Energy Industries and Sustainability, a Berkshire Essential, covers the exploitation of energy resources-such as coal, petroleum, and wood-and the innovations that can provide the energy we need for a cleaner, safer, and more sustainable future. Forty expert authors explain concepts such as ""materials substitution"" and the ""polluter pays principle"" and examine the industries and practices that bring us energy from the sun, water, and wind. This concise handbook offers a broad view of positive steps being taken to make responsible energy use a priority around the globe, and is designed for use in classrooms at the high school and college level. The book will be helpful to engaged citizens as well as to business people, policy makers, and environmental professionals. Controversial topics such as nuclear power and fracking are explained clearly and impartially, with a view to promoting thoughtful discussion and informed decision-making.

DOE prepared this EA to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing a financial assistance grant under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 in a cooperative agreement with the Beacon Power Corporation (Beacon Power) as part of the Smart Grid Demonstrations Program. This EA evaluates two similar proposed projects in two locations: Site 1 evaluates installation of a utility-scale 20-megawatt flywheel energy storage and frequency regulation plant in Chicago Heights, Illinois, to provide frequency regulation services to PJM Interconnection, the electrical grid operator. The cost of the proposed project at the Illinois location would be about $48.1 million. Site 2 evaluates installation of the same system in Hazle Township, Pennsylvania. The cost of the proposed project at the Pennsylvania location would be about $53 million. DOE could choose to provide a grant for either location. DOE's Proposed Action would provide approximately $24 million in financial assistance in a cost-sharing arrangement to Beacon Power. In addition, for the proposed project in Pennsylvania (Site 2), Beacon Power could receive a $5 million grant from Pennsylvania's Redevelopment Capital Assistance Program. This EA evaluates the environmental resource areas DOE commonly addresses in its EAs and identifies no significant adverse environmental impacts for the proposed project. The proposed projects could result in beneficial impacts to the nation's energy efficiency and the local economy, and could contribute to a minor reduction of greenhouse gases.

Wind energy has been the fastest growing source of U.S. electric power generation in recent years. The increase in federal funding for wind technologies and involvement of multiple agencies has raised questions about fragmented, overlapping, or duplicative federal support. In this report, GAO examines federal wind-related initiatives-programs or groups of agency activities that promoted wind energy through a specific emphasis or focus. GAO (1) identifies wind-related initiatives implemented by federal agencies in fiscal year 2011 and their key characteristics; (2) assesses the extent of fragmentation, overlap, and duplication, if any, among these initiatives, and the extent to which they were coordinated; and (3) examines how agencies allocate support to projects through their initiatives and the extent to which they assess applicant need for support. GAO identified 82 federal wind-related initiatives, with a variety of key characteristics, implemented by nine agencies in fiscal year 2011. Five agencies-the Departments of Energy (DOE), the Interior, Agriculture (USDA), Commerce, and the Treasury-collectively implemented 73 of the initiatives. Initiatives supporting deployment of wind facilities, such as those financing their construction or use, constituted the majority of initiatives and accounted for nearly all obligations and estimated tax subsidies related to wind in fiscal year 2011. In particular, a tax expenditure and a grant initiative, both administered by Treasury, accounted for nearly all federal financial support for wind energy. The 82 wind-related initiatives GAO identified were fragmented across agencies, most had overlapping characteristics, and several that financed deployment of wind facilities provided some duplicative financial support. The 82 initiatives were fragmented because they were implemented across nine agencies, and 68 overlapped with at least one other initiative because of shared characteristics. About half of all initiatives reported formal coordination. Such coordination can, in principle, reduce the risk of unnecessary duplication and improve the effectiveness of federal efforts. However, GAO identified 7 initiatives that have provided duplicative support-financial support from multiple initiatives to the same recipient for deployment of a single project. GAO also identified 3 other initiatives that did not fund any wind projects in fiscal year 2011 but that could, based on their eligibility criteria, be combined with 1 or more initiatives to provide duplicative support. Of the 10 initiatives, those at Treasury accounted for over 95 percent of the federal financial support for wind in fiscal year 2011. Agencies implementing the 10 initiatives allocate support to projects on the basis of the initiatives' goals or eligibility criteria, but the extent to which applicant financial need is considered is unclear. DOE and USDA allocate support based on projects' ability to meet initiative goals such as reducing emissions or benefitting rural communities, as well as other criteria. Both agencies also consider applicant need for the support of some initiatives, according to officials. However, GAO found that neither agency documents assessments of applicant need; therefore the extent to which they use such assessments to determine how much support to provide is unclear. Unlike DOE and USDA, Treasury generally supports projects based on the tax code's eligibility criteria and does not have discretion to allocate support to projects based on need. While the support of these initiatives may be necessary in many cases for wind projects to be built, because agencies do not document assessments of need, it is unclear, in some cases, if the entire amount of federal support provided was necessary. Federal support in excess of what is needed to induce projects to be built could instead be used to induce other projects to be built or simply withheld, thereby reducing federal expenditures. GAO-13-136

