,099 89,891 130,990 120,167 140,933 1990's 147,074 136,433 148,039 155,135 155,910 144,312 104,238 145,511 172,343 128,420 2000's 110,172 189,640 124,641 166,879 211,010 190,055 168,957 214,469 237,364 199,763 2010's 226,810 263,067 218,663 182,046

  18. California Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 2,676 4,631 11,774 22,230 26,798 17,079 11,773 10,071 10,383 17,080 11,528 1,051 1991 1,964 7,531 6,205 21,709 28,179 25,042 16,510 8,436 6,788 7,412 4,368 2,289 1992 1,926 6,570 5,706 17,569 17,167 26,308 19,985 14,876 21,087 11,679 3,331 1,835 1993 915 3,429 15,021 19,520 27,830 15,806 23,522 15,977 16,113 13,773 1,939 1,289 1994 870 494 6,150 20,903 28,804 21,822 18,914 11,381 26,575 14,221 2,254 3,522 1995 1,383 6,220 3,765

  19. Colorado Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 6,391 6,849 8,663 1970's 8,757 5,839 8,502 10,673 11,444 13,420 16,987 21,717 20,630 25,334 1980's 32,974 25,291 32,861 26,361 26,228 26,722 24,313 24,083 25,898 28,165 1990's 27,674 30,584 23,061 51,132 31,185 39,717 37,808 39,389 39,789 37,828 2000's 31,601 36,951 37,980 40,146 38,320 38,588 35,836 38,619 39,034 45,861 2010's 43,250 51,469 59,096 66,935 72,510 69,983

  20. Virginia Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    339 344 283 434 327 44 183 2003 51 220 70 276 458 504 482 823 671 147 102 203 2004 325 454 190 347 1,013 415 611 1,104 894 1,138 303 279 2005 599 566 319 458 699 560 923 747 783 ...

  1. Oklahoma Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 47,438 46,871 53,945 1970's 57,142 66,666 59,061 88,000 70,076 87,459 88,577 104,347 109,076 110,354 1980's 112,403 111,148...

  2. New York Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 1,869 1,563 3,711 4,231 6,916 10,157 8,932 7,141 5,172 2,549 1,879 1991 539 1,202 1,845 5,002 7,611 7,983 9,509 8,881...

  3. Underground Injection Control Permit Applications for FutureGen...

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

    ... A byproduct of the oxy-combustion process is an ... 1056 643 O'Rear, Judge 1 Oil & Gas Water No Yes 18 121370009900 ... the migration with extraction wells in the vicinity ...

  4. Utah Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 609 640 580 1970's 547 883 906 2,320 999 1,340 1,069 1,446 1,180 1,193 1980's 2,381 11,107 12,089 19,948 17,291 20,386 9,542 14,359 19,426 16,885 1990's 27,196 32,248 31,222 34,488 42,508 32,201 32,368 42,803 23,744 37,380 2000's 40,179 47,942 42,159 44,227 46,829 38,478 39,761 41,284 42,304 38,618 2010's 35,519 44,170 28,146 26,724 41,548 36,027

  5. Washington Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 929 289 499 863 0 2,707 2,937 2,937 1,101 622 906 507 1991 833 586 299 3,139 1,705 2,716 2,138 291 308 0 1,447 753 1992 436 149 945 1,205 1,824 1,543 1,336 1,618 1,578 979 785 895 1993 750 383 2,192 1,363 4,359 1,112 2,036 1,280 2,258 340 326 3,176 1994 1,579 318 1,268 3,455 2,882 2,005 1,945 965 1,330 503 1,263 1,192 1995 541 827 1,671 1,661 2,601 2,020 1,565 829 2,494 464 1,696 1,447 1996 808 2,027 1,081 1,609 2,176 3,349

  6. West Virginia Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 159,545 181,338 183,114 1970's 209,292 190,785 171,946 184,984 124,988 161,604 138,767 195,861 177,263 173,060 1980's 128,443 127,788 144,153 87,355 128,717 129,134 134,394 98,311 106,318 115,421 1990's 126,217 104,251 138,647 160,450 171,216 145,958 200,612 164,299 172,191 160,166 2000's 155,359 198,730 140,907 197,794 176,486 171,199 163,026 184,167 192,729 188,539 2010's 171,179 197,202 153,479

  7. Wyoming Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 3,748 5,337 6,695 1970's 8,305 11,325 11,996 9,854 7,025 13,276 10,404 10,061 8,812 11,193 1980's 11,194 12,695 21,860 11,546 6,110 7,565 7,701 2,932 9,719 12,546 1990's 12,146 10,872 5,340 13,605 10,596 9,448 10,422 14,080 15,212 11,458 2000's 6,144 19,510 19,547 18,304 26,689 18,665 19,820 22,213 19,194 24,183 2010's 14,762 14,102 37,107 18,868 15,440 10,236

  8. Wyoming Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 22 16 140 1,047 1,248 1,648 2,162 1,899 2,415 1,135 222 191 1991 56 467 479 368 908 1,922 2,233 1,628 1,090 1,135 423 164 1992 0 73 211 356 439 605 1,402 465 861 525 208 194 1993 8 15 557 1,247 1,443 2,426 2,423 1,875 1,433 1,533 482 163 1994 145 16 930 1,339 1,692 771 1,125 1,524 1,444 1,060 412 138 1995 17 76 89 67 863 1,452 1,588 1,896 1,849 1,265 236 52 1996 13 0 66 974 2,862 1,764 2,169 836 641 540 243 312 1997 157 0 47 372

  9. Indiana Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 25,027 26,679 26,483 1970's 35,065 33,816 40,220 46,617 36,070 43,845 18,252 32,090 25,903 27,177 1980's 24,509 24,301 25,489 20,160 22,069 21,885 22,118 15,844 24,423 24,816 1990's 23,054 23,654 25,770 25,928 24,656 24,335 27,263 23,403 22,034 21,533 2000's 19,486 24,647 20,425 23,563 23,451 21,405 23,598 22,686 22,874 24,399 2010's 21,943 23,864 19,878 22,435 22,067 20,542

  10. Indiana Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 997 821 771 1,207 1,916 1,673 2,268 3,772 4,202 2,896 1,993 539 1991 91 245 158 710 1,849 1,107 2,920 3,845 4,606 4,490 3,131 501 1992 98 349 429 1,076 1,611 2,638 5,174 4,168 5,309 3,579 926 413 1993 681 526 882 1,587 2,170 2,733 4,564 4,464 4,276 2,659 911 475 1994 328 565 519 609 934 2,541 5,229 4,565 4,175 3,340 1,546 305 1995 439 80 786 1,211 1,057 1,831 2,892 3,751 4,791 4,578 2,437 483 1996 262 870 948 968 1,028 2,560

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 26,084 28,993 31,726 1970's 38,968 46,139 51,437 54,392 50,903 70,609 69,954 69,097 72,674 68,961 1980's 49,142 67,518 64,789 42,090 63,617 62,202 43,698 42,388 55,774 55,277 1990's 66,195 47,425 49,367 48,117 59,831 58,561 69,498 57,073 65,267 55,134 2000's 55,348 75,165 49,577 70,497 66,037 61,190 65,956 70,682 77,503 71,972 2010's 85,167 77,526 64,483 60,782 80,129 80,247

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 3,591 7,852 5,644 4,269 4,991 5,462 7,829 7,379 7,268 5,324 3,591 2,996 1991 1,910 2,777 4,468 4,883 2,671 3,345 5,395 4,818 4,660 4,074 4,315 4,110 1992 5,509 3,635 2,314 2,151 1,697 2,787 4,724 4,202 5,539 10,882 3,272 2,656 1993 1,967 990 928 2,687 7,049 7,985 7,838 5,873 7,014 3,907 1,397 482 1994 431 928 1,526 6,100 10,571 9,346 9,742 7,138 4,696 4,684 3,438 1,230 1995 1,189 478 2,868 4,780 13,288 7,749 8,687 5,375 6,889

  13. Oklahoma Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 47,438 46,871 53,945 1970's 57,142 66,666 59,061 88,000 70,076 87,459 88,577 104,347 109,076 ...

  14. Kansas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 41,661 44,524 50,772 1970's 52,966 49,267 46,810 42,910 45,642 52,045 48,582 51,344 52,242 ...

  15. Virginia Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 158 272 2,143 1970's 2,175 2,286 278 320 112 1,079 1980's 22 1990's 0 2,369 2,378 2000's 2,455...

  16. Missouri Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 10,206 8,919 9,044 1970's 10,957 11,741 10,188 10,847 9,413 8,658 6,634 8,074 8,836 8,836 1980's...

  17. Maryland Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 239 2,623 1,788 2,614 1,243 2,126 2,822 2,513 2,065 403 535 1991 63 182 612 1,414 1,596 1,606 1,492 2,061 9,642 963 1,273...

  18. Michigan Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 9,245 1,582 10,686 31,603 52,870 66,300 76,718 72,178 53,824 26,587 11,504 2,212 1991 1,032 3,107 15,520 34,937 50,769 57,972 60,903 49,098 32,321 37,468 6,791 5,078 1992 1,016 711 1,745 17,659 47,567 67,131 73,573 69,301 68,599 37,430 3,947 1,784 1993 940 824 5,731 30,848 76,196 84,210 84,659 82,086 67,557 38,106 4,009 1,148 1994 1,753 2,710 5,746 48,993 74,457 74,862 76,199 76,055 66,415 34,456 5,582 2,992 1995 666 1,317 4,527

  19. Minnesota Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 0 0 69 477 330 112 133 48 61 27 0 0 1991 0 0 42 228 257 312 291 61 93 0 0 0 1992 0 0 0 0 391 307 299 250 126 0 0 0 1993 0 0 0 178 331 358 426 134 248 87 0 0 1994 0 0 0 46 342 374 371 273 150 0 0 0 1995 0 0 0 27 331 262 306 301 241 9 0 0 1996 - - - 142 366 294 287 280 202 83 - - 1997 0 0 0 173 273 312 321 207 130 0 0 0 1998 0 0 0 0 0 169 289 284 275 187 87 0 1999 0 0 0 0 0 172 308 320 272 175 136 0 2000 0 0 0 0 0 132 343 343 266

  20. Mississippi Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 1,750 3,607 4,330 6,127 5,544 4,224 6,928 5,497 4,867 4,368 3,234 2,683 1991 2,109 2,492 4,207 6,639 5,633 3,362 3,437 4,256 5,869 4,885 3,369 1,795 1992 1,096 3,138 2,980 2,951 5,887 9,079 6,978 4,305 7,046 4,637 4,536 2,471 1993 1,673 667 3,918 4,615 8,370 7,306 6,934 4,554 6,921 3,167 5,034 2,746 1994 3,660 5,153 6,296 6,337 5,829 3,779 7,746 7,154 4,569 5,564 4,790 4,095 1995 4,471 3,625 5,571 7,565 8,877 4,334 6,975 6,763

  1. Missouri Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 1,544 12 1,155 1,115 0 0 0 287 512 228 21 442 1991 669 0 0 2,142 701 120 299 306 216 222 225 70 1992 0 0 0 1,579 439 155 273 224 214 197 0 0 1993 0 0 0 1,558 1,054 462 108 323 211 221 556 218 1994 528 57 98 0 1,549 1,361 322 318 276 219 240 29 1995 0 191 610 59 669 0 0 376 484 144 180 65 1996 358 1,295 1,377 410 1,326 268 247 213 212 218 161 484 1997 1,025 621 88 466 1,207 121 440 387 248 223 254 0 1998 303 167 471 36 595 0 0

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 137 138 399 945 1,030 1,589 2,636 2,459 2,918 1,868 224 305 1991 49 400 337 661 1,912 1,830 2,316 2,077 1,390 1,069 208 144 1992 94 209 651 983 2,344 1,142 1,727 1,673 1,209 1,045 508 123 1993 282 135 618 768 1,156 889 1,969 1,580 1,608 1,404 175 310 1994 267 118 585 1,090 1,929 2,511 1,794 1,632 2,256 1,750 409 348 1995 225 467 966 1,330 1,775 2,542 3,316 3,925 2,132 871 325 180 1996 171 319 392 1,087 1,169 3,866 3,549 3,819

