Original source - The WUP_Stations geodatabase is a compilation of permitted water use withdrawal stations throughout parts of Florida and Georgia developed by the SJRWMD. This is part of the Water Use Permit (WUP) project led by Tammy Bader and former staff. The originating layer and associated tables are updated nightly from a script.Note: Permit Type FW used to indicate artesian wells with the potential to flow at land surface. These wells may have had or may currently have flow control devices. Most of these wells were identified through a groundwater modeling data consolidation effort performed in 2006.Truncated Shape File Field Name:Enterprise DB Field Name:DescriptionOBJECTIDOBJECTIDInternal feature number. Sequential unique whole numbers that are automatically generated.DISTPRMTSTDISTPRMTSTNConcatenate ID of District + Permit + StationDISTRICTDISTRICTPermit issuing agency.PRMT_IDPRMT_IDPermit ID.SEQ_NOSEQ_NOPermit sequence number or revision number where the station was last referenced. In the case of SFMWD, this is the Permit Application ID.SEQ_STTSSEQ_STTSStatus of this station’s sequence or revision.STN_IDSTN_IDSystem Generated Station ID (station header table)UTILITYUTILITYCommon name of public water supply utility.PROJECT_NAPROJECT_NAMEProject Name.STN_STTSSTN_STTSCurrent status of the station.SOURCESOURCESource of water withdrawn at the station.STN_TPSTN_TPStation type.CATEGORYCATEGORYCode indicating predominant permit level allocated water use.PERMITTYPEPERMITTYPECode indicating general permit level operations of the project: AG = Agriculture, CII = Commercial/Industrial/Institutional, LRA = Landscape/Recreational/Aesthetic, MD = Mining/Dewatering, PG = Power Generation, PS = Public Supply, DRN = Drainage, FW = Flowing Well, INJ = Injection, ASR = Aquifer Storage/Recovery, DOM = Domestic, ENV = Environmental, ESS = Essential, FP = Fire Protection, OTH = Other, UNK = Unknown. Note: Permit Type FW used to indicate artesian wells with the potential to flow at land surface. These wells may have had or may currently have flow control devices. Most of these wells were identified through a groundwater modeling data consolidation effort performed in 2006.SHAPESHAPECoordinates defining the features.WTRTYPEWTRTYPEWater use type.NFSEG_LAYENFSEG_LAYERNFSEG modeling.COUNTYCOUNTYThe county the project is located in.UPDATEDUPDATEDDate of latest record revision.JAN_1995JAN_1995Example Month, Year field with water use value for station, in MGD units.

Large reductions in PAFC power plant installed costs and other significant benefits are possible with the present technology if power plant production rates achieve significant levels. However, the required rates cannot currently be met because of low market penetration. Utilities will not commit to this alternative method of power production without convincing evidence that PAFC power plant performance, reliability, and economics are acceptable risks. A private sector demonstration initiative aimed at this issue is currently underway. A modest parallel R and D program could produce cost reductions and performance improvements that will leverage the industry demonstration program to substantially greater market success. DOE has completed a feasibility study, requested by the 99th Congress, which identified discrete areas of research in the PAFC and the associated benefits expected from such research. Consensus has been reached by all participants in the Fuel Cell Program that a focussed research program could be developed and implemented to achieve those benefits and readily permit their incorporation into power plants offered by the manufacturers in the mid 1990's at the completion of the demo program.

ABB Power Plant Laboratories Combustion Engineering, Inc., (ABB CE) and CQ Inc. completed a broad, comprehensive program to demonstrate the economic and environmental benefits of using higher quality U.S. coals for electrical power generation and developed state-of-the-art user-friendly software--Coal Quality Expert (CQE)-- to reliably predict/estimate these benefits in a consistent manner. The program was an essential extension and integration of R&D projects performed in the past under U.S. DOE and EPRI sponsorship and it expanded the available database of coal quality and power plant performance information. This software will permit utilities to purchase the lowest cost clean coals tailored to their specific requirements.