Since the late 1970s, U.S. policymakers at both the federal and state levels have authorized a variety of incentives, regulations, and programs to encourage the production and use of agriculture-based biofuels-i.e., any fuel produced from biological materials. Initially, federal biofuels policies were developed to help kick-start the biofuels industry during its early development, when neither production capacity nor a market for the finished product was widely available. Federal policy (e.g., tax credits, import tariffs, grants, loans, and loan guarantees) has played a key role in helping to close the price gap between biofuels and cheaper petroleum fuels. Now, as the industry has evolved, other policy goals (e.g., national energy security, climate change concerns, support for rural economies) are cited by proponents as justification for continuing or enhancing federal policy support. The U.S. biofuels sector responded to these government incentives by expanding output every year from 1980 through 2011 (with the exception of 1996), with important implications for the domestic and international food and fuel sectors. Production of the primary U.S. biofuel, ethanol (derived from corn starch), has risen from about 175 million gallons in 1980 to nearly 14 billion gallons in 2011. U.S. biodiesel production (derived primarily from vegetable oil), albeit much smaller, has also shown strong growth, rising from 0.5 million gallons in 1999 to a record 969 million gallons in 2012. Despite the rapid growth of the past decades, total agriculture-based biofuels consumption accounted for only about 8% of U.S. transportation fuel consumption (9.7% of gasoline and 1.5% of diesel) in 2012. Federal biofuels policies have had costs, including unintended market and environmental consequences and large federal outlays (estimated at $7.7 billion in 2011, but declining to $1.3 billion in 2012 with the expiration of the ethanol blender's tax credit). Despite the direct and indirect costs of federal biofuels policy and the relatively small role of biofuels as an energy source, the U.S. biofuels sector continues to push for federal involvement. But critics of federal policy intervention in the biofuels sector have also emerged. Current issues and policy developments related to the U.S. biofuels sector that are of interest to Congress include: Many federal biofuels policies require routine congressional monitoring and occasional reconsideration in the form of reauthorization or new appropriations; The 10% ethanol-to-gasoline blend ratio-known as the "blend wall"-poses a barrier to expansion of ethanol use. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued waivers to allow ethanol blending of up to 15% (per gallon of gasoline) for use in model year 2001 and newer light-duty motor vehicles. However, the limitation to newer vehicles, coupled with infrastructure issues, could limit rapid expansion of blending rates; The slow development of cellulosic biofuels has raised concerns about the industry's ability to meet large federal usage mandates, which in turn has raised the potential for future EPA waivers of mandated biofuel volumes and has contributed to a cycle of slow investment in and development of the sector. In 2012, the expiration of the blender tax credit, poor profit margins (due primarily to high corn prices), and the emerging blend wall limitation have contributed to a drop-off in ethanol production and have generated considerable uncertainty about the ethanol industry's future.

Publisher's Note: Products purchased from Third Party sellers are not guaranteed by the publisher for quality, authenticity, or access to any online entitlements included with the product. The Latest Tools and Techniques for Managing Infrastructure AssetsFully updated throughout, this practical resource provides a proven, cost-effective infrastructureasset management framework that integrates planning, design, construction, maintenance, rehabilitation, and renovation. Public Infrastructure Asset Management,Second Edition, describes the most current methodologies for effectively managing roads, bridges, airports, utility services, water and waste facilities, parks, public buildings, and sports complexes. This comprehensive guide covers information management and decision support systems, including proprietary solutions and new technological developments such ascloud storage. The book discusses total quality management, economics, life-cycle analysis, and maintenance, rehabilitation, and reconstruction programming. Up-to-date examples and real-world case studies illustrate the practical applications of the concepts presented in this thoroughly revised reference. This new edition features: Planning, needs assessment, and performance indicators Database management, data needs, and analysis Inventory, historical, and environmental data In-service monitoring and evaluation data Performance modeling and failure analysis Design for infrastructure service life Construction Maintenance, rehabilitation, and reconstruction strategies, policies, and treatment alternatives Dealing with new or alternate concepts Prioritization, optimization, and work programs Integrated infrastructure asset management systems Visual IMS: an illustrative infrastructure management system and applications Available asset management system and commercial off-the-shelf providers Benefits of implementing an asset management system Sustainability, environmental stewardship, and asset management Future directions for infrastructure asset management