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 0 29 194 1,042 1,483 1,696 30 778 1,165 695 281 4 1991 5 0 112 1,421 2,977 2,197 163 265 1,023 340 412 0 1992 0 108 275 703 1,637 2,634 2,118 1,220 1,200 360 0 0 1993 0 0 162 1,050 2,814 4,060 2,435 1,851 1,518 586 0 10 1994 0 0 582 1,280 2,156 1,045 2,245 933 2,230 1,100 938 15 1995 27 148 490 478 727 920 346 207 408 120 0 0 1996 - 101 14 530 1,650 1,984 1,325 1,416 875 213 289 25 1997 302 267 721 615 796 885 271 1,005 1,123

  4. New Mexico Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 502 1,137 1,088 2,198 1,190 1,665 3,674 3,203 2,048 3,187 1,857 602 1991 341 245 267 3,130 3,097 3,033 1,930 790 3,099 1,538 1,556 2,536 1992 1,345 741 1,159 197 1,538 1,940 1,147 2,411 2,287 2,932 1,133 2,132 1993 864 0 1,404 1 2,822 2,560 1,786 692 1,343 2,719 533 1,645 1994 412 604 1,464 275 2,297 1,630 1,349 986 4,132 2,343 1,241 1,817 1995 404 867 2,089 944 1,779 1,734 1,688 999 1,550 1,392 691 577 1996 690 567 167 587

  5. New York Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 1,869 1,563 3,711 4,231 6,916 10,157 8,932 7,141 5,172 2,549 1,879 1991 539 1,202 1,845 5,002 7,611 7,983 9,509 8,881 8,960 6,263 3,702 1,915 1992 965 83 455 4,003 9,753 9,677 11,054 9,933 6,960 5,600 2,866 916 1993 367 155 1,728 6,690 11,220 11,597 11,643 9,116 8,556 4,134 2,100 1,227 1994 170 658 1,345 10,036 10,214 12,914 11,583 10,095 5,457 2,869 707 579 1995 1,439 287 1,939 4,147 9,279 11,454 8,979 8,492 9,378 3,586 1,390

  6. Ohio Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 2,095 2,783 8,487 12,731 23,624 20,221 19,895 19,615 18,355 13,780 9,089 3,777 1991 474 569 2,278 13,918 24,470 20,782 18,348 18,211 16,615 12,371 5,205 819 1992 46 383 775 11,319 27,233 30,305 29,147 24,617 16,672 14,358 4,364 790 1993 152 278 1,376 10,017 30,894 32,804 30,187 28,001 26,720 12,055 3,036 109 1994 1,075 1,772 2,164 19,428 30,107 32,303 33,898 27,173 22,437 13,196 7,269 837 1995 617 1,176 1,782 7,066 28,599 32,073 31,206

  7. Oklahoma Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 4,366 3,193 6,903 5,872 11,548 13,440 11,689 10,380 8,709 8,453 8,353 2,367 1991 26 3,253 7,982 15,800 16,462 10,864 4,815 6,272 10,749 9,706 3,437 4,853 1992 1,358 3,452 5,980 8,163 10,270 11,596 17,116 11,326 13,627 11,199 2,570 812 1993 1,709 2,183 3,139 17,592 30,401 25,865 16,422 17,249 15,631 12,044 1,415 7,600 1994 692 1,521 7,130 20,751 26,772 15,711 17,419 13,891 9,370 6,950 2,330 1,038 1995 1,144 1,218 4,867 9,018

  8. Oregon Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 0 0 0 1,181 1,508 1,244 764 636 372 188 0 0 1991 0 0 0 0 713 1,554 1,458 1,092 674 339 23 0 1992 0 0 0 0 1,572 1,540 1,194 1,010 453 195 0 149 1993 0 0 0 0 1,636 1,291 1,175 1,036 575 487 0 0 1994 0 0 0 0 1,216 1,506 1,202 1,081 688 264 0 0 1995 0 182 0 867 1,179 1,034 695 0 490 0 0 0 1996 - - - - 841 1,365 1,318 509 121 262 - - 1997 0 24 0 0 1,300 1,681 1,301 1,178 411 97 267 0 1998 0 0 0 0 0 1,968 1,188 1,143 1,141 28 0 205 1999 0 0 0 0

  9. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 13,295 9,924 21,742 28,238 51,655 57,413 51,832 54,045 43,121 22,964 20,337 14,002 1991 73,993 63,063 44,655 46,683 64,031 52,754 59,771 61,123 70,362 55,270 57,416 58,249 1992 7,189 3,229 6,490 28,679 50,918 60,273 46,504 57,126 51,685 38,133 24,553 8,982 1993 5,815 1,906 9,046 31,461 62,602 58,643 54,419 47,350 54,543 27,811 19,970 8,144 1994 772 4,575 12,272 40,407 57,110 58,758 53,083 45,208 27,767 23,356 8,648 7,555 1995

  10. Rhode Island Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Pipeline and Distribution Use Price 1967-2005 Citygate Price 10.05 8.22 4.11 4.01 4.03 3.14 1984-2015 Residential Price 16.48 15.33 14.29 14.55 15.14 14.24 1967-2015 Percentage of Total Residential Deliveries included in Prices 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 1989-2015 Commercial Price 14.46 13.33 12.31 12.37 12.89 11.99 1967-2015 Percentage of Total Commercial Deliveries included in Prices 61.2 56.9 55.4 54.5 52.2 53.9 1990-2015 Industrial Price

  11. Tennessee Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1998 0 0 0 0 0 0 134 112 102 103 2 0 1999 6 0 0 0 143 107 76 104 105 57 0 0 2000 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 114 86 21 2001 0 0 0 103 113 32 63 47 62 100 32 4 2002 50 3 6 2 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 2003 0 0 0 0 42 76 75 95 2 46 0 0 2004 2 0 0 33 32 46 63 55 6 25 0 0 2005 0 2015 4 3 26 56 61 57 69 67 72 93 102 55 2016 3 25 37 19 27 38

  12. Texas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 17,004 8,785 10,204 19,677 17,706 20,683 10,352 12,126 22,756 13,644 6,455 1991 15,296 7,922 10,668 19,418 15,195 17,722 9,489 19,572 16,485 9,703 16,161 13,277 1992 28,613 14,959 26,061 25,971 36,754 40,361 32,383 37,832 33,591 24,896 15,309 23,871 1993 10,338 4,336 10,991 24,985 30,856 19,793 22,155 23,862 26,751 20,149 16,519 10,678 1994 9,151 9,187 22,843 31,648 45,809 29,041 34,716 32,744 34,998 26,664 23,258 10,215 1995 12,078

  13. Utah Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 217 15 3 133 1,503 1,503 7,253 6,393 5,871 3,255 768 282 1991 85 0 2,099 2,224 2,645 5,554 6,015 3,813 3,940 2,080 1,316 2,475 1992 389 1,210 2,719 3,032 3,970 3,612 3,759 4,834 3,898 3,111 506 182 1993 0 6 93 168 6,607 6,471 5,034 5,017 4,968 5,083 501 541 1994 45 195 3,861 2,050 6,133 4,069 5,508 6,269 8,509 4,218 1,026 624 1995 71 1,029 918 1,645 4,350 6,226 7,254 3,681 2,323 1,721 2,729 256 1996 7 276 904 1,589 5,596 6,757 6,824 4,746

  14. Virginia Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1998 303 22 31 220 304 296 185 322 301 225 78 84 1999 326 59 50 220 278 267 249 236 414 109 45 125 2000 127 269 47 282 291 224 222 222 350 299 62 60 2001 83 244 244 434 532 402 274 322 362 275 242 25 2002 95 92 0 186 683 339 344 283 434 327 44 183 2003 51 220 70 276 458 504 482 823 671 147 102 203 2004 325 454 190 347 1,013 415 611 1,104 894 1,138 303 279 2005 599 566 319 458 699 560 923 747 783 834 2,614

  15. Washington Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 929 289 499 863 0 2,707 2,937 2,937 1,101 622 906 507 1991 833 586 299 3,139 1,705 2,716 2,138 291 308 0 1,447 753 1992 436 149 945 1,205 1,824 1,543 1,336 1,618 1,578 979 785 895 1993 750 383 2,192 1,363 4,359 1,112 2,036 1,280 2,258 340 326 3,176 1994 1,579 318 1,268 3,455 2,882 2,005 1,945 965 1,330 503 1,263 1,192 1995 541 827 1,671 1,661 2,601 2,020 1,565 829 2,494 464 1,696 1,447 1996 808 2,027 1,081 1,609 2,176 3,349

  16. West Virginia Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 2,636 3,056 7,714 11,094 19,622 17,419 16,104 16,323 13,930 7,415 6,785 4,120 1991 843 2,207 5,193 12,543 15,471 16,359 15,601 10,248 9,551 8,573 5,375 2,288 1992 1,013 1,191 1,116 9,299 25,331 21,514 19,498 21,430 15,698 16,466 5,155 936 1993 467 42 1,620 11,145 39,477 28,118 20,621 18,991 20,910 11,087 7,110 863 1994 331 2,543 4,529 21,836 25,960 28,392 28,083 23,234 21,272 9,826 3,695 1,516 1995 1,637 1,663 6,487 10,136

  17. Wyoming Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 22 16 140 1,047 1,248 1,648 2,162 1,899 2,415 1,135 222 191 1991 56 467 479 368 908 1,922 2,233 1,628 1,090 1,135 423 164 1992 0 73 211 356 439 605 1,402 465 861 525 208 194 1993 8 15 557 1,247 1,443 2,426 2,423 1,875 1,433 1,533 482 163 1994 145 16 930 1,339 1,692 771 1,125 1,524 1,444 1,060 412 138 1995 17 76 89 67 863 1,452 1,588 1,896 1,849 1,265 236 52 1996 13 0 66 974 2,862 1,764 2,169 836 641 540 243 312 1997 157 0 47 372

  18. Illinois Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 119,125 143,180 153,497 1970's 190,661 214,871 237,098 233,112 232,284 294,689 235,310 293,311 236,669 253,320 1980's 197,385 141,824 217,536 122,620 194,327 165,688 156,754 125,066 166,713 199,165 1990's 213,076 212,232 214,404 240,515 235,778 263,409 241,129 227,785 225,089 238,325 2000's 225,524 231,097 246,574 249,228 246,747 260,515 242,754 243,789 260,333 259,421 2010's 247,458 258,690 249,953

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    3,291,395 3,421,813 2,825,427 3,155,661 3,838,826 3,639,015 1935-2015 Alaska 1973-1975 Alaska 15,054 11,675 9,161 2013-2015 Lower 48 States 3,421,813 2,825,427 3,047,153 3,827,150 3,629,854 2011-2015 Alabama 23,026 22,766 21,195 17,966 34,286 33,004 1968-2015 Arkansas 4,672 4,628 2,848 3,112 3,398 3,318 1967-2015 California 226,810 263,067 218,663 182,046 280,516 206,774 1967-2015 Colorado 43,250 51,469 59,096 66,935 72,510 69,983 1967-2015 Connecticut 1973-1996 Delaware 1967-1975 Georgia

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 49,603 57,082 43,037 1970's 46,301 53,186 53,137 57,011 56,505 59,065 55,005 71,002 68,772 70,967 1980's 61,413 48,918 61,121 49,523 44,355 64,993 52,084 45,128 55,076 58,386 1990's 44,471 57,278 65,818 64,184 70,926 70,785 61,060 61,132 70,001 73,398 2000's 69,893 80,546 66,202 67,017 70,097 66,827 68,750 70,329 70,022 79,012 2010's 76,407 77,783 66,774 71,793 80,866 71,767

  1. Kansas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 41,661 44,524 50,772 1970's 52,966 49,267 46,810 42,910 45,642 52,045 48,582 51,344 52,242...