This engineering technical report discusses at a basic level the current feasibility of using Lake Phillipson coal for electrical power generation, with the particular aim of determining those factors requiring more detailed evaluation in the... This engineering technical report discusses at a basic level the current feasibility of using Lake Phillipson coal for electrical power generation, with the particular aim of determining those factors requiring more detailed evaluation in the future. The design, construction and commissioning time scale provided by the proponent has been used by the authors for formulating a mining plan for the supply of coal from the Lake Phillipson deposits to such a power station. From the presentation, the cost of power generated for a particular coal fuel cost, under certain engineering conditions assumed for the report, can be estimated. Some of the controlling assumptions made are as follows: (a) there should be a 2000 megawatts base load station. This size is related to the estimated requirements of a proposed 6000 tonnes Separative Work Units capacity Uranium Enrichment Plant (using the gaseous diffusion process). The load characteristics for such a plant have not been considered. (b) the project will have an installed generating capacity at 3000 megawatts (for the 2000 megawatts base station), since for this study the station is assumed to be independent of the existing South Australian power grid, and so a 50% reserve capacity is provided. (c) there must be provision of data to permit the comparison of sites for said power station at either Lake Phillipson or Port Augusta. These locations were nominated to allow cost comparisons to be made for a station located at the mine site versus one built at the coast, and to highlight problems related to each of these locations. (d) the installation design should permit transmission of the station's entire power output to the Eastern States grid. This operating requirement was included to provide broad capital estimates and comments on the technical aspects of such transmission. (e) coal cost and transport cost estimates should be provided. Based on likely power station coal fuel consumption rates of either 5 million or 10 million tonnes per annum, a range of coal production costs (from $6 to $19 per tonne at mine site) and railway transport costs to Port Augusta ($5 to $9 per tonne) was selected to allow the consultants to prepare a graphical presentation of estimated cost of power generation compared to coal cost. When definite coal production costs are developed, these can be applied to the graphs to estimate associated power costs. (f) adequate cooling water volumes and quality will be available at both Lake Phillipson or Port Augusta. This assumption had to be made to allow the basic study to get underway, although the consultants stipulate that at Lake Phillipson a suitable supply, presently undefined, will need to be proved before a power station located there can be further considered. Present indications are that the quality of groundwater available from dewatering of the West Basin deposit would preclude its direct use for cooling systems. (g) coal quality estimates be used which have been compiled from analyses done on the 'F' seam of the Main Basin deposit; this is the only detailed information currently available, but is considered to provide a reasonable guide to coal properties for combustion purposes. Ultimately, however, to safely design for the burning of Lake Phillipson coal in a power station, it will be necessary to conduct detailed sampling and analyses of the coal units from the selected mining area, preferably leading to the burning of a bulk sample in an existing power station. The characteristics of the coal related to its sodium, potassium and magnesium content are considered to require most attention in the future due to their influence on ash fusion properties. The pronounced content of these elements possibly results from the high salinity of the groundwater in aquifers associated with the coal seams.

The wind energy concept is a concept in accordance with Art. 13 of the Swiss Spatial Planning Act (SPA, SR 700). The concept defines both the principal federal government interests which must be taken into account when planning wind energy plants and the main areas with wind-power potential which must be investigated as part of cantonal structural planning. In this way, the wind energy concept increases planning reliability. The Swiss federal government has identified the main areas with wind-power potential, taking into account the high wind energy yields (basic data from the Wind Atlas of Switzerland, www.windatlas.ch), the principal federal government interests and sufficient spatial concentration. The rough analysis, which is subject to some uncertainty, does not take account of any cantonal or municipal interests and does not permit any assertions to be made about the specific feasibility of wind energy plants. The cartographical representation of the areas with potential should not therefore be seen as a positive plan by the federal government or as competition to structural plan entries that have already been approved; neither does it make any assertions beyond a 1:50,000 scale. The cantons are responsible for identifying suitable areas for wind energy use and the associated balancing of interests appropriate to the relevant levels. The geodata from the main areas with potential are not officially binding but are primarily to be considered as the federal government’s basis for cantons which do not yet have any structural plans in place for wind energy or which want to adapt their structural plans accordingly. In the interests of completeness, the map must be consulted in parallel with the content of the wind energy concept and the associated explanatory report.