When the first gusher blew in at Spindletop, near Beaumont, Texas, in 1901, petroleum began to supplant cotton and cattle as the economic engine of the state and region. Very soon, much of the workforce migrated from the cotton field to the oilfield, following the lure of the wealth being created by black gold. The early decades of the twentieth century witnessed the development of an oilfield culture, as these workers defined and solidified their position within the region's social fabric. Over time, the work force grew more professionalized, and technological change attracted a different type of labourer. Bobby D. Weaver grew up and worked in the oil patch. Now, drawing on oral histories supplemented and confirmed by other research, he tells the colourful stories of the workers who actually brought oil wealth to Texas. Drillers, shooters, toolies, pipeliners, teamsters, roustabouts, tank builders, roughnecks . . . each of them played a role in the frenzied, hard-driving lifestyle of the boomtowns that sprouted overnight in association with each major oil discovery. Weaver tracks the differences between company workers and contract workers. He details the work itself and the ethos that surrounds it. He highlights the similarities and differences from one field to another and traces changing aspects of the work over time. Above all, Oilfield Trash captures the unique voices of the labouring people who worked long, hard hours, often risking life and limb to keep the drilling rigs "turning to the right".

The current distribution of power markets around intermediate structures between full integration and unbundling suggests that there has not been a linear path to reform in practice. Instead, many developing countries may retain intermediate structures in the foreseeable future. This possibility exposes a large gap in understanding about power market structures, since most theoretical work has focused on the two extreme structures and there is limited evidence on the impact of unbundling for developing countries. The study reports the evidence from statistical analysis and a representative sample of twenty case studies selected based on the initial conditions, such as income and power system size. It proposes a novel analytical approach to model market structure, together with ownership and regulation, controlling for several variables, as a key determinant of performance across several indicators, including access, operational and financial performance and environmental sustainability. The results of the analysis provide the following conclusions for policy guidance on power market restructuring for developing countries: There seems to be credible empirical basis for selecting a threshold power system size and per capita income level below which unbundling of the power supply chain is not expected to be worthwhile. Indeed a dichotomy emerges between high income countries characterized by a large system size for which unbundling and other reforms are significantly linked to better performance and low income countries characterized by small system power size for which there is no strong evidence that unbundling and other reforms delivered improvements in performance. Unbundling deliver consistently superior results across the board of performance indicators when used as an entry point to implement broader reforms, particularly introducing a sound regulatory framework, reducing the degree of concentration of the generation and distribution segments of the market by attracting additional number of both public and private players and encouraging private sector participation. Partial forms of vertical unbundling do not appear to drive improvements, probably because the owner was able to continue exercising control over the affairs of the sector and hinder the development of competitive pressure within the power market. Although the quest for growth remains as elusive as it was more than a decade ago, there is now much greater consensus on the policies and institutional changes that are needed to foster growth and economic development. But debate continues on the timing, sequencing, and local adaptation of these reforms. Furthermore, although the benefits of reform are well documented--the reasons as to why and when reforms occur still remain somewhat unclear. Many countries go through long periods of stagnation or even decline, without being able to create an environment for change, while others seem able to break the hold of vested interests and start following paths of reform. In October 2004, the Operations Evaluation Department (OED) of the World Bank held a conference on the Effectiveness of Policies and Reform. This event provided a forum at which participants--over 500 government officials, civil society representatives, and World Bank staff--could discuss how to improve the effectiveness of World Bank support for development policies and reform programs. Included in this volume are the contributions of distinguished development practitioners on issues such as: the links between good performance and policy change; how windows of opportunity can best be used to promote reform; how ownership of policies and reform programs can be encouraged; and how developed country policies can be improved to create a better global environment for development. Ajay Chhibber is director of the Operations Evaluation Department of the World Bank and was World Bank country director for Turkey from 1997 to 2003. R. Kyle Peters is senior manager, Country Evaluation and Regional Relations, in the Operations Evaluation Department of the World Bank. Barbara J. Yale is a consultant with the Operations Evaluation Department of the World Bank.