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1994 8 12 26 71 106 95 103 93 85 55 25 14 1995 0 122 0 0 44 42 41 252 592 156 24 101 1996 231 185 141 192 390 670 318 395 440 166 63 160 1997 297 101 63 168 271 161 108 286 262 251 27 27 1998 26 0 81 245 188 623 25 203 139 613 76 0 1999 0 0 14 645 547 213 333 202 459 0 166 67 2000 48 534 44 51 232 606 166 0 0 42 12 286 2001 411 304 85 323 207 618 250 293 370 414 529 109 2002 711 278 182 349 240 54 357 139 106 318 515 536 2003 242 818

  3. Alaska Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013 1,120 2,185 1,860 933 1,065 1,131 977 1,518 1,981 1,627 367 291 2014 701 337 1,062 1,084 903 2,078 831 997 774 678 976 1,255 2015 1,039 982 589 621 618 611 865 857 682 824 756 717 2016 496 748 752 1,540 2,065 1,970 2,123 2,139

  4. Arkansas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 0 0 0 46 104 473 527 481 279 28 0 0 1991 0 0 0 72 132 339 487 14 0 0 0 0 1992 0 0 0 0 0 510 852 665 434 0 0 0 1993 0 0 0 0 0 272 0 0 0 0 0 0 1994 0 0 0 0 657 639 648 859 214 79 65 88 1995 0 0 0 0 307 1,384 1,567 1,461 230 83 182 154 1996 99 281 117 396 1,355 1,217 795 664 1,199 690 110 229 1997 144 82 148 138 651 1,374 1,509 1,278 1,091 93 157 0 1998 138 64 130 555 1,075 1,129 1,070 1,040 848 616 175 109 1999 0 31 0 792 1,053

  5. California Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 2,676 4,631 11,774 22,230 26,798 17,079 11,773 10,071 10,383 17,080 11,528 1,051 1991 1,964 7,531 6,205 21,709 28,179 25,042 16,510 8,436 6,788 7,412 4,368 2,289 1992 1,926 6,570 5,706 17,569 17,167 26,308 19,985 14,876 21,087 11,679 3,331 1,835 1993 915 3,429 15,021 19,520 27,830 15,806 23,522 15,977 16,113 13,773 1,939 1,289 1994 870 494 6,150 20,903 28,804 21,822 18,914 11,381 26,575 14,221 2,254 3,522 1995 1,383 6,220 3,765

  6. Colorado Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 538 235 252 265 1,274 4,266 6,279 5,212 5,012 1,957 1,734 650 1991 992 654 483 61 2,494 3,876 4,219 4,449 5,296 3,296 2,611 2,153 1992 0 301 61 53 158 2,168 4,187 6,308 5,942 2,708 395 779 1993 1,476 514 1,328 277 3,434 5,426 4,400 5,097 4,898 19,867 1,773 2,642 1994 349 561 1,525 594 6,187 1,887 5,096 5,311 5,305 1,318 1,652 1,401 1995 1,508 1,548 1,831 1,379 3,769 6,416 6,446 4,716 4,341 2,877 3,680 1,206 1996 1,050 3,496

  7. Indiana Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 997 821 771 1,207 1,916 1,673 2,268 3,772 4,202 2,896 1,993 539 1991 91 245 158 710 1,849 1,107 2,920 3,845 4,606 4,490 3,131 501 1992 98 349 429 1,076 1,611 2,638 5,174 4,168 5,309 3,579 926 413 1993 681 526 882 1,587 2,170 2,733 4,564 4,464 4,276 2,659 911 475 1994 328 565 519 609 934 2,541 5,229 4,565 4,175 3,340 1,546 305 1995 439 80 786 1,211 1,057 1,831 2,892 3,751 4,791 4,578 2,437 483 1996 262 870 948 968 1,028 2,560

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 7,635 3,835 6,654 5,480 4,038 7,424 13,042 13,023 16,981 12,047 11,053 6,933 1991 5,647 10,096 7,403 7,023 8,901 9,815 5,663 9,450 12,006 14,791 7,219 11,614 1992 6,014 7,237 5,144 3,501 8,711 5,088 6,556 12,676 12,171 9,476 3,696 3,978 1993 3,474 3,941 5,856 10,399 23,758 12,175 7,172 10,616 15,593 14,770 2,712 5,817 1994 3,919 3,957 8,082 8,386 13,732 9,332 12,132 14,307 11,682 8,641 4,889 7,010 1995 3,561 3,694 6,319 7,908 11,537

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 3,591 7,852 5,644 4,269 4,991 5,462 7,829 7,379 7,268 5,324 3,591 2,996 1991 1,910 2,777 4,468 4,883 2,671 3,345 5,395 4,818 4,660 4,074 4,315 4,110 1992 5,509 3,635 2,314 2,151 1,697 2,787 4,724 4,202 5,539 10,882 3,272 2,656 1993 1,967 990 928 2,687 7,049 7,985 7,838 5,873 7,014 3,907 1,397 482 1994 431 928 1,526 6,100 10,571 9,346 9,742 7,138 4,696 4,684 3,438 1,230 1995 1,189 478 2,868 4,780 13,288 7,749 8,687 5,375 6,889

  10. Louisiana Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 17,712 15,346 15,364 11,228 15,333 18,647 19,527 17,703 19,665 19,333 15,705 14,621 1991 2,280 4,842 12,957 13,291 22,317 22,447 17,260 17,261 23,603 27,512 9,950 4,281 1992 7,699 4,109 13,109 16,478 29,243 21,440 20,695 21,713 23,276 24,685 7,374 3,230 1993 4,314 1,638 8,805 14,315 34,776 33,317 27,192 28,570 32,062 21,236 21,232 2,111 1994 3,737 9,288 9,922 26,592 34,270 23,811 30,757 28,317 24,211 15,673 13,387 4,560 1995

  11. Maryland Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 239 2,623 1,788 2,614 1,243 2,126 2,822 2,513 2,065 403 535 1991 63 182 612 1,414 1,596 1,606 1,492 2,061 9,642 963 1,273 1,604 1992 1,487 148 759 573 3,542 2,886 2,153 2,566 2,310 1,780 732 565 1993 281 0 1,364 604 2,216 1,472 1,128 1,717 2,542 2,679 823 486 1994 2 890 1,570 1,256 2,111 1,537 2,113 1,468 1,654 1,781 196 736 1995 657 199 1,442 1,267 2,010 2,042 1,080 1,854 2,210 1,468 830 550 1996 732 1,205 1,514 1,155 2,219

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    West Virginia 11,101 5,919 3,512 734 2,318 4,082 1990-2016 Wyoming 1,431 716 227 1,988 3,024 2,558 1990-2016 AGA Producing Region 1994-2014 AGA Eastern Consuming Region 1994-2014 ...

  13. New Mexico Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 502 1,137 1,088 2,198 1,190 1,665 3,674 3,203 2,048 3,187 1,857 602 1991 341 245 267 3,130 3,097 3,033 1,930 790 3,099 ...

  14. Minnesota Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 0 0 69 477 330 112 133 48 61 27 0 0 1991 0 0 42 228 257 312 291 61 93 0 0 0 1992 0 0 0 0 391 307 299 250 126 0 0 0 1993 0 ...

  15. Minnesota Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 829 1,502 839 551 1,326 1,267 987 1980's 1,217 1,125 1,601 646 1,113 1,640 1,146 476 1,142 1,226 ...

  16. Lower 48 States Total Natural Gas Injections into Underground...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    154,663 2014 67,600 104,037 132,997 321,828 527,860 504,311 462,167 445,872 467,828 451,675 199,417 141,558 2015 68,894 61,035 181,326 404,414 541,018 429,353 377,626 393,223 ...

  17. Chemical tailoring of steam to remediate underground mixed waste contaminents

    DOEpatents

    Aines, Roger D.; Udell, Kent S.; Bruton, Carol J.; Carrigan, Charles R.

    1999-01-01

    A method to simultaneously remediate mixed-waste underground contamination, such as organic liquids, metals, and radionuclides involves chemical tailoring of steam for underground injection. Gases or chemicals are injected into a high pressure steam flow being injected via one or more injection wells to contaminated soil located beyond a depth where excavation is possible. The injection of the steam with gases or chemicals mobilizes contaminants, such as metals and organics, as the steam pushes the waste through the ground toward an extraction well having subatmospheric pressure (vacuum). The steam and mobilized contaminants are drawn in a substantially horizontal direction to the extraction well and withdrawn to a treatment point above ground. The heat and boiling action of the front of the steam flow enhance the mobilizing effects of the chemical or gas additives. The method may also be utilized for immobilization of metals by using an additive in the steam which causes precipitation of the metals into clusters large enough to limit their future migration, while removing any organic contaminants.

  18. Virginia Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working Gas) (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Working Gas) (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working ... Underground Working Natural Gas in Storage - All Operators Virginia Underground Natural ...

  19. New Jersey Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) New Jersey Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals ... Withdrawals of Natural Gas from Underground Storage - All Operators New Jersey Underground ...

  20. New Mexico Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (Million...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Base Gas) (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) ... Underground Base Natural Gas in Storage - All Operators New Mexico Underground Natural Gas ...

  1. New York Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Base Gas) (Million Cubic Feet) New York Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) ... Underground Base Natural Gas in Storage - All Operators New York Underground Natural Gas ...

  2. New Mexico Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working Gas) ...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Working Gas) (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working ... Underground Working Natural Gas in Storage - All Operators New Mexico Underground Natural ...

  3. New York Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working Gas) (Million...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Working Gas) (Million Cubic Feet) New York Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working ... Underground Working Natural Gas in Storage - All Operators New York Underground Natural ...

  4. Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...

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

    Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Natural Gas Underground ... Net Withdrawals of Natural Gas from Underground Storage - All Operators Minnesota ...

  5. Logistics background study: underground mining

    SciTech Connect

    Hanslovan, J. J.; Visovsky, R. G.

    1982-02-01

    Logistical functions that are normally associated with US underground coal mining are investigated and analyzed. These functions imply all activities and services that support the producing sections of the mine. The report provides a better understanding of how these functions impact coal production in terms of time, cost, and safety. Major underground logistics activities are analyzed and include: transportation and personnel, supplies and equipment; transportation of coal and rock; electrical distribution and communications systems; water handling; hydraulics; and ventilation systems. Recommended areas for future research are identified and prioritized.

  6. ,"California Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: California Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5070CA2" "Date","California Natural Gas Underground Storage Net ...

  7. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million...

    Annual Energy Outlook

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

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...010TX2","N5020TX2","N5070TX2","N5050TX2","N5060TX2" "Date","Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)","Texas Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Texas ...

  9. 2009 underground/longwall mining buyer's guide

    SciTech Connect

    2009-06-15

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

  10. High Temperature Superconducting Underground Cable

    SciTech Connect

    Farrell, Roger, A.

    2010-02-28

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

  11. South Central Region Natural Gas Working Underground Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    * * 17 9 1967-2015 Propane-Air 0 0 17 9 1980-201

    Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 1973 1974 1975 View History Net Withdrawals -6 -27 46 1973-1975 Injections 48 80 70 1973-1975 Withdrawals 42 53 116 1973-197

    in Working Gas from Same Month Previous Year (Percent)

    Producing Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage - Change in Working Gas from Same Month Previous

  12. Method and apparatus for constructing an underground barrier wall structure

    DOEpatents

    Dwyer, Brian P.; Stewart, Willis E.; Dwyer, Stephen F.

    2002-01-01

    A method and apparatus for constructing a underground barrier wall structure using a jet grout injector subassembly comprising a pair of primary nozzles and a plurality of secondary nozzles, the secondary nozzles having a smaller diameter than the primary nozzles, for injecting grout in directions other than the primary direction, which creates a barrier wall panel having a substantially uniform wall thickess. This invention addresses the problem of the weak "bow-tie" shape that is formed during conventional jet injection when using only a pair of primary nozzles. The improvement is accomplished by using at least four secondary nozzles, of smaller diameter, located on both sides of the primary nozzles. These additional secondary nozzles spray grout or permeable reactive materials in other directions optimized to fill in the thin regions of the bow-tie shape. The result is a panel with increased strength and substantially uniform wall thickness.