Georgian Energy Development Fund (GEDF) through JSC Namakhvani HPP Cascade (NHC) is planning to construct Namakhvani Hydroelectric Power Plant project in Georgia.The project involves the construction of a 433MW hydroelectric power plant. It will include the construction of a concrete dam, derivation tunnels, spillways, a powerhouse, a substation and access roads, the installation of transformers, generators and Kaplan turbines, and the laying of transmission lines.Encon Environmental Consultancy Co and Geographic Ltd have been appointed as environmental consultants, GIS & RS Consulting Center (GeoGraphic) and DOHWA Engineering Co., Ltd as surveyors, CORE International, Inc. as pre-feasibility study consultant, Studio Ing. G. Pietrangeli S.r.l. as an engineering consultant.In December 2009, NHC signed an MOU with a joint venture named NS JV Joint Venture comprising KEPCO, SK Engineering, and NUROL Energy Co to undertake the feasibility study on the project.On June 10, 2011, the public hearing on the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) Report for the project was held.In February 2012, pre-qualification documents for the engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contract were invited by NHC with May 2, 2012, as the submission deadline.On May 2, 2012, 40 companies expressed their interest in the project by submitting the pre-qualification documents and NHC shortlisted 25 pre-qualified bidders for the tender process.In February 2013, an additional geological and hydrological research for more detailed designing of the cascade, and to prepare more comprehensive evaluations of the project's environmental impact was commenced.On December 24, 2015, GEDF announced Invitation for Expression of Interest for the project development. In January 2016, the project received conditional Construction Permit. The project has finalised updated basic design of the Project, feasibility study of relocation road and conclusion of ecological expertise. All interested Investors have expressed their interests before February 2, 2016, and a site visit and clarification meeting were held on February 25, 2016.The submission date for the interested investors to submit their final proposals is July 7, 2016. In July 2016, three companies have submitted their bids: Clean Energy Group Georgia LLC, Powerchina Resources LTD, and General Development LLC. The selected company will sign an Implementation Agreement with Georgian Government.On January 25, 2017, Clean Energy Group appointed as Build-Operate(BO) contractor for the project.ENKA has been appointed as engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contractor. Construction activities are expected to commence in a couple of months. Read More

The originating WUP_Stations geodatabase is a compilation of permitted water use withdrawal stations throughout parts of Florida and Georgia developed by SJRWMD staff. This is part of the Water Use Permit (WUP) project led by Tammy Bader and former staff.Note: Permit Type FW used to indicate artesian wells with the potential to flow at land surface. These wells may have had or may currently have flow control devices. Most of these wells were identified through a groundwater modeling data consolidation effort performed in 2006.Truncated Shape File Field Name:Enterprise DB Field Name:DescriptionOBJECTIDOBJECTIDInternal feature number. Sequential unique whole numbers that are automatically generated.DISTPRMTSTDISTPRMTSTNConcatenate ID of District + Permit + StationDISTRICTDISTRICTPermit issuing agency.PRMT_IDPRMT_IDPermit ID.SEQ_NOSEQ_NOPermit sequence number or revision number where the station was last referenced. In the case of SFMWD, this is the Permit Application ID.SEQ_STTSSEQ_STTSStatus of this station’s sequence or revision.STN_IDSTN_IDSystem Generated Station ID (station header table)UTILITYUTILITYCommon name of public water supply utility.PROJECT_NAPROJECT_NAMEProject Name.STN_STTSSTN_STTSCurrent status of the station.SOURCESOURCESource of water withdrawn at the station.STN_TPSTN_TPStation type.CATEGORYCATEGORYCode indicating predominant permit level allocated water use.PERMITTYPEPERMITTYPECode indicating general permit level operations of the project: AG = Agriculture, CII = Commercial/Industrial/Institutional, LRA = Landscape/Recreational/Aesthetic, MD = Mining/Dewatering, PG = Power Generation, PS = Public Supply, DRN = Drainage, FW = Flowing Well, INJ = Injection, ASR = Aquifer Storage/Recovery, DOM = Domestic, ENV = Environmental, ESS = Essential, FP = Fire Protection, OTH = Other, UNK = Unknown. Note: Permit Type FW used to indicate artesian wells with the potential to flow at land surface. These wells may have had or may currently have flow control devices. Most of these wells were identified through a groundwater modeling data consolidation effort performed in 2006.SHAPESHAPECoordinates defining the features.WTRTYPEWTRTYPEWater use type.NFSEG_LAYENFSEG_LAYERNFSEG modeling.COUNTYCOUNTYThe county the project is located in.UPDATEDUPDATEDDate of latest record revision.JAN_1995JAN_1995Example Month, Year field with water use value for station, in MGD units.

