94 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Natural Gas Pipeline Technology Overview.
The United States relies on natural gas for one-quarter of its energy needs. In 2001 alone, the nation consumed 21.5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. A large portion of natural gas pipeline capacity within the United States is directed from major production areas in Texas and Louisiana, Wyoming, and other states to markets in the western, eastern, and midwestern regions of the country. In the past 10 years, increasing levels of gas from Canada have also been brought into these markets (EIA 2007). The United States has several major natural gas production basins and an extensive natural gas pipeline network, with almost 95% of U.S. natural gas imports coming from Canada. At present, the gas pipeline infrastructure is more developed between Canada and the United States than between Mexico and the United States. Gas flows from Canada to the United States through several major pipelines feeding U.S. markets in the Midwest, Northeast, Pacific Northwest, and California. Some key examples are the Alliance Pipeline, the Northern Border Pipeline, the Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, the TransCanada Pipeline System, and Westcoast Energy pipelines. Major connections join Texas and northeastern Mexico, with additional connections to Arizona and between California and Baja California, Mexico (INGAA 2007). Of the natural gas consumed in the United States, 85% is produced domestically. Figure 1.1-1 shows the complex North American natural gas network. The pipeline transmission system--the 'interstate highway' for natural gas--consists of 180,000 miles of high-strength steel pipe varying in diameter, normally between 30 and 36 inches in diameter. The primary function of the transmission pipeline company is to move huge amounts of natural gas thousands of miles from producing regions to local natural gas utility delivery points. These delivery points, called 'city gate stations', are usually owned by distribution companies, although some are owned by transmission companies. Compressor stations at required distances boost the pressure that is lost through friction as the gas moves through the steel pipes (EPA 2000). The natural gas system is generally described in terms of production, processing and purification, transmission and storage, and distribution (NaturalGas.org 2004b). Figure 1.1-2 shows a schematic of the system through transmission. This report focuses on the transmission pipeline, compressor stations, and city gates
Recommended from our members
Relationships between Western Area Power Administration`s power marketing program and hydropower operations at Salt Lake City area integrated projects
This technical memorandum provides background information on the Western Area Power Administration (Western) and the physical characteristics of the Salt Lake City Area Integrated Projects (SLCA/IP) hydropower plants, which include the Colorado River Storage Project, the Rio Grande Project, and the Collbran Project. In addition, the history, electrical capacity, storage capacity, and flow restrictions at each dam are presented. An overview of Western`s current programs and services, including a review of statutory authorities, agency discretion, and obligations, is also provided. The variability of SLCA/IP hourly generation under various alternative marketing strategies and purchasing programs is discussed. The effects of Western`s services, such as area load control, outage assistance, and transmission, on SLCA/IP power plant operations are analyzed
Recommended from our members
Approaches to accident analysis in recent US Department of Energy environmental impact statements
A review of accident analyses in recent US Department of Energy (DOE) Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) was conducted to evaluate the consistency among approaches and to compare these approaches with existing DOE guidance. The review considered several components of an accident analysis: the overall scope, which in turn should reflect the scope of the EIS; the spectrum of accidents considered; the methods and assumptions used to determine frequencies or frequency ranges for the accident sequences; and the assumption and technical bases for developing radiological and chemical atmospheric source terms and for calculating the consequences of airborne releases. The review also considered the range of results generated with respect to impacts on various worker and general populations. In this paper, the findings of these reviews are presented and methods recommended for improving consistency among EISs and bringing them more into line with existing DOE guidance
Recommended from our members
A review of the radiological treatment
The Draft Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (WM PEIS) was released by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for public comment on September 22, 1995. Prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Final WM PEIS is currently scheduled for release in late summer 1996. The Draft WM PEIS was published after about 3 years of effort to select and evaluated the best alternatives for treating, storing, and disposing of the 50-year legacy of radioactive and chemically hazardous wastes existing within the DOE complex. The evaluation examined the potential health and environmental impacts of integrated waste management alternatives for five categories of waste types at 54 DOE sites. A primary consideration as a potential source of human health impacts at all sites is that of radiological releases resulting from postulated accidents involving facilities used to treat radioactive wastes. This paper first provides a brief, updated summary of the approach used to define and perform treatment facility accident analyses in the Draft WM PEIS. It reviews the selection of dominant sequences for the major sites most affected by the preferred waste management alternatives and highlights the salient accident analysis results. Finally, it summarizes and addresses key public and state and federal agency comments relating to accident analysis that were received in the public comment process
Recommended from our members
Unit decontamination and dismantlement (D&D) costs