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030al2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030mn2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030mo2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030ut2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030va2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030in2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  19. ,"Maryland Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030md2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030ia2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030la2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030co2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030wa2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030ks2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030il2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030ky2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030mi2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030ms2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030wy2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030ar2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  11. Underground Natural Gas Storage by Storage Type

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage by Storage Type (Million Cubic Feet) Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Underground Natural Gas ...

  13. ,"California Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

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

  14. ,"Kentucky Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

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

  15. ,"Maryland Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

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

  16. ,"Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

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

  17. ,"Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

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

  18. ,"Colorado Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

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

  19. ,"Alabama Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

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

  20. ,"Missouri Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

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

  1. ,"Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

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

  2. ,"Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

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

  3. ,"Louisiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

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

  4. ,"Montana Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

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

  5. ,"Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

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

  6. ,"Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

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

  7. ,"Mississippi Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

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

  8. ,"Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

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

  9. ,"Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

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

  10. ,"Mississippi Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Mississippi Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","102015" ,"Release...

  11. Cryogenic slurry for extinguishing underground fires

    DOEpatents

    Chaiken, Robert F. (Pittsburgh, PA); Kim, Ann G. (Pittsburgh, PA); Kociban, Andrew M. (Wheeling, WV); Slivon, Jr., Joseph P. (Tarentum, PA)

    1994-01-01

    A cryogenic slurry comprising a mixture of solid carbon dioxide particles suspended in liquid nitrogen is provided which is useful in extinguishing underground fires.

  12. Westinghouse Again Recognized For Safe Underground Operations...

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

    The company's underground operations include mining, hoisting, maintenance, engineering ... Westinghouse by the New Mexico State Inspector of Mines and the New Mexico Mining ...

  13. Earthquake damage to underground facilities (Technical Report...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    The potential seismic risk for an underground nuclear waste repository will be one of the ... Damage from documented nuclear events was also included in the study where applicable. ...

  14. Management of dry flue gas desulfurization by-products in underground mines. Quarterly report, August 1--October 31, 1997

    SciTech Connect

    Chugh, Y.P.

    1997-12-31

    The objective of this project was to develop and demonstrate two technologies for the placement of coal combustion by-products in abandoned underground coal mines, and to assess the environmental impact of these technologies for the management of CCB materials. The two technologies for the underground placement that were to be developed and demonstrated are: (1) pneumatic placement using virtually dry CCB products, and (2) hydraulic placement using a paste mixture of CCB products with about 70% solids. The period covered by this report is the second quarter of Phase 3 of the overall program. During this period over 8,000 tons of CCB mixtures was injected using the hydraulic paste technology. This amount of material virtually filled the underground opening around the injection well, and was deemed sufficient to demonstrate fully the hydraulic injection technology. By the end of this quarter about 2,000 tons of fly ash had been placed underground using the pneumatic placement technology. While the rate of injection of about 50 tons per hour met design criteria, problems were experienced in the delivery of fly ash to the pneumatic demonstration site. The source of the fly ash, the Archer Daniels Midland Company power plant at Decatur, Illinois is some distance from the demonstration site, and often sufficient tanker trucks are not available to haul enough fly ash to fully load the injection equipment. Further, on some occasions fly ash from the plant was not available. The injection well was plugged three times during the demonstration. This typically occurred due to cementation of the FBC ash in contact with water. After considerable deliberations and in consultation with the technical project officer, it was decided to stop further injection of CCB`s underground using the developed pneumatic technology.

  15. Underground storage tank management plan

    SciTech Connect

    1994-09-01

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

  16. ,"Underground Natural Gas Storage by Storage Type"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...ey","N5030US2","N5010US2","N5020US2","N5070US2","N5050US2","N5060US2" "Date","U.S. Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)","U.S. Total Natural Gas in Underground Storage ...

  17. ,"Underground Natural Gas Storage by Storage Type"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Sourcekey","N5030US2","N5010US2","N5020US2","N5070US2","N5050US2","N5060US2" "Date","U.S. Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)","U.S. Total Natural Gas in Underground...

  18. Underground Flow Measurement and Particle Release Test | Department...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Underground Flow Measurement and Particle Release Test Underground Flow Measurement and Particle Release Test This document was used to determine facts and conditions during the ...

  19. Nevada National Security Site Underground Test Area (UGTA) Flow...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Nevada National Security Site Underground Test Area (UGTA) Flow and Transport Modeling - ... Video Presentation Nevada National Security Site Underground Test Area (UGTA) Flow and ...

  20. ,"West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Data for" ,"Data 1","West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ... AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ...

  1. DOE - Office of Legacy Management -- Hoe Creek Underground Coal...

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Hoe Creek Underground Coal Gasification Site - 045 FUSRAP Considered Sites Site: Hoe Creek Underground Coal Gasification Site (045) Designated Name: Alternate Name: Location: ...

  2. Eastern Consuming Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net...

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

    Eastern Consuming Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Eastern Consuming Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...

  3. DOE - NNSA/NFO -- Photo Library Underground Testing

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

    U.S. DOENNSA - Nevada Field Office Photo Library - Underground Testing Between 1951 and 1992, 828 underground nuclear tests were conducted in specially drilled shafts, horizontal ...

  4. Nevada Underground Tank Program Webpage | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Underground Tank Program Webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Nevada Underground Tank Program Webpage Abstract Provides overview of...

  5. NAC - 534 Underground Water and Wells | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    - 534 Underground Water and Wells Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- RegulationRegulation: NAC - 534 Underground Water and...

  6. Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...

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

    Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct...

  7. Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...

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

    Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct...

  8. Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...

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

    Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct...

  9. Illinois Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...

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

    Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct...

  10. East Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...

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

    East Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) East Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar...

  11. Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...

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

    Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct...

  12. Emissions and Durability of Underground Mining Diesel Particulate...

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

    Durability of Underground Mining Diesel Particulate Filter Applications Emissions and Durability of Underground Mining Diesel Particulate Filter Applications Presentation given at ...

  13. New Jersey Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) New Jersey Natural Gas Underground ... Net Withdrawals of Natural Gas from Underground Storage - All Operators New Jersey ...

  14. New model more accurately tracks gases for underground nuclear...

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

    Model tracks gases for underground nuclear explosion detection New model more accurately tracks gases for underground nuclear explosion detection Scientists have developed a new, ...

  15. North Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) North Carolina Natural Gas Underground ... Net Withdrawals of Natural Gas from Underground Storage - All Operators North Carolina ...

  16. North Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) North Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage ... Withdrawals of Natural Gas from Underground Storage - All Operators North Carolina ...

  17. Montana Underground Storage Tanks Webpage | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Underground Storage Tanks Webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Montana Underground Storage Tanks Webpage Abstract Provides overview...

  18. Alaska Underground Storage Tanks Website | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Underground Storage Tanks Website Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Alaska Underground Storage Tanks Website Author Division of Spill...

  19. Hawaii Department of Health Underground Storage Tank Webpage...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Underground Storage Tank Webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Hawaii Department of Health Underground Storage Tank Webpage Abstract...

  20. Long-Baseline Neutrino Facility / Deep Underground Neutrino Project...

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

    Long-Baseline Neutrino Facility Deep Underground Neutrino Project (LBNF-DUNE) Long-Baseline Neutrino Facility Deep Underground Neutrino Project (LBNF-DUNE) Long-Baseline ...

  1. Foams and surfactants for improved underground storage of natural gas by blockage of water cooling

    SciTech Connect

    Smith, D.H.; Jikich, S.A.

    1993-12-31

    Foam blockage to alleviate water coning during the retrieval stage appears to be the simplest, least expensive, and most easily commercialized foam-based technology for improving the underground storage of natural gas. This paper describes effects of injection rate, surfactant concentration, NaCl salinity, and divalent ions on measured aqueous-phase and gaseous-phase relative permeabilities, as well as why these data are needed for modeling the process and designing single-well field tests.

  2. OSTIblog Articles in the Sanford Underground Research Facilities Topic |

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    OSTI, US Dept of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information Underground Research Facilities

  3. The Basics of Underground Natural Gas Storage

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Two of the most important characteristics of an underground storage reservoir are its capacity to hold natural gas for future use and the rate at which gas inventory can be...

  4. Delaware Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

  5. Connecticut Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Connecticut Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

  6. Wisconsin Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Wisconsin Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

  7. Georgia Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Georgia Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

  8. WIPP Installs Underground Personnel Notification and Tracking...

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

    Plant (WIPP) that allows for two-way communication for both talk and text, audible and ... In addition to providing two- way communication between the underground and the surface, ...

  9. False Radiological Alarm in WIPP Underground

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

    At approximately 7:40 a.m. Mountain Time today, a portable continuous air monitor (CAM) alarm activated in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) underground. Shortly after...

  10. System for remote control of underground device

    DOEpatents

    Brumleve, T.D.; Hicks, M.G.; Jones, M.O.

    1975-10-21

    A system is described for remote control of an underground device, particularly a nuclear explosive. The system includes means at the surface of the ground for transmitting a seismic signal sequence through the earth having controlled and predetermined signal characteristics for initiating a selected action in the device. Additional apparatus, located with or adjacent to the underground device, produces electrical signals in response to the seismic signals received and compares these electrical signals with the predetermined signal characteristics.

  11. Base Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Summary)

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Citygate Price Residential Price Commercial Price Industrial Price Electric Power Price Gross Withdrawals Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Oil Wells Gross Withdrawals From Shale Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Coalbed Wells Repressuring Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed Vented and Flared Marketed Production NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent Dry Production Imports By Pipeline LNG Imports Exports Exports By Pipeline LNG Exports Underground Storage Capacity Gas in Underground

  12. Underground infrastructure damage for a Chicago scenario

    SciTech Connect

    Dey, Thomas N; Bos, Rabdall J

    2011-01-25

    Estimating effects due to an urban IND (improvised nuclear device) on underground structures and underground utilities is a challenging task. Nuclear effects tests performed at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) during the era of nuclear weapons testing provides much information on how underground military structures respond. Transferring this knowledge to answer questions about the urban civilian environment is needed to help plan responses to IND scenarios. Explosions just above the ground surface can only couple a small fraction of the blast energy into an underground shock. The various forms of nuclear radiation have limited penetration into the ground. While the shock transmitted into the ground carries only a small fraction of the blast energy, peak stresses are generally higher and peak ground displacement is lower than in the air blast. While underground military structures are often designed to resist stresses substantially higher than due to the overlying rocks and soils (overburden), civilian structures such as subways and tunnels would generally only need to resist overburden conditions with a suitable safety factor. Just as we expect the buildings themselves to channel and shield air blast above ground, basements and other underground openings as well as changes of geology will channel and shield the underground shock wave. While a weaker shock is expected in an urban environment, small displacements on very close-by faults, and more likely, soils being displaced past building foundations where utility lines enter could readily damaged or disable these services. Immediately near an explosion, the blast can 'liquefy' a saturated soil creating a quicksand-like condition for a period of time. We extrapolate the nuclear effects experience to a Chicago-based scenario. We consider the TARP (Tunnel and Reservoir Project) and subway system and the underground lifeline (electric, gas, water, etc) system and provide guidance for planning this scenario.

  13. Underground pipe inspection device and method

    DOEpatents

    Germata, Daniel Thomas (Wadsworth, IL)

    2009-02-24

    A method and apparatus for inspecting the walls of an underground pipe from inside the pipe in which an inspection apparatus having a circular planar platform having a plurality of lever arms having one end pivotably attached to one side of the platform, having a pipe inspection device connected to an opposite end, and having a system for pivoting the lever arms is inserted into the underground pipe, with the inspection apparatus oriented with the planar platform disposed perpendicular to the pipe axis. The plurality of lever arms are pivoted toward the inside wall of the pipe, contacting the inside wall with each inspection device as the apparatus is conveyed along a length of the underground pipe.

  14. Method for making generally cylindrical underground openings

    DOEpatents

    Routh, J.W.