The CSIS Working Group on Private-Sector Development in Fragile, Conflict-Affected, and Violent States identifies tools available to the international business community and the U.S. government to assist these countries, as well as the gaps in needed resources. Participants examined cases from Afghanistan, Iraq, Burma, and Liberia to glean examples of successes and failures in private-sector development, with the goal of identifying potential roles for host governments and the international private sector. This report presents the results of those discussions.

Given the chronic power shortages faced by numerous developing countries, and the need everywhere to keep pace with demand, understanding the drivers of public private partnerships (PPPs) in energy is critical. While many private electricity projects have been delayed and financing costs have increased, the impact of the global financial crisis was less severe than that of previous crises that originated in developing countries. This resilience stems from developing countries - need to expand generation capacity, electricity sector reforms and better regulatory frameworks, and short-term solutions (such as rental power plants). The study reports the evidence from statistical analysis and a sample of case studies selected based. It proposes a novel analytical approach to model PPPs, using a two-stage procedure based on Heckman's sample selection distinguishing between those factors that determine whether private investment in energy takes place, and those that influence the volume of investment. The results of the analysis provide the following conclusions: Both general governance and regulatory instrument primarily affect investors' decisions to enter the various power sector markets, not the subsequent level of investment - indicating that investors seem to be adequately protected against risks. Support mechanisms, like feed-in tariffs, are crucial for attracting investors in renewable generation, but they do not succeed in displacing fossil fuel investment and they could play a bigger role in affecting the level of investment in renewables. There is a significant trade-off between effectiveness and efficiency of alternative instruments for deploying renewables. Feed-in tariffs tended to be quite effective but to be set on the high side, reducing incentives to cut costs and posing significant strains on already stripped national budgets. Competitive auctions, on the other hand have tended to be efficient but initially low and not always the most effective instrument. Countries can scale up renewables following different paths. For Brazil, the move from feed-in tariffs to auctions enabled it to both reduce costs and deploy additional capacity. Peru followed in Brazil's path, opting for auctions instead of introducing feed-in tariffs. On the other hand, China's move from competitive tenders to feed-in tariffs allowed for discovery effects to determine the right level of prices to attract private investment in renewables.

Energy efficiency is an important factor in an economy, since it helps meet energy needs, decrease costs, and lower environmental impacts. A review of the evolution of energy intensity in European and Former Soviet Union countries indicates a positive trend: high-energy-intensity countries have now reached the level of medium-energy-intensity economies 15 years earlier, and in the same period, medium-energy-intensity ones had similarly evolved to levels of low-energy-intensity. At the same time, the fast transitioning economies of Central Europe converged towards similar levels of energy intensities, in line with EU Directives, while successful EU-15 countries managed to maintain economic growth while keeping energy use flat. This report looks at how countries effect the transition from high- to medium- to low-energy-intensity, exploring whether leapfrogging is possible (it s not) and what policies can be particularly helpful. Some of the lessons include: energy prices tend to evolve from subsidized levels to full-cost-recovery to full-cost-recovery-plus environmental externalities; industrial energy efficiency is often the starting point, with privatization and competition driving companies to reduce production costs, including energy; successful countries excell at governance (setting targets, building institutional capacity, creating and improving the legal and regulatory framework, and monitoring and evaluating); households tended to be the last, and most difficult, area of reform, starting with pricing improvements, outreach campaigns, financing programs, and building certificates programs."

In Eastern Europe and Central Asia there are significant pressures for residential energy tariffs to rise, as government budgets are increasingly stretched and cannot afford to pay large energy subsidies. Further pressures for tariffs to rise come from environmental concerns, as the tariff levels that households now face do not cover the social costs of energy production. Because reforms that would increase energy tariffs are likely to affect significantly the poor and the middle class, their political feasibility may be questioned unless appropriate ways of cushioning the impacts can be devised. Balancing these competing claims-fiscal and environmental concerns on the one hand, affordability and political economy concerns on the other-is a task that policy makers in the region are increasingly unable to put off. While challenging, the reforms needed for this balancing act can build on much that has been learned in the last decade in terms of improving the effectiveness of social assistance systems and increasing energy efficiency. This report suggests that a policy agenda that focuses on cutting subsidies to the energy sector, while investing in energy efficiency and supporting households at the bottom of the distribution, amounts to a new wave of policy reforms for the energy sector in transition countries. The feasibility of such an integrated policy agenda and the ability of these policies to balance the competing claims of fi scal responsibility and social concerns are explored through different policy scenarios, which, in their simplicity, help clarify the parameters of the policy choices many countries ECA are facing. This report is a part of a series of 3 regional reports. The series includes 'Growing green: The economic benefits of climate action in Europe and Central Asia', 'Balancing act: Cutting energy subsidies and protecting affordability' and 'Lessons learned from energy efficiency success cases'.