A series of relationships have been developed for estimating unit decontamination and dismantlement (D&D) costs for a number of building types which may be applied in the absence of other data to obtain rough order-of-magnitude (ROM) cost estimates for D&D activities. The relationships were developed using unit D&D costs for a number of building structure types at the Department of Energy Fernald site. These unit costs into account the level of radioactive contamination as well as the, building size
Recommended from our members
Case study: Evaluation of a scenario for the reuse of structures in the production area at Fernald
The potential for the reuse of uncontaminated structures at federal facilities that are being remediated should be evaluated. Although various factors often limit the viability of such reuse, it may be economically attractive to reuse selected structures. Consideration of a hypothetical reuse scenario for the US Department of Energy`s Fernald, Ohio facility shows that the reuse of selected buildings that were not significantly contaminated by production activities at the site may be considerably less expensive than the construction of new ones. The cost of removal of existing buildings is a major factor influencing the relative advantages of these two options. For Fernald, no need for the facility`s buildings has been identified; however, the reuse of structures may be a viable option at other facilities
Recommended from our members
Waste management facility accident analysis (WASTE ACC) system: software for analysis of waste management alternatives
This paper describes the Waste Management Facility Accident Analysis (WASTE{underscore}ACC) software, which was developed at Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) to support the US Department of Energy`s (DOE`s) Waste Management (WM) Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS). WASTE{underscore}ACC is a decision support and database system that is compatible with Microsoft{reg_sign} Windows{trademark}. It assesses potential atmospheric releases from accidents at waste management facilities. The software provides the user with an easy-to-use tool to determine the risk-dominant accident sequences for the many possible combinations of process technologies, waste and facility types, and alternative cases described in the WM PEIS. In addition, its structure will allow additional alternative cases and assumptions to be tested as part of the future DOE programmatic decision-making process. The WASTE{underscore}ACC system demonstrates one approach to performing a generic, systemwide evaluation of accident risks at waste management facilities. The advantages of WASTE{underscore}ACC are threefold. First, the software gets waste volume and radiological profile data that were used to perform other WM PEIS-related analyses directly from the WASTE{underscore}MGMT system. Second, the system allows for a consistent analysis across all sites and waste streams, which enables decision makers to understand more fully the trade-offs among various policy options and scenarios. Third, the system is easy to operate; even complex scenario runs are completed within minutes
Recommended from our members
Assessment of risks and costs associated with transportation of US Department of Energy radioactively contaminated carbon steel
This report provides a preliminary assessment of potential human health risks and develops unit risks and costs for transporting radioactively contaminated carbon steel (RCCS) scrap between U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) sites. The RCCS would be generated from DOE activities (current or future) and from decontamination and decommissioning of DOE facilities. The estimates of transportation system risk reflect preliminary information regarding the quantities of RCCS at some sites and the spectrum of activity in RCCS at various types of DOE facilities
Recommended from our members
Radiological accidents potentially important to human health risk in the U.S. Department of Energy waste management program
Human health risks as a consequence of potential radiological releases resulting from plausible accident scenarios constitute an important consideration in the US Department of Energy (DOE) national program to manage the treatment, storage, and disposal of wastes. As part of this program, the Office of Environmental Management (EM) is currently preparing a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) that evaluates the risks that could result from managing five different waste types. This paper (1) briefly reviews the overall approach used to assess process and facility accidents for the EM PEIS; (2) summarizes the key inventory, storage, and treatment characteristics of the various DOE waste types important to the selection of accidents; (3) discusses in detail the key assumptions in modeling risk-dominant accidents; and (4) relates comparative source term results and sensitivities
Recommended from our members
Unit costs of waste management operations
This report provides estimates of generic costs for the management, disposal, and surveillance of various waste types, from the time they are generated to the end of their institutional control. Costs include monitoring and surveillance costs required after waste disposal. Available data on costs for the treatment, storage, disposal, and transportation of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive, low-level radioactive, transuranic radioactive, hazardous, mixed (low-level radioactive plus hazardous), and sanitary wastes are presented. The costs cover all major elements that contribute to the total system life-cycle (i.e., ``cradle to grave``) cost for each waste type. This total cost is the sum of fixed and variable cost components. Variable costs are affected by operating rates and throughput capacities and vary in direct proportion to changes in the level of activity. Fixed costs remain constant regardless of changes in the amount of waste, operating rates, or throughput capacities. Key factors that influence cost, such as the size and throughput capacity of facilities, are identified. In many cases, ranges of values for the key variables are presented. For some waste types, the planned or estimated costs for storage and disposal, projected to the year 2000, are presented as graphics
- …