    1983-05-26

    A rapid, economical and safe method for making a generally cylindrical underground opening such as a shaft or a tunnel is described. A borehole is formed along the approximate center line of where it is desired to make the underground opening. The borehole is loaded with an explodable material and the explodable material is detonated. An enlarged cavity is formed by the explosive action of the detonated explodable material forcing outward and compacting the original walls of the borehole. The enlarged cavity may be increased in size by loading it with a second explodable material, and detonating the second explodable material. The process may be repeated as required until the desired underground opening is made. The explodable material used in the method may be free-flowing, and it may be contained in a pipe.

  15. Cost and code study of underground buildings

    SciTech Connect

    Sterling, R.L.

    1981-01-01

    Various regulatory and financial implications for earth-sheltered houses and buildings are discussed. Earth-sheltered houses are covered in the most detail including discussions of building-code restrictions, HUD Minimum Property Standards, legal aspects, zoning restrictions, taxation, insurance, and home financing. Examples of the initial-cost elements in earth-sheltered houses together with projected life-cycle costs are given and compared to more-conventional energy-conserving houses. For larger-scale underground buildings, further information is given on building code, fire protection, and insurance provisions. Initial-cost information for five large underground buildings is presented together with energy-use information where available.

  16. Potential underground risks associated with CAES.

    SciTech Connect

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

    2010-10-01

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

  17. NM Underground Storage Tank Registration | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Underground Storage Tank Registration Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- OtherOther: NM Underground Storage Tank RegistrationLegal...

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

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

  19. Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1997 0 0 ...

  20. Mississippi Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

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

  1. Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 245,145 ...

  2. Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Annual Energy Outlook

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

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

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

  4. Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1997 0 0 0 ...

  5. Montana Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Annual Energy Outlook

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

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

    Annual Energy Outlook

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

  7. Illinois Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Annual Energy Outlook

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

  8. Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Annual Energy Outlook

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

  9. Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 6,996 ...

  10. California Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

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

  11. Kentucky Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

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

  12. Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 84,808 ...

  13. Louisiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

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

  14. Alabama Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Annual Energy Outlook

    Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1995 1,379 ...

  15. Nebraska Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

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

  16. Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Annual Energy Outlook

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

  17. Colorado Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

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

  18. Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

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

  19. Maryland Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Annual Energy Outlook

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

  20. Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Annual Energy Outlook

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

  1. Missouri Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

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

  2. Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 96,943 ...

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

    Annual Energy Outlook

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

  4. ,"Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5070VA2" "Date","Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net ...

  5. ,"West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    "Back to Contents","Data 1: West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5070WV2" "Date","West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage ...

  6. Visit to the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory

    ScienceCinema

    None

    2010-01-08

    U.S. Department of Energy scientists and administrators join members of the National Science Foundation and South Dakotas Sanford Underground Laboratory for the deepest journey yet to the proposed site of the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory (DUSEL).

  7. NRS Chapter 534 - Underground Water and Wells | Open Energy Informatio...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    - Underground Water and Wells Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- StatuteStatute: NRS Chapter 534 - Underground Water and WellsLegal...

  8. Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

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

  9. Visit to the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory

    SciTech Connect

    2009-03-31

    U.S. Department of Energy scientists and administrators join members of the National Science Foundation and South Dakotas Sanford Underground Laboratory for the deepest journey yet to the proposed site of the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory (DUSEL).

  10. Visit to the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory

    SciTech Connect

    2009-01-01

    U.S. Department of Energy scientists and administrators join members of the National Science Foundation and South Dakotas Sanford Underground Laboratory for the deepest journey yet to the proposed site of the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory (DUSEL).

  11. New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...

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

    Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct...

  12. Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...

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

    Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov...

  13. East Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

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

    East Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) East Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug...

  14. NMSA 72-12 Underground Waters | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    12 Underground Waters Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- StatuteStatute: NMSA 72-12 Underground WatersLegal Abstract New Mexico...

  15. Lower 48 States Natural Gas Working Underground Storage (Billion...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage (Billion Cubic Feet) Lower 48 States Natural Gas Working Underground Storage (Billion Cubic Feet) Year-Month Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 End Date Value...

  16. RCW - 90.76 Underground Storage Tanks | Open Energy Information

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    - 90.76 Underground Storage Tanks Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- RegulationRegulation: RCW - 90.76 Underground Storage...

  17. Notification for Underground Storage Tanks (EPA Form 7530-1)...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Notification for Underground Storage Tanks (EPA Form 7530-1) Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Form: Notification for Underground Storage Tanks...

  18. WAC - 173-360 Underground Storage Tank Regulations | Open Energy...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    60 Underground Storage Tank Regulations Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- RegulationRegulation: WAC - 173-360 Underground Storage...

  19. ,"Midwest Region Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:21 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Midwest Region Natural Gas ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:24 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","AGA Eastern Consuming Region ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:59 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","West Virginia Natural Gas in ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:48 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... York Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","New York Natural Gas in ...

  3. ,"Mountain Region Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:22 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Mountain Region Natural Gas ...

  4. ,"Pacific Region Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:26 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Pacific Region Natural Gas ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:25 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","AGA Western Consuming Region ...

  6. ,"East Region Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:19 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","East Region Natural Gas in ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:23 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","AGA Producing Region Natural ...

  8. ,"South Central Region Underground Natural Gas Storage - All...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...282016 11:29:20 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","South Central Region Natural ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

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

  10. Magnetic detection of underground pipe using timed-release marking droplets

    DOEpatents

    Powell, James R.; Reich, Morris

    1996-12-17

    A system 10 and method of detecting an underground pipe 12 injects magnetic marking droplets 16 into the underground pipe 12 which coat the inside of the pipe 12 and may be detected from aboveground by a magnetometer 28. The droplets 16 include a non-adhesive cover 32 which allows free flow thereof through the pipe 12, with the cover 32 being ablatable for the timed-release of a central core 30 containing magnetic particles 30a which adhere to the inside of the pipe 12 and are detectable from aboveground. The rate of ablation of the droplet covers 32 is selectively variable to control a free flowing incubation zone 12a for the droplets 16 and a subsequent deposition zone 12b in which the magnetic particles 30a are released for coating the pipe 12.

  11. Magnetic detection of underground pipe using timed-release marking droplets

    DOEpatents

    Powell, J.R.; Reich, M.

    1996-12-17

    A system and method are disclosed of detecting an underground pipe by injecting magnetic marking droplets into the underground pipe which coat the inside of the pipe and may be detected from aboveground by a magnetometer. The droplets include a non-adhesive cover which allows free flow through the pipe, with the cover being ablatable for the timed-release of a central core containing magnetic particles which adhere to the inside of the pipe and are detectable from aboveground. The rate of ablation of the droplet covers is selectively variable to control a free flowing incubation zone for the droplets and a subsequent deposition zone in which the magnetic particles are released for coating the pipe. 6 figs.

  12. Sandia Energy - Storing Hydrogen Underground Could Boost Transportatio...

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

    Storing Hydrogen Underground Could Boost Transportation, Energy Security Home Infrastructure Security Energy Transportation Energy Facilities Capabilities News News & Events...

  13. Underground Storage Tanks: New Fuels and Compatibility | Department of

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

    Energy Underground Storage Tanks: New Fuels and Compatibility Underground Storage Tanks: New Fuels and Compatibility Breakout Session 1C-Fostering Technology Adoption I: Building the Market for Renewables with High Octane Fuels Underground Storage Tanks: New Fuels and Compatibility Ryan Haerer, Program Analyst, Alternative Fuels, Office of Underground Storage Tanks, Environmental Protection Agency haerer_biomass_2014.pdf (598.19 KB) More Documents & Publications Regulatory and Commercial

  14. Underground Energy Storage Program. 1983 annual summary

    SciTech Connect

    Kannberg, L.D.

    1984-06-01

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

  15. Underground natural gas storage reservoir management

    SciTech Connect

    Ortiz, I.; Anthony, R.

    1995-06-01

    The objective of this study is to research technologies and methodologies that will reduce the costs associated with the operation and maintenance of underground natural gas storage. This effort will include a survey of public information to determine the amount of natural gas lost from underground storage fields, determine the causes of this lost gas, and develop strategies and remedial designs to reduce or stop the gas loss from selected fields. Phase I includes a detailed survey of US natural gas storage reservoirs to determine the actual amount of natural gas annually lost from underground storage fields. These reservoirs will be ranked, the resultant will include the amount of gas and revenue annually lost. The results will be analyzed in conjunction with the type (geologic) of storage reservoirs to determine the significance and impact of the gas loss. A report of the work accomplished will be prepared. The report will include: (1) a summary list by geologic type of US gas storage reservoirs and their annual underground gas storage losses in ft{sup 3}; (2) a rank by geologic classifications as to the amount of gas lost and the resultant lost revenue; and (3) show the level of significance and impact of the losses by geologic type. Concurrently, the amount of storage activity has increased in conjunction with the net increase of natural gas imports as shown on Figure No. 3. Storage is playing an ever increasing importance in supplying the domestic energy requirements.

  16. Silicone injection restores failing submarine cables

    SciTech Connect

    Tilstra, M.

    1995-12-01

    Faced with the prospect of replacing nearly 10 miles of aging undersea cables, Orcas Power & Light Co (Opalco) elected instead to inject silicone into as many of the cables as possible. Silicone injection has been used extensively on underground residential distribution (URD) and feeder cables, but only two underwater cables had previously been injected: a feeder cable for Florida Power Corp under an intercoastal waterway and a cable for Washington Water Power Co under a lake in western Idaho. The compound restores power cables damaged by water treeing and prevents further water damage. Selection criteria included age, type, and whether the cables had ever been spliced. Older, soldered, hand-wrapped splices were avoided as they block the CableCure fluid from flowing through. This makes the cable uninjectable unless the splices are replaced with the molded type. The first cables chosen for injection were between 15 and 30 years old and clear of soldered splices. They also were free from faults. 4 figs.

  17. Injection Laser System

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

    Injection Laser System For each of NIF's 192 beams: The pulse shape as a function of time ... NIF's injection laser system (ILS) plays a key role in meeting these three requirements. ...

  18. Rich catalytic injection

    DOEpatents

    Veninger, Albert (Coventry, CT)

    2008-12-30

    A gas turbine engine includes a compressor, a rich catalytic injector, a combustor, and a turbine. The rich catalytic injector includes a rich catalytic device, a mixing zone, and an injection assembly. The injection assembly provides an interface between the mixing zone and the combustor. The injection assembly can inject diffusion fuel into the combustor, provides flame aerodynamic stabilization in the combustor, and may include an ignition device.

  19. The Sanford underground research facility at Homestake

    SciTech Connect

    Heise, J.

    2014-06-24

    The former Homestake gold mine in Lead, South Dakota is being transformed into a dedicated laboratory to pursue underground research in rare-process physics, as well as offering research opportunities in other disciplines such as biology, geology and engineering. A key component of the Sanford Underground Research Facility (SURF) is the Davis Campus, which is in operation at the 4850-foot level (4300 m.w.e) and currently hosts three projects: the LUX dark matter experiment, the MAJORANA DEMONSTRATOR neutrinoless double-beta decay experiment and the CUBED low-background counter. Plans for possible future experiments at SURF are well underway and include long baseline neutrino oscillation experiments, future dark matter experiments as well as nuclear astrophysics accelerators. Facility upgrades to accommodate some of these future projects have already started. SURF is a dedicated facility with significant expansion capability.

  20. Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Pacific Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013 544,417 522,182 529,030 543,901 581,848 610,748 619,005 624,692 636,405 645,077 626,113 529,510 2014 456,688 373,776 363,397 402,887 459,189 507,932 533,461 561,487 576,755 604,676 598,236 581,556 2015 535,012 532,186 534,713 552,592 584,491 595,030 603,251 606,862 617,976 638,832 628,206 579,071 2016 535,527 521,897

  1. Reliability assessment of underground shaft closure

    SciTech Connect

    Fossum, A.F.

