The Impact of Fracking on Freight Distribution Patterns

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Impact of Fracking on Freight Distribution Patterns The Impact of Fracking on Freight Distribution Patterns CFIRE 09-15 CFIRE November 2016 National Center for Freight & Infrastructure Research & Education Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering College of Engineering University of Wisconsin–Madison Author: Mark Abkowitz Vanderbilt University Principal Investigator: Mark Abkowitz Vanderbilt University This page intentionally left blank. Technical Report Documentation 1. Report No. CFIRE 09-15 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. CFDA 20.701 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date November 2016 The Impact of Fracking on Freight Distribution Pattern 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author/s 8. Performing Organization Report No. Mark Abkowitz CFIRE 09-15 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Vanderbilt University 400 24th Avenue, South 11. Contract or Grant No. T002688 Nashville, TN 37235 United States 12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Department of Transportation Final Report 8/1/2014–11/30/2016 Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Washington, DC 20590 United States 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstract The increasing production of domestic energy through the use of fracking will likely alter local/regional/national economies and corresponding freight distribution patterns (highway, rail, marine, pipeline) in the United States. The proposed project will assess the impact of fracking on freight transportation demand and corresponding distribution patterns, for the purpose of identifying where the system is or will become overly stressed (in addition to identifying where excess capacity has been created due to shifts in freight transportation patterns). This will be achieved by deploying a methodology in which multiple future scenarios are defined in terms of fracking activity and energy consumption, each scenario is analyzed according to the resulting freight distribution across modal networks using a routing tool developed under a prior National Center for Freight & Infrastructure Research & Education (CFIRE) initiative, and the results evaluated according to specific performance measures. 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement Energy consumption; Energy resources; No restrictions. This report is available through the Transportation Research Freight transportation; Impacts; Routing; Information Services of the National Transportation Library. Travel patterns; Energy; Freight Transportation; Planning and Forecasting 19. Security Classification (of this report) 20. Security Classification (of this 21. No. of Pages 22. Price page) Unclassified 50 -0- Unclassified Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of form and completed page is authorized. DISCLAIMER This research was funded by the National Center for Freight and Infrastructure Research and Education. The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the information presented herein. This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the US Department of Transportation, University Transportation Centers Program, in the interest of information exchange. The US Government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views of the National Center for Freight and Infrastructure Research and Education, the University of Wisconsin– Madison, or the US DOT’s RITA at the time of publication. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade and manufacturers names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the object of the document. The Impact of Fracking on Highway Infrastructure FINAL REPORT Prepared by: Vanderbilt University Prepared for: National Center for Freight and Infrastructure Research & Education (CFIRE) Project No. CFIRE 09-15 November, 2016 Page 1 1. Introduction The increasing production of domestic oil and gas production through the use of fracking (also known as “fracing”) places additional freight traffic on our nation’s highway system, oftentimes using roadways that were not originally designed for these volumes and associated loads. Consequently, concern has been expressed as to the damage to highway infrastructure that can be caused by fracking activity, as well as who should be responsible for roadway maintenance and repair. This is a particularly acute problem in rural communities, where the majority of fracking activity is taking place, roadways are not typically built to heavy haul standards, and jurisdictions are often manpower and financially constrained in overseeing management of the process. The objective of this project was to investigate this consideration by reviewing logistical, safety and infrastructure challenges associated with evaluating the impact of domestic oil and gas production in the U.S.; and identifying data sources available to profile the level of past, current and anticipated fracking activity in various geographical regions. Utilizing this information, a methodology to assess the impacts to highway infrastructure was developed and applied in a case study using the Tuscaloosa Marine Shale Oil Play in