The Department of Energy (DOE) prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of providing a financial assistance grant under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) in a cooperative agreement with the Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) as part of the Smart Grid Demonstrations Program. If PNM received the funding, the company would install a 2- to 4-megawatt-hour advanced absorbed valve-regulated lead acid battery, an access road, a parking lot, and a 3,000-foot underground electrical tie-in to the existing power distribution system (the proposed project). PNM would also install separately a collocated utility-scale solar photovoltaic array with an output of about 500 kilowatts at its own expense. The goal would be to use the battery, along with a sophisticated control system, to turn solar energy into reliable dispatchable generation resource. This EA analyzes the potential environmental impacts of DOE's proposed action of providing Recovery Act funding and of the No-Action Alternative. DOE's proposed action is to provide about $1.8 million in financial assistance in a cost-sharing arrangement to PNM. The cost of the proposed project would be about $5.9 million. In this EA, DOE evaluates the impacts to air quality, noise, aesthetics, soils, geology, water resources, biological resources, and cultural resources from DOE's proposed action and PNM's proposed project.

The Department of Energy (DOE) prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to assess the potential for impacts to the human and natural environment of its Proposed Action-providing financial assistance to FutureFuel under a cooperative agreement. DOE's objective is to support the development of the EDV industry in an effort to substantially reduce the United States' consumption of petroleum, in addition to stimulating the United States' economy. More specifically, DOE's objective is to accelerate the development and production of various EDV systems by building or increasing domestic manufacturing capacity for advanced automotive batteries, their components, recycling facilities, and EDV components. This work will enable market introduction of various electric vehicle technologies by lowering the cost of battery packs, batteries, and electric propulsion systems for EDVs through high-volume manufacturing. Under the terms of the cooperative agreement, DOE would provide approximately 50 percent of the funding to FutureFuel to partially fund the retrofitting of an existing manufacturing building to a commercial-scale plant to produce intermediate anode material for high-performance Li-ion batteries (referred to as the "Proposed Project" within this EA). An existing FutureFuel manufacturing building (48,000 square feet, 5 stories) would be retrofitted to accommodate the proposed plant. The existing building that would be reconfigured currently includes over half of the major process equipment and pumps required to produce intermediate anode material. The goal would be to increase the product supply from the current 1,000,000 pounds per year at an off-site plant to 10,000,000 pounds per year, which would be sufficient for supplying over 2,000,000 HEVs. Additionally, the project would create approximately 33 permanent jobs. The environmental analysis identified that the most notable changes, although minor, to result from FutureFuel's Proposed Project would occur in the following areas: air quality and greenhouse gas, surface water and groundwater, transportation and traffic, solid and hazardous wastes, and human health and safety. No significant environmental effects were identified in analyzing the potential consequences of these changes.

The Department of Energy (DOE) prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing a financial assistance grant under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 to Texas A&M University (Texas A&M) for installation of a combined heat and power (CHP) system at its campus in College Station, Texas. DOE's proposed action is to provide $10 million in financial assistance in a cost-sharing arrangement with the project proponent, Texas A&M. The cost of the proposed project would be about $70.3 million. Texas A&M's proposed project is to install and operate a high-efficiency CHP system that would produce steam for heating and cooling as well as generate electricity. This EA evaluates commonly addressed environmental resource areas and identifies no significant adverse environmental impacts for the proposed project. The proposed project would upgrade the Central Utility Plant and campus electrical distribution system to serve Texas A&M expansion. The proposed CHP system would result in substantial energy savings, reduce carbon dioxide emissions, and reduce the amount of electricity Texas A&M would purchase from carbon-producing plants such coal-fired power generators.