    1994-12-31

    The intent of the WIPP, being constructed in the bedded geologic salt deposits of Southeastern New Mexico, is to provide the technological basis for the safe disposal of radioactive Transuranic (TRU) wastes generated by the defense programs of the United States. In determining this technological basis, advanced reliability and structural analysis techniques are used to determine the probability of time-to-closure of a hypothetical underground shaft located in an argillaceous salt formation and filled with compacted crushed salt. Before being filled with crushed salt for sealing, the shaft provides access to an underground facility. Reliable closure of the shaft depends upon the sealing of the shaft through creep closure and recompaction of crushed backfill. Appropriate methods are demonstrated to calculate cumulative distribution functions of the closure based on laboratory determined random variable uncertainty in salt creep properties.

  2. Rotary steerable motor system for underground drilling

    DOEpatents

    Turner, William E.; Perry, Carl A.; Wassell, Mark E.; Barbely, Jason R.; Burgess, Daniel E.; Cobern, Martin E.

    2008-06-24

    A preferred embodiment of a system for rotating and guiding a drill bit in an underground bore includes a drilling motor and a drive shaft coupled to drilling motor so that drill bit can be rotated by the drilling motor. The system further includes a guidance module having an actuating arm movable between an extended position wherein the actuating arm can contact a surface of the bore and thereby exert a force on the housing of the guidance module, and a retracted position.

  3. Rotary steerable motor system for underground drilling

    DOEpatents

    Turner, William E.; Perry, Carl A.; Wassell, Mark E.; Barbely, Jason R.; Burgess, Daniel E.; Cobern, Martin E.

    2010-07-27

    A preferred embodiment of a system for rotating and guiding a drill bit in an underground bore includes a drilling motor and a drive shaft coupled to drilling motor so that drill bit can be rotated by the drilling motor. The system further includes a guidance module having an actuating arm movable between an extended position wherein the actuating arm can contact a surface of the bore and thereby exert a force on the housing of the guidance module, and a retracted position.

  4. Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Definitions Definitions Since 2006, EIA has reported two measures of aggregate capacity, one based on demonstrated peak working gas storage, the other on working gas design capacity. Demonstrated Peak Working Gas Capacity: This measure sums the highest storage inventory level of working gas observed in each facility over the 5-year range from May 2005 to April 2010, as reported by the operator on the Form EIA-191M, "Monthly Underground Gas Storage Report." This data-driven estimate

  5. Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Methodology Methodology Demonstrated Peak Working Gas Capacity Estimates: Estimates are based on aggregation of the noncoincident peak levels of working gas inventories at individual storage fields as reported monthly over a 60-month period ending in April 2010 on Form EIA-191M, "Monthly Natural Gas Underground Storage Report." The months of measurement for the peak storage volumes by facilities may differ; i.e., the months do not necessarily coincide. As such, the noncoincident peak

  6. 3Q/4Q99 F-Area Hazardous Waste Management Facility Corrective Action Report - Third and Fourth Quarter 1999, Volumes I and II

    SciTech Connect

    Chase, J.

    2000-05-12

    Savannah River Site (SRS) monitors groundwater quality at the F-Area Hazardous Waste management Facility (HWMF) and provides results of this monitoring to the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) semiannually as required by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) permit. SRS also performs monthly sampling of the Wastewater Treatment Unit (WTU) effluent in accordance with Section C of the Underground Injection Control (UIC) application.

  7. Connecticut Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    1994 1995 1996 View History Net Withdrawals 0 0 1973-1996 Injections 0 0 0 1973-1996 Withdrawals 0 0 0 1973-1996

  8. Georgia Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    1974 1975 View History Net Withdrawals -90 -339 1974-1975 Injections 123 366 1974-1975 Withdrawals 33 27 1974

  9. Dynamic underground stripping demonstration project. Interim engineering report

    SciTech Connect

    Newmark, R.L.

    1992-04-01

    LLNL is collaborating with the UC Berkeley College of Engineering to develop and demonstrate a system of thermal remediation techniques for rapid cleanup of localized underground spills. Called dynamic stripping to reflect the rapid and controllable nature of the process, it will combine steam injection, direct electrical heating, and tomographic geophysical imaging in a cleanup of the LLNL gasoline spill. In the first eight months of the project, a Clean Site engineering test was conducted to prove the field application of the techniques. Tests then began on the contaminated site in FY 1992. This report describes the work at the Clean Site, including design and performance criteria, test results, interpretations, and conclusions. We fielded `a wide range of new designs and techniques, some successful and some not. In this document, we focus on results and performance, lessons learned, and design and operational changes recommended for work at the contaminated site. Each section focuses on a different aspect of the work and can be considered a self-contained contribution.

  10. Potential Advantages of Underground Nuclear Parks

    SciTech Connect

    Myers, Carl W.; Elkins, Ned Z.; Kunze, Jay F.; Mahar, James M.

    2006-07-01

    In this paper we argue that an underground nuclear park (UNP) could potentially lead to lower capital and operating cost for the reactors installed in the UNP compared to the traditional approach, which would be to site the reactors at the earth's surface at distributed locations. The UNP approach could also lead to lower waste management cost. A secondary benefit would be the increased margins of safety and security that would be realized simply as a consequence of siting the reactors underground. Lowered capital and operating cost for a UNP relative to traditional reactor siting is possible through the aggregate effect of the elimination of containment structures, in-place decommissioning, reduced physical security costs, reduced weather-related costs, reduced cost of liability insurance and reduced unit-cost for the nth reactor made possible through the continuous construction of multiple reactors at the same underground location. Other cost reductions might be possible through the transfer of the capital cost for part of the underground construction from the reactor owners to the owners of the UNP. Lower waste management cost is possible by siting the UNP at a location where there are geological and hydrological conditions suitable for hosting both the reactors and the repository for the waste from those reactors. After adequate storage and cooling, and assuming direct disposal, this would enable the spent fuel from the reactors to be transported directly to the repository and remain entirely underground during the transport process. Community concerns and transportation costs would be significantly reduced relative to current situations where the reactors are separated from the repository by long distances and populated areas. The concept for a UNP in bedded salt is used to develop a rough order of magnitude cost estimate for excavation of the reactor array portion of a UNP. Excavation costs appear to be only a small fraction of the overall power plant costs

  11. Rock Fall Causes Precautionary Evacuation of WIPP Underground

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

    November 3, 2016 Rock Fall Causes Precautionary Evacuation of WIPP Underground Employees evacuated the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) underground around 2:30 p.m. (MT) today in response to a reported rock fall. There were no injuries and no release of radiological contamination. Employees working in the area of Panel 7 in the WIPP underground reported a loud noise and observed salt dust indicating a possible rock fall. The employees reported the incident to the Central Monitoring Room (CMR),

  12. New model more accurately tracks gases for underground nuclear explosion

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

    detection Model tracks gases for underground nuclear explosion detection New model more accurately tracks gases for underground nuclear explosion detection Scientists have developed a new, more thorough method for detecting underground nuclear explosions by coupling two fundamental elements-seismic models with gas-flow models. December 17, 2015 Los Alamos National Laboratory sits on top of a once-remote mesa in northern New Mexico with the Jemez mountains as a backdrop to research and

  13. Liquid Propane Injection Applications

    Energy.gov [DOE]

    Liquid propane injection technology meets manufacturing/assembly guidelines, maintenance/repair strategy, and regulations, with same functionality, horsepower, and torque as gasoline counterpart.

  14. Activated Carbon Injection

    ScienceCinema

    None

    2014-07-22

    History of the Clean Air Act and how the injection of carbon into a coal power plant's flu smoke can reduce the amount of mercury in the smoke.

  15. Activated Carbon Injection

    SciTech Connect

    2014-07-16

    History of the Clean Air Act and how the injection of carbon into a coal power plant's flu smoke can reduce the amount of mercury in the smoke.

  16. Utah Underground Storage Tank Installation Permit | Open Energy...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    Storage Tank Installation Permit Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Form: Utah Underground Storage Tank Installation Permit Form Type Application...

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

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

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

  18. ,"Midwest Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at ...dnavnghistn5030852m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  19. ,"U.S. Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ,"Data 1","U.S. Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","22016" ...dnavnghistn5030us2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  20. ,"East Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at ...dnavnghistn5030832m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  1. ,"West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030wv2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  2. ,"U.S. Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    ...dnavnghistn5070us2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ... 1: U.S. Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Total Underground Storage",6,"Monthly","72015","01151973" ,"Data 2","Change in Working Gas from Same Period Previous Year",2,"Monthly","72015","01151973" ,"Release...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators",3,"Annual",2014,"06301935" ,"Release Date:","09302015" ,"Next Release Date:","10302015" ,"Excel File...

  5. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Underground Natural Gas...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Storage About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 20072008 with selected updates Underground Natural Gas Storage Overview | Regional ...

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

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Underground Natural Gas Storage - Salt Cavern Storage Fields",8,"Monthly","72016","01151994" ,"Release ...

  7. Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 ...

  8. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Regional/State Underground...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    RegionalState Underground Natural Gas Storage Table About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 20072008 with selected updates Regional ...

  9. ,"Underground Natural Gas Storage - Storage Fields Other than...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Underground Natural Gas Storage - Storage Fields Other than Salt Caverns",8,"Monthly","72016","01151994" ...

  10. Additions to natural gas in underground storage to be nearly...

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

    Additions to natural gas in underground storage to be nearly 50% higher this summer Although it's still spring, natural gas supply companies and utilities are already preparing for ...

  11. Idaho Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Idaho Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 ...

  12. Accident Investigation of the February 5, 2014, Underground Salt...

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

    Accident Investigation of the February 5, 2014, Underground Salt Haul Truck Fire at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Carlsbad NM March 26, 2014 Accident Investigation of the ...

  13. Caging the dragon: the containment of underground nuclear explosions

    SciTech Connect

    Carothers, J.

    1995-06-01

    The science of the containment of U.S. underground tests is documented through a series of interviews of leading containment scientists and engineers.

  14. Analysis of Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Underground and...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Analysis of Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Underground and MgO Samples by the Savannah ... investigation into the radiological release event at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. ...

  15. United States Marks 20 Years without Underground Nuclear Explosive...

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

    United States Marks 20 Years without Underground Nuclear Explosive Testing September 21, 2012 WASHINGTON, DC -- Twenty years ago, on September 23, 1992, the United States conducted ...

  16. EA-1943: Long Baseline Neutrino Facility/Deep Underground Neutrino...

    Energy.gov [DOE] (indexed site)

    May 27, 2015 EA-1943: Draft Environmental Assessment Long Baseline Neutrino FacilityDeep Underground Neutrino Experiment (LBNFDUNE) at Fermilab, Batavia, Illinois and the...

  17. Delaware Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

  18. ,"Kentucky Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kentucky Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","102015" ,"Release...

  19. Georgia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Georgia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

  20. ,"Colorado Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Colorado Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","102015" ,"Release...

  1. ,"Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","102015" ,"Release...

  2. Connecticut Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Connecticut Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

  3. Wisconsin Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Wisconsin Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

  4. ,"Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","102015" ,"Release...

  5. ,"Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","102015" ,"Release...

  6. EM Takes Safe, Unique Approach to Underground Demolition at Hanford...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    largest of Hanford's experimental reactors used for developing and testing alternative fuels for the commercial nuclear power industry. Preparations to remove the underground...

  7. DOE - Office of Legacy Management -- Hoe Creek Underground Coal...

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Designated Name: Not Designated under FUSRAP Alternate Name: None Location: Campbell ... The Hoe Creek Underground Gasification site occupies 80 acres of land located in Campbell ...

  8. Reaching Underground Sources (from MIT Energy Initiative's Energy...

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

    Reaching Underground Sources (from MIT Energy Initiative's Energy Futures, Spring 2012) American Fusion News Category: Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Link: Reaching ...

  9. WSDE Underground Storage Tank Program webpage | Open Energy Informatio...

    OpenEI (Open Energy Information) [EERE & EIA]

    navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: WSDE Underground Storage Tank Program webpage Author Washington State Department of Ecology Published...

  10. Last U.S. Underground Nuclear Test Conducted | National Nuclear...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    U.S. Underground Nuclear Test Conducted | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing...