Mississippi. The project was led by Vanderbilt University, in collaboration with the University of Southern Mississippi and the University of Alabama at Huntsville. The authors would like to acknowledge financial support from the National Center for Freight & Infrastructure Research and Education (CFIRE), a consortium of University Transportation Centers funded in part by the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), as well as the participation of the many individuals whose feedback was solicited through the conduct of interviews and surveys. The views expressed in this paper are solely those of the authors and do not reflect the opinions or conclusions of CFIRE, USDOT, Vanderbilt University, the University of Southern Mississippi or the University of Alabama at Huntsville. The remainder of this report is divided into three sections, corresponding to topical areas related to the overall project objective, and which were the subject of focused research investigation and development. The narrative in each case is in the form of a white paper, which can be extracted for use in a stand-alone capacity. Page 2 2. Evaluating the Impact of Domestic Oil and Gas Development on the U.S. Transportation Sector: A Review of the Logistical, Safety and Infrastructure Challenges Introduction Since approximately 2005, the U.S. has experienced an unprecedented boom in domestic oil and gas production. In 2014 the U.S. averaged 8,721,000 barrels of crude oil per day, nearly reaching the historical peak production of 9,637,000 per day in 1970 (USEIA, 2015a) and representing the largest annual growth rate ever (USEIA 2015d). Also in 2014, the U.S. natural gas marketed production (which excludes gas that is flared or vented) exceeded 27 trillion cubic feet, surpassing the 1973 record of approximately 22.6 trillion cubic feet (USEIA 2015b). This increase in domestic gas production has caused net imports of natural gas to fall from around 3.7 trillion cubic feet in 2007 to record lows of less than 1.3 trillion cubic feet in 2014 (USEIA 2015e). This peak production has since waned, but is expected to be achieved again if oil prices rebound to above $80 per barrel (Bellamy, 2015). These dramatic changes in oil and gas production have been driven by advances in two old technologies: 1) hydraulic fracturing and 2) horizontal drilling. Together, advances in these technologies have made it economical to produce oil or gas from ‘tight’ formations (where the oil or gas is trapped in impermeable rock layers), where previously it could not be profitably extracted. Consequently, domestic production of shale/tight oil has expanded from 0.34 million barrels per day in 2007 to 4.2 million barrels per day in 2014, and is now estimated to constitute 49% of total domestic crude oil production (USEIA, 2015c). Shale gas experienced a nearly six fold growth from 2 trillion cubic feet in 2007 to 11.4 trillion cubic feet in 2014 (see Figure 1) and is responsible for the sharp decline in imports noted above. Indeed, it is the technological advances associated with fracing and horizontal drilling that reversed the generally downward trend of domestic oil and gas production that had been in place since the peak of the 1970s production. Tight oil (million barrels per day) Shale gas (trillion cubic feet) 4 15 3 10 2 1 5 0 0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Figure 1. Increased Oil and Gas Production from Hydraulic Fracturing Source: Energy Information Administration (EIA). According to EIA, tight oil is oil found within low permeability reservoirs and includes, though not limited to, shale oil. However, EIA data with regards to shale oil is provided as aggregate of tight oil. Page 3 This rapid increase in production places substantial demands on the nation’s transportation infrastructure. Gas and oil wells are often located in rural areas, and supplies to drill, construct, and hydraulically fracture the well must ultimately be trucked to the site, even if other modes of transportation are available to move these materials closer to the well site from their origin, which can often
Recommended publications
  • Blending Hydrogen Into Natural Gas Pipeline Networks: a Review of Key Issues
    Blending Hydrogen into Natural Gas Pipeline Networks: A Review of Key Issues M. W. Melaina, O. Antonia, and M. Penev NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. Technical Report NREL/TP-5600-51995 March 2013 Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 Blending Hydrogen into Natural Gas Pipeline Networks: A Review of Key Issues M. W. Melaina, O. Antonia, and M. Penev Prepared under Task No. HT12.2010 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. National Renewable Energy Laboratory Technical Report 15013 Denver West Parkway NREL/TP-5600-51995 Golden, Colorado 80401 March 2013 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrogen Storage for Mobility: a Review