Original source - The WUP_Stations geodatabase is a compilation of permitted water use withdrawal stations throughout parts of Florida and Georgia developed by the SJRWMD. This is part of the Water Use Permit (WUP) project led by Tammy Bader and former staff. The originating layer and associated tables are updated nightly from a script. (edean 11/25/2015)Note: Permit Type FW used to indicate artesian wells with the potential to flow at land surface. These wells may have had or may currently have flow control devices. Most of these wells were identified through a groundwater modeling data consolidation effort performed in 2006.Truncated Shape File Field Name:Enterprise DB Field Name:DescriptionOBJECTIDOBJECTIDInternal feature number. Sequential unique whole numbers that are automatically generated.DISTPRMTSTDISTPRMTSTNConcatenate ID of District + Permit + StationDISTRICTDISTRICTPermit issuing agency.PRMT_IDPRMT_IDPermit ID.SEQ_NOSEQ_NOPermit sequence number or revision number where the station was last referenced. In the case of SFMWD, this is the Permit Application ID.SEQ_STTSSEQ_STTSStatus of this station’s sequence or revision.STN_IDSTN_IDSystem Generated Station ID (station header table)UTILITYUTILITYCommon name of public water supply utility.PROJECT_NAPROJECT_NAMEProject Name.STN_STTSSTN_STTSCurrent status of the station.SOURCESOURCESource of water withdrawn at the station.STN_TPSTN_TPStation type.CATEGORYCATEGORYCode indicating predominant permit level allocated water use.PERMITTYPEPERMITTYPECode indicating general permit level operations of the project: AG = Agriculture, CII = Commercial/Industrial/Institutional, LRA = Landscape/Recreational/Aesthetic, MD = Mining/Dewatering, PG = Power Generation, PS = Public Supply, DRN = Drainage, FW = Flowing Well, INJ = Injection, ASR = Aquifer Storage/Recovery, DOM = Domestic, ENV = Environmental, ESS = Essential, FP = Fire Protection, OTH = Other, UNK = Unknown. Note: Permit Type FW used to indicate artesian wells with the potential to flow at land surface. These wells may have had or may currently have flow control devices. Most of these wells were identified through a groundwater modeling data consolidation effort performed in 2006.SHAPESHAPECoordinates defining the features.WTRTYPEWTRTYPEWater use type.NFSEG_LAYENFSEG_LAYERNFSEG modeling.COUNTYCOUNTYThe county the project is located in.UPDATEDUPDATEDDate of latest record revision.JAN_1995JAN_1995Example Month, Year field with water use value for station, in MGD units.

Original source - The WUP_Stations geodatabase is a compilation of permitted water use withdrawal stations throughout parts of Florida and Georgia developed by the SJRWMD. This is part of the Water Use Permit (WUP) project led by Tammy Bader and former staff. The originating layer and associated tables are updated nightly from a script.Note: Permit Type FW used to indicate artesian wells with the potential to flow at land surface. These wells may have had or may currently have flow control devices. Most of these wells were identified through a groundwater modeling data consolidation effort performed in 2006.Truncated Shape File Field Name:Enterprise DB Field Name:DescriptionOBJECTIDOBJECTIDInternal feature number. Sequential unique whole numbers that are automatically generated.DISTPRMTSTDISTPRMTSTNConcatenate ID of District + Permit + StationDISTRICTDISTRICTPermit issuing agency.PRMT_IDPRMT_IDPermit ID.SEQ_NOSEQ_NOPermit sequence number or revision number where the station was last referenced. In the case of SFMWD, this is the Permit Application ID.SEQ_STTSSEQ_STTSStatus of this station’s sequence or revision.STN_IDSTN_IDSystem Generated Station ID (station header table)UTILITYUTILITYCommon name of public water supply utility.PROJECT_NAPROJECT_NAMEProject Name.STN_STTSSTN_STTSCurrent status of the station.SOURCESOURCESource of water withdrawn at the station.STN_TPSTN_TPStation type.CATEGORYCATEGORYCode indicating predominant permit level allocated water use.PERMITTYPEPERMITTYPECode indicating general permit level operations of the project: AG = Agriculture, CII = Commercial/Industrial/Institutional, LRA = Landscape/Recreational/Aesthetic, MD = Mining/Dewatering, PG = Power Generation, PS = Public Supply, DRN = Drainage, FW = Flowing Well, INJ = Injection, ASR = Aquifer Storage/Recovery, DOM = Domestic, ENV = Environmental, ESS = Essential, FP = Fire Protection, OTH = Other, UNK = Unknown. Note: Permit Type FW used to indicate artesian wells with the potential to flow at land surface. These wells may have had or may currently have flow control devices. Most of these wells were identified through a groundwater modeling data consolidation effort performed in 2006.SHAPESHAPECoordinates defining the features.WTRTYPEWTRTYPEWater use type.NFSEG_LAYENFSEG_LAYERNFSEG modeling.COUNTYCOUNTYThe county the project is located in.UPDATEDUPDATEDDate of latest record revision.JAN_1995JAN_1995Example Month, Year field with water use value for station, in MGD units.