  11. $50 and up underground house book

    SciTech Connect

    Oehler, M.

    1981-01-01

    Earth-sheltered housing can be livable, compatible with nature, and inexpensive. Plans and designs for low-cost houses that are integrated with their environment make up most of this book. The author begins by outlining 23 advantages of underground housing and describing the histories of several unconventional buildings in the $50 to $500 price range. He also suggests where building materials can be bought and scrounged, describes construction techniques, and explains how to cope with building codes. Sketches, floorplans, and photographs illustrate the text. 8 references, 4 tables. (DCK)

  12. Method of locating underground mines fires

    DOEpatents

    Laage, Linneas; Pomroy, William

    1992-01-01

    An improved method of locating an underground mine fire by comparing the pattern of measured combustion product arrival times at detector locations with a real time computer-generated array of simulated patterns. A number of electronic fire detection devices are linked thru telemetry to a control station on the surface. The mine's ventilation is modeled on a digital computer using network analysis software. The time reguired to locate a fire consists of the time required to model the mines' ventilation, generate the arrival time array, scan the array, and to match measured arrival time patterns to the simulated patterns.

  13. 100-N Area underground storage tank closures

    SciTech Connect

    Rowley, C.A.

    1993-08-01

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

  14. Underground Energy Storage Program. 1984 annual summary

    SciTech Connect

    Kannberg, L.D.

    1985-06-01

    Underground Energy Storage (UES) Program activities during the period from April 1984 through March 1985 are briefly described. Primary activities in seasonal thermal energy storage (STES) involved field testing of high-temperature (>100/sup 0/C (212/sup 0/F)) aquifer thermal energy storage (ATES) at St. Paul, laboratory studies of geochemical issues associated with high-temperatures ATES, monitoring of chill ATES facilities in Tuscaloosa, and STES linked with solar energy collection. The scope of international activities in STES is briefly discussed.

  15. Tennessee Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Annual Energy Outlook

    340 340 340 340 340 340 1997-2015 Base Gas 340 340 340 340 340 340 1997-2015 Working Gas 1997-2011 Net Withdrawals 1998-2006 Injections 1997-2005 Withdrawals 1997-2006 Change in...

  16. Delaware Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    1969 1970 1971 1973 1975 View History Net Withdrawals 699 211 -189 -255 -549 1967-1975 Injections 179 391 189 255 2,012 1967-1975 Withdrawals 878 602 1,463 1967

  17. U.S. Natural Gas Salt Underground Storage Activity-Injects (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 142,243 194,185 258,468 267,309 296,968 259,652 2000's 295,916 341,084 358,397 356,964 340,537 378,485 370,756 400,244 440,262 459,330 2010's 510,691 532,893 465,005 492,143 634,045 607,148

  18. Exploratory simulations of multiphase effects in gas injection and ventilation tests in an underground rock laboratory

    SciTech Connect

    Finsterle, S. . Versuchsanstalt fuer Wasserbau, Hydrologie und Glaciologie); Schlueter, E.; Pruess, K. )

    1990-06-01

    This report is one of a series documenting the results of the Nagra-DOE Cooperative (NDC-I) research program in which the cooperating scientists explore the geological, geophysical, hydrological, geochemical, and structural effects was sponsored by the US Department of Energy (DOE) through the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (LBL) and the Swiss Nationale Genossenschaft fuer die Lagerung radioaktiver Abfaella (Nagra) and concluded in September 1989. 16 refs., 29 figs., 4 tabs.

  19. U.S. Total Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1930's 11,294 10,998 13,706 14,981 8,032 1940's 14,995 16,251 21,024 18,953 43,502 61,502 75,458 96,316...

  20. U.S. Natural Gas Non-Salt Underground Storage Injections (Million...

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 2,654,035 2,371,697 2,647,124 2,532,986 2,607,787 2,337,857 2000's 2,388,369 3,123,178 2,312,532...

  1. ,"Rhode Island Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Annual",1996 ,"Release Date:","10/31/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","11/30/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5050ri2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5050ri2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"10/28/2016 9:37:25 PM" "Back to

  2. ,"Rhode Island Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Monthly","12/1996" ,"Release Date:","10/31/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","11/30/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5050ri2m.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5050ri2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"10/28/2016 9:37:25 PM" "Back

  3. ,"U.S. Natural Gas Non-Salt Underground Storage Injections (MMcf)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Annual",2015 ,"Release Date:","10/31/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","11/30/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5540us2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5540us2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"10/28/2016 9:38:01 PM" "Back to

  4. ,"U.S. Natural Gas Salt Underground Storage Activity-Injects (MMcf)"

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Annual",2015 ,"Release Date:","10/31/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","11/30/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5440us2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n5440us2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"10/28/2016 9:38:00 PM" "Back to

  5. U.S. Natural Gas Non-Salt Underground Storage Injections (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1994 23,610 37,290 91,769 272,229 412,511 370,551 398,280 363,275 332,730 213,939 94,314 43,538 1995 30,839 30,821 88,264 159,247 351,714 395,761 348,399 282,995 319,462 252,016 79,450 32,731 1996 25,996 73,383 59,375 196,997 354,267 389,563 397,787 379,756 375,662 258,861 74,521 60,957 1997 47,422 39,996 108,965 183,536 334,707 384,856 345,606 355,687 353,354 264,545 87,529 26,783 1998 51,238 56,722 112,635 249,644 407,102 357,628

  6. U.S. Natural Gas Salt Underground Storage Activity-Injects (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1994 10,956 12,444 13,738 13,524 14,931 10,472 12,153 9,236 12,757 10,248 10,991 10,792 1995 13,745 13,232 15,992 17,283 17,654 14,528 10,998 9,778 23,267 21,484 16,206 20,016 1996 23,488 23,256 21,012 29,831 18,909 20,523 20,268 20,540 22,624 16,908 15,716 25,394 1997 20,945 14,876 21,608 21,581 27,492 22,410 15,072 22,801 26,605 29,839 25,383 18,699 1998 18,091 17,783 23,444 30,168 25,873 21,482 26,158 24,084 24,200 44,723 22,501

  7. U.S. Total Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1973 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1974 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1975 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 220,000 190,000 98,000 38,000 1976 15,000 59,000 71,000 166,000 220,000 273,000 271,000 268,000 233,000 121,000 36,000 21,000 1977 17,000 97,000 181,000 247,000 318,000 306,000 336,000 280,000 253,000 152,000 81,000 40,000 1978 21,000 21,000 90,000 175,000 285,000 357,000 341,000 351,000 322,000 204,000 80,000 32,000 1979

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

    SciTech Connect

    Bradley K. Griffith

    2011-12-01

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

  9. Method of pressurizing and stabilizing rock by periodic and repeated injections of a settable fluid of finite gel strength

    DOEpatents

    Colgate, Stirling A.

    1983-01-01

    A finite region of overpressure can be created in solid underground formations by the periodic injection of a fluid that has finite gel strength that subsequently, after each injection, partially sets--i.e., equivalently becomes a very much stronger gel. A region of overpressure is a region in which the static, locked in pressure is larger than what was there before. A region of overpressure can be used to prevent a roof of a tunnel from caving by adding compressive stresses in the roof. A sequence of regions of overpressure can be used to lift an arch or dome underground, squeeze off water or gas flows, stabilize dams, foundations, large underground rooms, etc. In general, the stress or pressure distribution in rock can be altered and engineered in a fashion that is more advantageous than what would have been the case without overstressing.

  10. Method of pressurizing and stabilizing rock by periodic and repeated injections of a settable fluid of finite gel strength

    DOEpatents

    Colgate, S.A.

    1983-01-25

    A finite region of overpressure can be created in solid underground formations by the periodic injection of a fluid that has finite gel strength that subsequently, after each injection, partially sets--i.e., equivalently becomes a very much stronger gel. A region of overpressure is a region in which the static, locked in pressure is larger than what was there before. A region of overpressure can be used to prevent a roof of a tunnel from caving by adding compressive stresses in the roof. A sequence of regions of overpressure can be used to lift an arch or dome underground, squeeze off water or gas flows, stabilize dams, foundations, large underground rooms, etc. In general, the stress or pressure distribution in rock can be altered and engineered in a fashion that is more advantageous than what would have been the case without overstressing. 3 figs.

  11. Allergy Injection Policy

    Energy.gov [DOE]

    Millions of Americans suffer from perennial and seasonal allergic rhinitis. Allergy immunotherapy is an effective way to reduce or eliminate the symptoms of allergic rhinitis by desensitizing the patient to the allergen(s) by giving escalating doses of an extract via regular injections. Receiving weekly injections at a private physician’s office is time consuming, reduces productivity, and can quickly deplete an employee’s earned leave. FOH offers the convenience of receiving allergy injections at the OHC as a physician-prescribed service, reducing time away from work for many federal employees.

  12. Premixed direct injection disk

    DOEpatents

    York, William David; Ziminsky, Willy Steve; Johnson, Thomas Edward; Lacy, Benjamin; Zuo, Baifang; Uhm, Jong Ho

    2013-04-23

    A fuel/air mixing disk for use in a fuel/air mixing combustor assembly is provided. The disk includes a first face, a second face, and at least one fuel plenum disposed therebetween. A plurality of fuel/air mixing tubes extend through the pre-mixing disk, each mixing tube including an outer tube wall extending axially along a tube axis and in fluid communication with the at least one fuel plenum. At least a portion of the plurality of fuel/air mixing tubes further includes at least one fuel injection hole have a fuel injection hole diameter extending through said outer tube wall, the fuel injection hole having an injection angle relative to the tube axis. The invention provides good fuel air mixing with low combustion generated NOx and low flow pressure loss translating to a high gas turbine efficiency, that is durable, and resistant to flame holding and flash back.

  13. Hazard index for underground toxic material

    SciTech Connect

    Smith, C.F.; Cohen, J.J.; McKone, T.E.

    1980-06-01

    To adequately define the problem of waste management, quantitative measures of hazard must be used. This study reviews past work in the area of hazard indices and proposes a geotoxicity hazard index for use in characterizing the hazard of toxic material buried underground. Factors included in this index are: an intrinsic toxicity factor, formulated as the volume of water required for dilution to public drinking-water levels; a persistence factor to characterize the longevity of the material, ranging from unity for stable materials to smaller values for shorter-lived materials; an availability factor that relates the transport potential for the particular material to a reference value for its naturally occurring analog; and a correction factor to accommodate the buildup of decay progeny, resulting in increased toxicity.

  14. Quantum cryptography over underground optical fibers

    SciTech Connect

    Hughes, R.J.; Luther, G.G.; Morgan, G.L.; Peterson, C.G.; Simmons, C.

    1996-05-01

    Quantum cryptography is an emerging technology in which two parties may simultaneously generated shared, secret cryptographic key material using the transmission of quantum states of light whose security is based on the inviolability of the laws of quantum mechanics. An adversary can neither successfully tap the key transmissions, nor evade detection, owing to Heisenberg`s uncertainty principle. In this paper the authors describe the theory of quantum cryptography, and the most recent results from their experimental system with which they are generating key material over 14-km of underground optical fiber. These results show that optical-fiber based quantum cryptography could allow secure, real-time key generation over ``open`` multi-km node-to-node optical fiber communications links between secure ``islands.``

  15. Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update

    Feet) Base Gas) (Million Cubic Feet) Pacific Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013 272,719 272,719 272,719 272,719 272,719 272,719 258,434 258,434 258,434 258,434 258,434 258,736 2014 258,736 258,541 258,456 258,619 258,736 258,736 258,736 258,736 258,736 259,036 259,036 259,036 2015 259,036 259,036 259,036 259,036 259,036 259,036 259,036 259,036 259,036 259,331 259,331 259,331 2016 259,331 259,331

  16. MODELING UNDERGROUND STRUCTURE VULNERABILITY IN JOINTED ROCK

    SciTech Connect

    R. SWIFT; D. STEEDMAN

    2001-02-01

    The vulnerability of underground structures and openings in deep jointed rock to ground shock attack is of chief concern to military planning and security. Damage and/or loss of stability to a structure in jointed rock, often manifested as brittle failure and accompanied with block movement, can depend significantly on jointed properties, such as spacing, orientation, strength, and block character. We apply a hybrid Discrete Element Method combined with the Smooth Particle Hydrodynamics approach to simulate the MIGHTY NORTH event, a definitive high-explosive test performed on an aluminum lined cylindrical opening in jointed Salem limestone. Representing limestone with discrete elements having elastic-equivalence and explicit brittle tensile behavior and the liner as an elastic-plastic continuum provides good agreement with the experiment and damage obtained with finite-element simulations. Extending the approach to parameter variations shows damage is substantially altered by differences in joint geometry and liner properties.