    materials Review Hydrogen Storage for Mobility: A Review Etienne Rivard * , Michel Trudeau and Karim Zaghib * Centre of Excellence in Transportation Electrification and Energy Storage, Hydro-Quebec, 1806, boul. Lionel-Boulet, Varennes J3X 1S1, Canada; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] (E.R.); [email protected] (K.Z.) Received: 18 April 2019; Accepted: 11 June 2019; Published: 19 June 2019 Abstract: Numerous reviews on hydrogen storage have previously been published. However, most of these reviews deal either exclusively with storage materials or the global hydrogen economy. This paper presents a review of hydrogen storage systems that are relevant for mobility applications. The ideal storage medium should allow high volumetric and gravimetric energy densities, quick uptake and release of fuel, operation at room temperatures and atmospheric pressure, safe use, and balanced cost-effectiveness. All current hydrogen storage technologies have significant drawbacks, including complex thermal management systems, boil-off, poor efficiency, expensive catalysts, stability issues, slow response rates, high operating pressures, low energy densities, and risks of violent and uncontrolled spontaneous reactions. While not perfect, the current leading industry standard of compressed hydrogen offers a functional solution and demonstrates a storage option for mobility compared to other technologies. Keywords: hydrogen mobility; hydrogen storage; storage systems assessment; Kubas-type hydrogen storage; hydrogen economy 1. Introduction According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), it is almost certain that the unusually fast global warming is a direct result of human activity [1]. The resulting climate change is linked to significant environmental impacts that are connected to the disappearance of animal species [2,3], decreased agricultural yield [4–6], increasingly frequent extreme weather events [7,8], human migration [9–11], and conflicts [12–14].
    [Show full text]
  • Storing Syngas Lowers the Carbon Price for Profitable Coal Gasification
    Carnegie Mellon Electricity Industry Center Working Paper CEIC-07-10 www.cmu.edu/electricity Storing syngas lowers the carbon price for profitable coal gasification ADAM NEWCOMER AND JAY APT Carnegie Mellon Electricity Industry Center, Tepper School of Business, and Department of Engineering and Public Policy, 254 Posner Hall, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213 Integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) electric power generation systems with carbon capture and sequestration have desirable environmental qualities, but are not profitable when the carbon dioxide price is less than approximately $50 per metric ton. We examine whether an IGCC facility that operates its gasifier continuously but stores the syngas and produces electricity only when daily prices are high may be profitable at significantly lower CO2 prices. Using a probabilistic analysis, we have calculated the plant-level return on investment (ROI) and the value of syngas storage for IGCC facilities located in the US Midwest using a range of storage configurations. Adding a second turbine to use the stored syngas to generate electricity at peak hours and implementing 12 hours of above ground high pressure syngas storage significantly increases the ROI and net present value. Storage lowers the carbon price at which IGCC enters the US generation mix by approximately 25%. 1 Carnegie Mellon Electricity Industry Center Working Paper CEIC-07-10 www.cmu.edu/electricity Introduction Producing electricity from coal-derived synthesis gas (syngas) in an integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) facility can improve criteria pollutant performance over other coal-fueled technologies such as pulverized coal (PC) facilities [1-5] and can be implemented with carbon capture and sequestration.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Innovative and Automated Freight Strategies and Technologies—Phase I Final Report
    Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FHWA/TX-17/0-6837-1 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date ASSESSMENT OF INNOVATIVE AND AUTOMATED FREIGHT February 2017 STRATEGIES AND TECHNOLOGIES—PHASE I FINAL REPORT 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Curtis Morgan, Jeffery Warner, Allan Rutter, Dahye Lee, C. James Report 0-6837-1 Kruse, Dong Hun Kang, Mario Monsreal, Jolanda Prozzi, Juan Carlos Villa, Jeffrey Borowiec, Leslie Olson, David Bierling, and Edwin Varela 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Texas A&M Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System 11. Contract or Grant No. College Station, Texas 77843-3135 Project 0-6837 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation Technical Report: Research and Technology Implementation Office March 2016 125 E. 11th Street 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Austin, Texas 78701-2483 15. Supplementary Notes Project performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. Project Title: Assessment of Innovative and Automated Freight Systems and Development of Evaluation Tools URL: http://tti.tamu.edu/documents/0-6837-1.pdf 16. Abstract Many innovative freight delivery strategies and technologies have been proposed to address the future freight needs of Texas’s growing population. Changes in both buying habits and a shift toward direct home package delivery threaten to dramatically change distribution patterns and increase the number of intercity and local delivery trucks on Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) roadways.