The Department of Energy (DOE) prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing a financial assistance grant under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) (Recovery Act; Public Law 111-5, 123 Stat. 115) to Battelle Memorial Institute to facilitate the installation of 540 additional solar panels, 10 solar concentrating modules, and 8 small wind energy systems at the City of Ellensburg's Renewable Energy Park located in Ellensburg, Kittitas County, Washington. This EA analyzes the potential environmental impacts of DOE's proposed action of providing the Recovery Act funding and of the No-Action Alternative. In this EA, DOE evaluated impacts to air quality, noise, aesthetics and visual resources, soils and geology, water resources, biological resources, and cultural resources. After performing a screening analysis of other environmental resource areas, DOE concluded that impacts to some aspects of the environment would not be likely to occur or would be negligible. The proposed project would be designed in compliance with federal and state air quality regulations, would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and would have a net beneficial impact on air quality in the region. Operation of the concentrating solar modules and eight small wind systems would cause a negligible increase in noise outdoors near the adjacent interstate and Recreation Park. The aesthetics of the City of Ellensburg's Renewable Energy Park would change with the addition of ten 18-foot diameter solar concentrating modules and eight wind towers ranging from 40 to 100 feet in height; however, these changes would be in compliance with the City and County proposed regulations for wind turbines. Adverse impacts to visual resources would be minimal. There would be no adverse impacts to the 100-year floodplain profiles associated with Reecer Creek, and no increase in risk to lives or property in the area from the project. Developing 3 acres for further construction of the Renewable Energy Park would not adversely impact any plant or animal species because the project site is small and isolated from larger tracks of undisturbed land, and because plant and animal species found there are common and widespread in the region. The risk of collisions between the wind turbines and migratory birds and bats is not likely due to the configuration of the turbines (parallel to bird movements toward the wetlands and grouped configuration), the relatively short height of the turbines, and placement in previously disturbed habitat. In support of this EA, a cultural resources inventory was conducted for the area of potential effect (project site). No archaeological resources were identified, and DOE determined that no historic properties would be affected by Battelle's project. In summary, expanding the Renewable Energy Park with additional solar panels, solar concentrating modules, and small wind turbines would not likely result in significant adverse environmental impacts, particularly considering the other existing surrounding uses.

This EA presents information on the potential impacts associated with the distribution of a grant to Conergy for the construction of a solar facility in Philadelphia. This EA was prepared in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.); the National Environmental Policy Act, Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations 40 CFR Parts 1500-1508; and DOE NEPA Implementation Procedures 10 CFR 1021. This EA analyzes the following resource areas: Natural Resources - including water resources, geology, topography and soils, vegetation and wildlife, air quality, and noise; Historic Resources - including visual, and historical resources; Infrastructure - including roadways and traffic, potable water, storm water management, sanitary sewer, energy systems, solid waste, and hazardous material; Socioeconomic Resources - including land use, planning policies, demographics and environmental justice, and human health and safety. DOE's purpose and need is to ensure that SEP funds are used for activities that meet Congress's statutory aims to improve energy efficiency, reduce dependence on imported oil, decrease energy consumption, or promote renewable energy. However, it is not DOE's role to dictate to Pennsylvania how to allocate its funds among these objectives or to prescribe the projects it should pursue. PEDA's purpose and need is to take action to help fulfill its mission to finance clean, advanced energy projects in Pennsylvania, including solar energy projects. Applications are evaluated using criteria including but not limited to technical and financial feasibility of the project, number and quality of jobs created or preserved, and other economic benefits for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Projects must show financial commitment from at least one source other than PEDA and demonstrate a net environmental benefit to Pennsylvania. Conergy's purpose and need is to facilitate green job creation, economic development and growth and improve and drive the solar market place in Pennsylvania.

The Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010, which was included in the final legislation (H.R. 3183, Public Law 111-85), directed the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) to develop this report outlining domestic unconventional fossil energy resource opportunities and associated technology applications, in support of overall research, development, and deployment (RD&D) strategy for the further development of these resources. While the strategy report is prepared by DOE, the scope of the RD&D opportunities and associated technology application is nationwide. Based on the current state of ongoing private and public research efforts, the report summarizes: the potential magnitude of the resource base for each of the unconventional fossil energy sources; the technical, safety, and environmental challenges that have been identified in connection with each of the unconventional resources; and the current status of research activity, both public and private, focused on these resources. From this review of past research activity, the report identifies the following principal remaining technological and environmental challenges: production of residual oil that remains in large domestic oil reservoirs while simultaneously storing carbon dioxide (CO2) in those same reservoirs; potential development of the nation's unmineable coal resource via underground coal gasification; the producibility of natural gas from methane hydrate and the potential for simultaneously sequestering CO2; development of gas shale and tight gas sands; application of advance computational methods for evaluating cumulative environmental and socioeconomic impacts of simultaneous development of conventional and unconventional resources on a regional basis; collection and archiving of historical baseline data related to unconventional fossil fuel resources that may facilitate collaborative efforts among researchers; and quantifying the environmental and safety impacts of unconventional resource development and identifying ways to reduce and/or mitigate these impacts, thereby improving environmentally sustainable production of the resources.