  17. Weekly Working Gas in Underground Storage

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Working Gas in Underground Storage (Billion Cubic Feet) Period: Weekly Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Region 10/07/16 10/14/16 10/21/16 10/28/16 11/04/16 11/11/16 View History Total Lower 48 States 3,759 3,836 3,909 3,963 4,017 4,047 2010-2016 East 913 925 939 940 946 944 2010-2016 Midwest 1,071 1,093 1,115 1,130 1,148 1,155 2010-2016 Mountain 240 243 245 249 253 257 2010-2016 Pacific 323 325 326 326 327 328

  18. DISPOSAL OF FLUIDIZED BED COMBUSTION ASH IN AN UNDERGROUND MINE TO CONTROL ACID MINE DRAINAGE AND SUBSIDENCE

    SciTech Connect

    Unknown

    2000-10-01

    This project evaluated the technical, economic and environmental feasibility of filling abandoned underground mine voids with coal combustion byproducts. Success was measured in terms of technical feasibility of the approach (i.e. % void filling), cost, environmental benefits (acid mine drainage and subsidence control) and environmental impacts (noxious ion release). Phase 1 of the project was completed in September 1995 and was concerned with the development of the grout and a series of predictive models. These models were verified through the Phase II field phase and will be further verified fin the large scale field demonstration of Phase III. The verification allows the results to be packaged in such a way that the technology can be easily adapted to different site conditions. Phase II was successfully completed with 1000 cubic yards of grout being injected into Anker Energy's Fairfax mine. The grout flowed over 600 feet from a single injection borehole. The grout achieved a compressive strength of over 1000 psi (twice the level that is needed to guarantee subsidence control). Phase III was a full scale test at Anker's eleven acre Longridge mine site. The CCB grout replaced what was an open mine void with a solid so that the groundwater tends to flow around and through the pillars rather than through the previously mined areas. The project has demonstrated that CCBs can be successfully disposed in underground mines. Additionally, the project has shown that filling an abandoned underground mine with CCBs can lead to the reduction and elimination of environmental problems associated with underground mining such as acid mine drainage and subsidence. The filling of the Longridge Mine with 43,000 cubic yards of CCB grout resulted in a 97% reduction in acid mine drainage coming from the mine.

  19. Tevatron injection timing

    SciTech Connect

    Saritepe, S.; Annala, G.

    1993-06-01

    Bunched beam transfer from one accelerator to another requires coordination and synchronization of many ramped devices. During collider operation timing issues are more complicated since one has to switch from proton injection devices to antiproton injection devices. Proton and antiproton transfers are clearly distinct sequences since protons and antiprotons circulate in opposite directions in the Main Ring (MR) and in the Tevatron. The time bumps are different, the kicker firing delays are different, the kickers and lambertson magnets are different, etc. Antiprotons are too precious to be used for tuning purposes, therefore protons are transferred from the Tevatron back into the Main Ring, tracing the path of antiprotons backwards. This tuning operation is called ``reverse injection.`` Previously, the reverse injection was handled in one supercycle. One batch of uncoalesced bunches was injected into the Tevatron and ejected after 40 seconds. Then the orbit closure was performed in the MR. In the new scheme the lambertson magnets have to be moved and separator polarities have to be switched, activities that cannot be completed in one supercycle. Therefore, the reverse injection sequence was changed. This involved the redefinition of TVBS clock event $D8 as MRBS $D8 thus making it possible to inject 6 proton batches (or coalesced bunches) and eject them one at a time on command, performing orbit closure each time in the MR. Injection devices are clock event driven. The TCLK is used as the reference clock. Certain TCLK events are triggered by the MR beam synchronized clock (MRBS) events. Some delays are measured in terms of MRBS ticks and MR revolutions. See Appendix A for a brief description of the beam synchronized clocks.

  20. Surface effects of underground nuclear explosions

    SciTech Connect

    Allen, B.M.; Drellack, S.L. Jr.; Townsend, M.J.

    1997-06-01

    The effects of nuclear explosions have been observed and studied since the first nuclear test (code named Trinity) on July 16, 1945. Since that first detonation, 1,053 nuclear tests have been conducted by the US, most of which were sited underground at the Nevada Test Site (NTS). The effects of underground nuclear explosions (UNEs) on their surroundings have long been the object of much interest and study, especially for containment, engineering, and treaty verification purposes. One aspect of these explosion-induced phenomena is the disruption or alteration of the near-surface environment, also known as surface effects. This report was prepared at the request of the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), to bring together, correlate, and preserve information and techniques used in the recognition and documentation of surface effects of UNEs. This report has several main sections, including pertinent background information (Section 2.0), descriptions of the different types of surface effects (Section 3.0), discussion of their application and limitations (Section 4.0), an extensive bibliography and glossary (Section 6.0 and Appendix A), and procedures used to document geologic surface effects at the NTS (Appendix C). Because a majority of US surface-effects experience is from the NTS, an overview of pertinent NTS-specific information also is provided in Appendix B. It is not within the scope of this report to explore new relationships among test parameters, physiographic setting, and the types or degree of manifestation of surface effects, but rather to compile, summarize, and capture surface-effects observations and interpretations, as well as documentation procedures and the rationale behind them.

  1. Missouri Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Base Gas 7,845 7,845 7,845 7,845 7,845 7,845 1990-2016 Working Gas 6,341 6,537 6,493 6,045 6,198 6,063 1990-2016 Net Withdrawals -268 -212 28 433 -168 119 1990-2016 Injections 268 ...

  2. Arkansas Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Base Gas 10,841 11,213 11,664 11,664 11,652 11,652 1990-2016 Working Gas 2,222 2,132 1,808 1,374 1,057 619 1990-2016 Net Withdrawals -212 -283 -127 434 328 438 1990-2016 Injections ...

  3. Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Working Gas 4,980 5,251 5,202 3,591 3,573 3,438 1997-2016 Net Withdrawals -545 -270 48 1,612 17 135 1995-2016 Injections 1,077 722 392 1,258 1,471 653 1997-2016 Withdrawals 533 451 ...

  4. Tennessee Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2015 View History Net Withdrawals -453 1968-2015 Injections 665 1968-2015 Withdrawals 212 1968-201

  5. Oklahoma Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    -15,481 -13,571 4,223 30,339 -6,811 -32,397 1967-2015 Injections 145,951 140,729 95,877 127,670 160,232 154,368 1967-2015 Withdrawals 130,470 127,159 100,100 158,009 153,421 ...

  6. Washington Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    358 -2,099 -2,362 653 2,912 -3,458 1967-2014 Injections 26,411 25,968 27,946 25,183 28,208 29,058 1967-2014 Withdrawals 26,053 23,869 25,583 25,836 31,120 25,600...

  7. Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    284 1,263 -2,089 812 -317 6 1967-2014 Injections 9,464 10,315 12,006 10,593 11,361 12,602 1967-2014 Withdrawals 9,748 11,578 9,917 11,405 11,044 12,608...

  8. Nebraska Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    753 1,043 -2,925 1,897 440 -278 1967-2014 Injections 8,936 8,146 10,482 6,349 9,578 9,998 1967-2014 Withdrawals 9,690 9,189 7,557 8,247 10,018 9,720...

  9. Illinois Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    11,464 -2,323 -1,186 1,001 17,324 -10,730 1967-2014 Injections 259,421 247,458 258,690 249,953 265,175 270,831 1967-2014 Withdrawals 247,957 245,135 257,504 250,955 282,499 260,100...

  10. Maryland Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    1,758 2,292 -1,721 2,383 -811 556 1967-2014 Injections 15,088 14,384 15,592 10,582 14,165 20,362 1967-2014 Withdrawals 13,330 16,676 13,871 12,965 13,354 20,91...

  11. Iowa Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    4,861 2,037 -4,244 10,517 3,074 -7,424 1967-2014 Injections 79,012 76,407 77,783 66,774 71,793 80,866 1967-2014 Withdrawals 74,151 78,444 73,538 77,291 74,867 73,44...

  12. Kansas Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    3,685 8,484 -20,296 11,916 21,416 -15,614 1967-2014 Injections 102,406 113,253 119,823 93,460 103,676 111,853 1967-2014 Withdrawals 106,091 121,737 99,527 105,376 125,092 96,239...

  13. Utah Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Net Withdrawals -4,323 -1,402 3,131 6,185 8,830 3,685 1990-2016 Injections 4,599 2,100 1,228 430 117 1,451 1990-2016 Withdrawals 276 698 4,359 6,615 8,947 5,135 1990-2016 Change in ...

  14. Ohio Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) (indexed site)

    Working Gas 181,373 192,681 184,926 165,463 118,381 86,221 1990-2016 Net Withdrawals -22,886 -11,308 7,717 19,441 47,082 32,160 1990-2016 Injections 23,451 13,257 2,530 1,632 70 ...

  15. Transonic Combustion Â’ - Injection Strategy Development for...

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

    Transonic Combustion - Injection Strategy Development for Supercritical Gasoline Injection-Ignition in a Light Duty Engine Transonic Combustion - Injection Strategy ...

  16. Underground nuclear energy complexes - technical and economic advantages

    SciTech Connect

    Myers, Carl W; Kunze, Jay F; Giraud, Kellen M; Mahar, James M

    2010-01-01

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

  17. Nevada National Security Site Underground Test Area (UGTA) Tour |

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Department of Energy Tour Nevada National Security Site Underground Test Area (UGTA) Tour Tour Booklet from the Nevada National Security Site Underground Test Area (UGTA) Tour on December 10, 2014 at the Performance and Risk Assessment (P&RA) Community of Practice (CoP) Annual Technical Exchange Meeting. Photos - December 10, 2014 Site Tour of the Nevada National Security Site for participants of the 2014 P&RA CoP Technical Exchange Meeting. Nevada National Security Site Underground

  18. Method and apparatus for injecting particulate media into the ground

    DOEpatents

    Dwyer, Brian P.; Dwyer, Stephen F.; Vigil, Francine S.; Stewart, Willis E.

    2004-12-28

    An improved method and apparatus for injecting particulate media into the ground for constructing underground permeable reactive barriers, which are used for environmental remediation of subsurface contaminated soil and water. A media injector sub-assembly attached to a triple wall drill string pipe sprays a mixture of active particulate media suspended in a carrier fluid radially outwards from the sub-assembly, at the same time that a mixing fluid is sprayed radially outwards. The media spray intersects the mixing spray at a relatively close distance from the point of injection, which entrains the particulate media into the mixing spray and ensures a uniform and deep dispersion of the active media in the surrounding soil. The media injector sub-assembly can optionally include channels for supplying compressed air to an attached down-the-hole hammer drive assembly for use during drilling.

  19. OSTIblog Articles in the Large Underground Xenon Detector Topic | OSTI, US

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Dept of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information Large Underground Xenon Detector

  20. Fuel injection apparatus

    SciTech Connect

    Suzuki, Y.; Kuroda, Y.; Ogata, K.

    1988-07-12

    A fuel injection apparatus is described for injecting fuel responsive to a rotary speed of an engine by utilizing the pressure of compressed air, the apparatus comprising means for regulating the supplying time of the compressed air responsive to at least one of the rotary speed of the engine and the load of the engine, and the regulating means including means for supplying the compressed air for a longer time at least one of low rotary speed and low load of the engine than at least one of high rotary speed and high load of the engine.