    [Show full text]
  • Changing LNG Market Dynamics – Implications on Supply Security in the APEC Region
    Changing LNG Market Dynamics – Implications on Supply Security in the APEC Region APEC Oil and Gas Security Studies | Series 17 APEC Energy Working Group September 2020 APEC Project: EWG 01 2020S Produced by Asia Pacific Energy Research Centre (APERC) Institute of Energy Economics, Japan Inui Building, Kachidoki 11F, 1-13-1 Kachidoki Chuo-ku, Tokyo 104-0054 Japan Tel: (813) 5144-8551 Fax: (813) 5144-8555 E-mail: [email protected] (administration) Website: http://aperc.or.jp/ For Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Secretariat 35 Heng Mui Keng Terrace Singapore 119616 Tel: (65) 68919 600 Fax: (65) 68919 690 Email: [email protected] Website: www.apec.org © 2020 APEC Secretariat APEC#220-RE-01.9 ISBN: 978-981-14-7794-2 OGSS Series 17 Changing LNG Market Dynamics – Implications on Supply Security in the APEC Region 3 | P a g e TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................... 3 Foreword ....................................................................................................................................... 6 Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... 7 Project coordinators .................................................................................................................. 7 Authors ...................................................................................................................................... 7 Editors
    [Show full text]
  • NATURAL GAS STORAGE: Actions Needed to Assess Inspection
    United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Requesters October 2019 NATURAL GAS STORAGE Actions Needed to Assess Inspection Workload and Progress toward Safety Outcomes GAO-20-167 October 2019 NATURAL GAS STORAGE Actions Needed to Assess Inspection Workload and Progress toward Safety Outcomes Highlights of GAO-20-167, a report to congressional requesters Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found About 400 natural gas storage sites In 2018, the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous are important to the U.S. natural gas Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) set a goal for its natural gas storage system, providing about 30 percent of inspection program to inspect all approximately 400 natural gas storage sites the nation's energy. During a 2015 leak within 5 years, according to agency officials. PHMSA expected that all 25 eligible at a storage site near Los Angeles, states would help inspect sites, but only 10 states agreed to partner with the about 8,000 families were temporarily agency. As a result, the agency’s inspection workload increased by almost 60 relocated due to symptoms such as percent from when it set its goal, according to PHMSA data. Because of the migraines, nausea, and respiratory increase in its inspection workload over its preliminary estimate, PHMSA does problems. The leak raised concerns not have assurance that it has enough resources to meet its inspection goal. about health and safety risks from Furthermore, PHMSA has not used a workforce analysis to inform its budget other storage sites. In 2017, GAO recommended that PHMSA take requests.