The United States Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory (DOE NETL) prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to analyze the potential environmental impacts of providing funding for the proposed Pope/Douglas Third Combustor Expansion Project in Alexandria, Minnesota. The Proposed Action is for DOE to provide $927,514 of cost-shared funding for this project, or 5% of the overall total project cost of $19,400,000. The proposed project is a Congressionally Directed Project selected by the DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) to advance research and the development and demonstration of energy efficiency or renewable energy technologies or programs. The proposed project would construct and operate a third Municipal Waste Combustor (MWC) to complement the two existing MWCs at the Pope/Douglas Solid Waste Management (PDSWM) waste-to-energy facility. The proposed project would be consistent with DOE's goal to increase the use and amount of renewable energy generation projects. The third MWC would have a nominal capacity of 120 tons of waste per day and would double the facility's overall capacity. Expansion of the facility would enable PDSWM to manage the solid waste of five counties and provide steam to three customers. Excess steam produced at the facility would be used to produce electricity for in-house use or would possibly be sold to the local energy grid. The proposed third MWC unit would be designed and operated similarly to the two existing MWC units, and would be constructed on an already paved surface, immediately south of the existing MWCs. The proposed project would require a construction permit and a Major Amendment to the facility's existing air emissions operating permit. However, no other permits are anticipated to be required. No significant adverse impacts are anticipated to result from implementation of this proposed project.

DOE prepared this EA to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing a financial assistance grant under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act; Public Law 111-5, 123 Stat. 115) to the Center for Commercialization of Electric Technology (CCET) to facilitate the development and demonstration of a multi-faceted, synergistic approach to managing fluctuations in wind power within the Electric Reliability Council of Texas transmission grid. This EA analyzes the potential environmental impacts of DOE's proposed action of providing the Recovery Act funding and of the No-Action Alternative. In this EA, DOE evaluated potential environmental consequences from a portion of the overall project that would involve land disturbance. Other portions are described as significant elements of the project, but because they involve only installation of equipment in existing facilities, they do not involve potential for significant environmental impact and are not evaluated further. With regard to the land disturbing actions considered in this EA, DOE evaluated impacts to air quality, noise, aesthetics and visual resources, surface water resources, and biological resources. After performing a screening analysis of other environmental resource areas, DOE concluded that impacts to some aspects of the environment would not be likely to occur or would be negligible. The proposed project would be designed in compliance with federal and state air quality regulations, would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and would have a net beneficial impact on air quality in the region. New construction would involve a 500-kilowatt solar farm with an array of solar panels, a storage battery with capacity to hold at least 250 kilowatts, and other green technologies. Operation of the solar farm would not result in any increase in noise in the vicinity. The aesthetics of the Discovery at Spring Trails community would change with the addition of the solar photovoltaic panels, which would be housed on rows of metal framework designed to allow the panels to be sloped toward the south for optimal exposure to the sun. The top edge of the modules would be 10 to 11 feet above the ground and the bottom edge would be about 2 feet above the ground. Developing 4 acres for the solar farm on the Discovery at Spring Trails site would not significantly impact any population of plant or animal species because the project site is small and isolated from larger tracts of undisturbed land, and because plant and animal species found there are expected to be widespread in the region or, for sensitive species, the area is not unique habitat. The red-cockaded woodpecker, which is an endangered species under the federal Endangered Species Act, occurs in Montgomery County. However, forest habitat in the project vicinity is second growth due to past development of the area, and it is unlikely that this species would occur there.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) proposes to issue A123 Systems, Inc. (A123), loan and grant funding to retrofit several existing facilities and construct and equip a new facility to support lithium-ion phosphate battery manufacturing operations for hybrid electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. All facilities associated with the Proposed Action would be in the Detroit metropolitan area of southeastern Michigan. DOE prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), Council on Environmental Quality NEPA implementing regulations (40 Code of Federal Regulations CFR] Parts 1500-1508), and DOE NEPA implementing procedures (10 CFR 1021). The EA examines the potential environmental effects associated with the Proposed Action and the No-Action Alternative. Using the targeted benchmark of 2012 for production, the incorporation of 1 year's output of A123 lithium-ion phosphate batteries into plug-in hybrid electric vehicles and hybrid electric vehicles would be expected to reduce national fuel consumption by more than 1 billion gallons of gasoline and reduce emissions of carbon dioxide by approximately 12 million tons over a 10-year period. Therefore, the A123 project would help avoid and reduce emissions of air pollutants and human-caused greenhouse gases, as mandated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for passenger cars and trucks pursuant to federal emissions requirements under the Clean Air Act (65 Federal Register 6698, February 10, 2000). The analysis did not identify adverse impacts to land use (zoned use), visual resources, water resources, biological resources, cultural resources, noise, or public health and safety from implementing the Proposed Action. The analysis identified small adverse impacts to air quality and traffic. The analysis identified small short- and long-term beneficial impacts to socioeconomics in the region of influence from job creation associated with the proposed project. The No-Action Alternative would not impact the environmental resources evaluated in the EA. If DOE did not issue A123 loan and grant funding, A123 would not proceed with the project. Without the financial assistance a DOE loan and grant would provide, A123 would not pursue creation of lithium-ion phosphate battery manufacturing centers in the United States. This would not be consistent with DOE Incentive Program and Vehicle Technologies Program goals.