    [Show full text]
  • Update to Gas Storage Needed to Support Electricity Generation
    Gas Storage Needed to Support Electricity Generation Prepared For The Utility Air Regulatory Group and the American Public Power Association An Update to Implications of Greater Reliance on Natural Gas for Electricity Generation (2010) June 2012 Update on Natural Gas Storage Needed to Support Electricity Generation Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 3 Recent and Expected Additions to Storage .................................................................................................. 5 Generator Use of Storage ............................................................................................................................. 7 Use of Storage to Provide Reliability ............................................................................................................ 8 Generator Use of Storage for Imbalance Management ............................................................................. 10 Use of Storage to Provide Flexible Pipeline Services .................................................................................. 11 Competition for the Geology By Other Uses .............................................................................................. 14 Other Types of Storage May Increase in Relevance ................................................................................... 16 Final Thoughts ............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Underground Storage of Natural Gas Storing Natural Gas the Same Way Nature Always Has… Deep Underground
    UNDERGROUND STORAGE OF NATURAL GAS STORING NATURAL GAS THE SAME WAY NATURE ALWAYS HAS… DEEP UNDERGROUND Most of the natural gas used in Southern California travels from supply sources as far away as Texas and Canada. So, Underground storage is based on the simple in order to maintain a balance between supply and demand, premise that if an underground rock formation storage is a necessity. Without it, we might not always be held oil and natural gas securely for millions of able to meet our customers’ needs. years, it could continue to do under controlled Customer needs change by the season, by the day, and even conditions. by the hour. On a cold winter day, for example, residential customers can use seven times the amount of natural gas Extensive research and our experience have proven that used on an average summer day. this concept is sound. Depleted oil and natural gas fields Five decades ago, balancing customer demand meant relying offer ideal storage conditions because they are comprised on natural gas holding structures, which stood several stories of natural underground traps. Care is taken that the original high and resembled oil storage tanks. formation pressure of the field is not exceeded. These subterranean rock formations can be repeatedly refilled and In 1941 we introduced a new system to the Southwest: drawn from to meet the fluctuating needs of our customers. underground storage of natural gas. This system is based on the simple premise that if an underground rock formation When out of state pipelines can’t deliver enough natural held oil and natural gas securely for millions of years, it could gas to meet heavy demand, which might occur on a cold continue to do so under controlled circumstances.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Gas Annual Questionnaire 2017-2021
    NATURAL GAS ANNUAL QUESTIONNAIRE 2017-2021 AND HISTORICAL REVISIONS August 2018 Attached is the annual questionnaire for natural gas which provides for the submission of 2017-2021 data and historical revisions where applicable. Countries reporting to the IEA are requested to complete the questionnaire at the latest by 30 September. Earlier submissions are welcome. Countries reporting to Eurostat are requested to complete the questionnaire by 30 November (Regulation (EC) No 1099/2008 on energy statistics). Earlier submissions are welcome. Please send your questionnaire to: International Energy Agency (IEA/OECD), Energy Data Centre (the IEA will forward the data to the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe in Geneva). European Commission, Eurostat, Energy Statistics (for EU Member States, European Economic Area countries, EU Candidate Countries and Potential Candidates, Energy Community Contracting Parties) United Nations Statistics Division, Energy Statistics Section Transmission details are provided in the “Data communication procedures” section. ANNUAL GAS QUESTIONNAIRE Data communication procedures IEA 31-35, rue de la Fédération, 75739, Paris, Cedex 15, France Please complete data for your country on the Energy Validation Outlet: https://evo.iea.org Alternatively send the completed questionnaire in a CSV or Excel file as an e-mail attachment. to [email protected] For questions regarding the questionnaire, contact [email protected] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Eurostat European Commission – Eurostat, Unit E.5: Energy, L-2920 Luxembourg (for EU Member States, European Economic Area countries, EU Candidate Countries and Potential Candidates, Energy Community Contracting Parties) The completed MS Excel questionnaire should be transmitted via the Single Entry Point following the implementing procedures of EDAMIS (Electronic Data Files Administration And Management Information System): https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/edamis/ selecting the electronic data collection ENERGY_NTGAS_A.
    [Show full text]
  • LNG Solutions in Action LNG Solutions in Action
    LNG Solutions in Action LNG Solutions in Action Access to reliable energy means empowerment and increased living standards. With energy demand forecast to increase by 30% between today and 2030 and with society committed to transitioning to a low carbon future, natural gas is fundamental to meeting the challenge of significantly increased global energy without worsening air quality conditions. Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) is simply natural gas that has been refrigerated to its liquid form so that it can be economically stored and transported. Traditionally it would be produced and distributed on a massive scale but Chart is a key player in the development of small-scale models that are revolutionizing its usage and bringing power to off-grid locations, providing back-up power for peak shaving and supply curtailment events and fueling road, marine and even rail transportation. It’s an exciting and transient landscape where decisions in different parts of the value chain are highly interdependent. Therefore, it’s important to select a project partner that under- stands this. From the earliest feasibility study right through to after-sales service and mainte- nance packages, Chart will accompany you through the entire project lifecycle. By choosing Chart you gain a reliable and trustworthy ally, with a proven, solution driven track record. We have provided the industry’s highest rate of functionally successful systems from day one and, as a result, the most financially successful projects. We are delighted to present a small sample of them drawn from our experience across the globe. 2 3 LIQUEFACTION LNG Production and Trailer Loading Facility at Gas Processing Plant Highlights: Application: Cryogenic gas processing (Nitrogen Rejection Unit) produces LNG as part of the process, providing low cost LNG for the merchant market.
    [Show full text]
  • Novel Design and Optimization of Vehicle's Natural Gas Fuel Tank
    Novel Design and Optimization ofVehicle's Natural Gas Fuel Tank A Thesis Presented to The Faculty ofthe Fritz J. and Dolores H. Russ College ofEngineering and Technology Ohio University In Partial Fulfillment ofthe Requirement for the Degree Master ofScience \ by , Shr-Hung Chen March 1997 QHIO UN!VERSlrv LIBRARY Acknowledgments I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Bhavin V. Mehta, Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering, for having given me the privilege of working on this problem. Working on this thesis has been an invaluable experience and has greatly contributed to my knowledge and understanding ofthe subject. I would also like to thank Dr. M. Khairul Alam, Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Dr. Daniel Gulino, Associate Professor of Chemical Engineering of being on my thesis committee. I dedicate this thesis to my parents who have been my source inspiration In pursuing my Master's degree. A special word ofthanks to my sister for her support. Table of Contents Topic Page List ofTable III List ofFigure IV 1. Introduction 1 1-1 Introduction 1 1-2 Objective 1 1-3 Natural Gas Vehicles and High Pressure Storage Tanks 2 2. Literature Review 4 2-1 Natural Gas Vehicle 4 2-2 The Shape ofNatural Gas Storage Tanks 5 2-3 The Materials ofCompress Natural Gas Storage Tanks 6 3. Materials Consideration ofNatural Gas Storage Tanks 9 3-1 Introduction 9 3-2 Different Materials Considered 9 3-3 Aluminum-6061-T6 10 3-4 Steel-AISI-I040 16 3-5 Composite Material (Kevlar) 19 4. FEM Modeling and Design ofNatural Gas Storage Tanks 24 4-1 Introduction 24 ii Topic Page 4-2 Creation of3-D Model ofthe Tank Using Intergraph's CAD/CAM System 24 4-3 Creation of3-D Model ofTank Using Patran3.0 36 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix B Description of Potential Alternatives for CEQA Master
    California Public Utilities Commission Pipeline Safety and Reliability Project – New Natural Gas Line 3602 and De-rating Line 1600 (PSRP) Appendix B Description of Potential Alternatives for CEQA Master Environmental Assessment Prepared by: Ecology and Environment, Inc. November 2018 PIPELINE SAFETY AND RELIABILITY PROJECT – NEW NATURAL GAS LINE 3602 AND DE-RATING LINE 1600 (PSRP) APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVES TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction ................................................................................... 1 1.1 Existing System .............................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Proposed Project ............................................................................................................. 1 1.3 Potential Alternatives to the Proposed Project ................................................................ 2 2 Development of the Range of Potential Alternatives...................... 4 3 Description of Potential Alternatives .............................................. 4 A. No Project Alternative .................................................................................................... 4 B. Proposed Route, Alternate Diameter Pipeline (42-inch) Alternative .............................. 5 C. United States – Liquefied Natural Gas Alternative......................................................... 5 D. Liquefied Natural Gas Storage (Peak Shaver) Alternative ............................................. 5 E. Existing
    [Show full text]