U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) prepared this draft Environmental Assessment (EA) to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing financial assistance in a cooperative agreement with Big Sky Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (BSCSP). If DOE decides to provide funding, in accordance with the terms of the cooperative agreement, BSCSP plans to test the injection of 1 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) over a four year project injection period into the Duperow formation in Kevin Dome. BSCSP would drill up to five production wells, one injection well, and four wells for monitoring. The project would also involve construction of a compressor station, five miles of roads, and six to ten miles of stainless steel pipeline, as well as various monitoring activities. Two activities, a three dimensional, nine-component seismic survey and some air and water baseline sampling, were allowed to proceed before this document was completed under an interim action request. However, the seismic survey work ceased after the seismic crews caused inadvertent adverse effects to cultural resources, and inclement weather caused postponement of the environmental monitoring. Under the terms of the financial assistance agreement, BSCSP has also initiated some desktop studies and administrative work that would have no effect on the environment (BSCSP, 2012a). DOE's proposed action evaluated in this draft EA is to provide approximately $63.8 million in financial assistance in a cost-sharing arrangement to BSCSP. The total cost of the proposed project would be approximately $81.4 million. This EA evaluates the environmental resource areas DOE commonly addresses in its EAs and identifies no significant adverse environmental impacts for the proposed project after mitigation.

The "Top 25 Oil and Gas KPIs of 2011-2012" report provides insights into the state of oil and gas performance measurement today by listing and analyzing the most visited KPIs for this industry on smartKPIs.com in 2011. In addition to KPI names, it contains a detailed description of each KPI, in the standard smartKPIs.com KPI documentation format, that includes fields such as: definition, purpose, calculation, limitation, overall notes and additional resources. This product is part of the "Top KPIs of 2011-2012" series of reports and a result of the research program conducted by the analysts of smartKPIs.com in the area of integrated performance management and measurement. SmartKPIs.com hosts the largest catalogue of thoroughly documented KPI examples, representing an excellent platform for research and dissemination of insights on KPIs and related topics. The hundreds of thousands of visits to smartKPIs.com and the thousands of KPIs visited, bookmarked and rated by members of this online community in 2011 provided a rich data set, which combined with further analysis from the editorial team, formed the basis of these research reports.

The DOE National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to analyze the potential environmental impacts of providing funding to Norwich Public Utilities (NPU) for its proposed Norwich Cogeneration Initiative in Norwich, New London County, Connecticut. DOE's proposed action is to provide a financial assistance grant of about $718,000. The total project cost would be about $1.47 million, with NPU providing the balance of the funding. The proposed funding is based on a Congressional earmark. DOE's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy believes this project will advance research and development and demonstrate energy efficiency technology. NPU would construct and operate a high-efficiency natural-gas-fired reciprocating engine cogeneration facility on property leased from and adjoining Atlantic City Linen Supply New England (ACLS). ACLS operates an industrial laundry service at this location. The proposed project would install a natural-gas-fired reciprocating engine to generate 540 kilowatts of electricity and use the thermal energy, in the form of a closed-loop hot water heat exchanger, to produce hot water for ACLS's operations. The electricity generated by the unit would be transmitted to NPU's distribution system and offset electricity purchases, potentially reducing costs to all customers.