Germanium and indium are two important elements used in electronics devices, flat-panel display screens, light-emitting diodes, night vision devices, optical fiber, optical lens systems, and solar power arrays. Germanium and indium are treated together in this chapter because they have similar technological uses and because both are recovered as byproducts, mainly from copper and zinc sulfides.
The world’s total production of germanium in 2011 was estimated to be 118 metric tons. This total comprised germanium recovered from zinc concentrates, from fly ash residues from coal burning, and from recycled material. Worldwide, primary germanium was recovered in Canada from zinc concentrates shipped from the United States; in China from zinc residues and coal from multiple sources in China and elsewhere; in Finland from zinc concentrates from the Democratic Republic of the Congo; and in Russia from coal.
World production of indium metal was estimated to be about 723 metric tons in 2011; more than one-half of the total was produced in China. Other leading producers included Belgium, Canada, Japan, and the Republic of Korea. These five countries accounted for nearly 95 percent of primary indium production.
Deposit types that contain significant amounts of germanium include volcanogenic massive sulfide (VMS) deposits, sedimentary exhalative (SEDEX) deposits, Mississippi Valley-type (MVT) lead-zinc deposits (including Irish-type zinc-lead deposits), Kipushi-type zinc-lead-copper replacement bodies in carbonate rocks, and coal deposits.
More than one-half of the byproduct indium in the world is produced in southern China from VMS and SEDEX deposits, and much of the remainder is produced from zinc concentrates from MVT deposits. The Laochang deposit in Yunnan Province, China, and the VMS deposits of the Murchison greenstone belt in Limpopo Province, South Africa, provide excellent examples of indium-enriched deposits. The SEDEX deposits at Bainiuchang, China (located in southeastern Yunnan Province), and the Dabaoshan SEDEX deposit (located in the Nanling region of China) contain indium-enriched sphalerite. Another major potential source of indium occurs in the polymetallic tin-tungsten belt in the Eastern Cordillera of the Andes Mountains of Bolivia. Deposits there occur as dense arrays of narrow, elongate, indium-enriched tin oxide-polymetallic sulfide veins in volcanic rocks and porphyry stocks.
Information about the behavior of germanium and indium in the environment is limited. In surface weathering environments, germanium and indium may dissolve from host minerals and form complexes with chloride, fluoride, hydroxide, organic matter, phosphate, or sulfate compounds. The tendency for germanium and indium to be dissolved and transported largely depends upon the pH and temperature of the weathering solutions. Because both elements are commonly concentrated in sulfide minerals, they can be expected to be relatively mobile in acid mine drainage where oxidative dissolution of sulfide minerals releases metals and sulfuric acid, resulting in acidic pH values that allow higher concentrations of metals to be dissolved into solution.
","largerWorkType":{"id":18,"text":"Report"},"largerWorkTitle":"Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply","largerWorkSubtype":{"id":5,"text":"USGS Numbered Series"},"language":"English","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","publisherLocation":"Reston, VA","doi":"10.3133/pp1802I","isbn":"978-1-4113-3991-0","usgsCitation":"Shanks, W.C.P., III, Kimball, B.E., Tolcin, A.C., and Guberman, D.E., 2017, Germanium and indium, chap. I of Schulz, K.J., DeYoung, J.H., Jr., Seal, R.R., II, and Bradley, D.C., eds., Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1802, p. I1–I27, https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1802I.","productDescription":"viii, 27 p.","numberOfPages":"39","onlineOnly":"N","additionalOnlineFiles":"N","ipdsId":"IP-052088","costCenters":[{"id":171,"text":"Central Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":334573,"rank":1,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/i/coverthb1.jpg"},{"id":334574,"rank":2,"type":{"id":11,"text":"Document"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/i/pp1802i.pdf","text":"Report","size":"1.84 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"},"description":"PP 1802 I"}],"contact":"Mineral Resources Program Coordinator
U.S. Geological Survey
913 National Center
Reston, VA 20192
Email: minerals@usgs.gov
https://minerals.usgs.gov
Mineral commodities are vital for economic growth, improving the quality of life, providing for national defense, and the overall functioning of modern society. Minerals are being used in larger quantities than ever before and in an increasingly diverse range of applications. With the increasing demand for a considerably more diverse suite of mineral commodities has come renewed recognition that competition and conflict over mineral resources can pose significant risks to the manufacturing industries that depend on them. In addition, production of many mineral commodities has become concentrated in relatively few countries (for example, tungsten, rare-earth elements, and antimony in China; niobium in Brazil; and platinum-group elements in South Africa and Russia), thus increasing the risk for supply disruption owing to political, social, or other factors. At the same time, an increasing awareness of and sensitivity to potential environmental and health issues caused by the mining and processing of many mineral commodities may place additional restrictions on mineral supplies. These factors have led a number of Governments, including the Government of the United States, to attempt to identify those mineral commodities that are viewed as most “critical” to the national economy and (or) security if supplies should be curtailed.
This book presents resource and geologic information on the following 23 mineral commodities currently among those viewed as important to the national economy and national security of the United States: antimony (Sb), barite (barium, Ba), beryllium (Be), cobalt (Co), fluorite or fluorspar (fluorine, F), gallium (Ga), germanium (Ge), graphite (carbon, C), hafnium (Hf), indium (In), lithium (Li), manganese (Mn), niobium (Nb), platinum-group elements (PGE), rare-earth elements (REE), rhenium (Re), selenium (Se), tantalum (Ta), tellurium (Te), tin (Sn), titanium (Ti), vanadium (V), and zirconium (Zr). For a number of these commodities—for example, graphite, manganese, niobium, and tantalum—the United States is currently wholly dependent on imports to meet its needs. The first two chapters (A and B) deal with general information pertinent to the study of mineral resources. Chapters C through V describe individual mineral commodities and include an overview of current uses of the commodity, identified resources and their distribution nationally and globally, the state of current geologic knowledge, the potential for finding additional deposits nationally and globally, and geoenvironmental issues that may be related to the production and uses of the commodity. These chapters are updates of the commodity chapters published in 1973 in U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 820, “United States Mineral Resources.”
","language":"English","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","publisherLocation":"Reston, VA","doi":"10.3133/pp1802","isbn":"978-1-4113-3991-0","usgsCitation":"Schulz, K.J., DeYoung, J.H., Jr., Seal, R.R., II, and Bradley, D.C., eds., 2017, Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1802, 797 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1802.","productDescription":"Report: 862 p.; Data Release","numberOfPages":"862","onlineOnly":"N","additionalOnlineFiles":"N","ipdsId":"IP-069563","costCenters":[{"id":245,"text":"Eastern Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":350071,"rank":5,"type":{"id":22,"text":"Related Work"},"url":"https://mrdata.usgs.gov/pp1802/ ","text":"- Global Distribution of Selected Mines, Deposits, and Districts of Critical Minerals","linkFileType":{"id":5,"text":"html"},"description":"Global distribution of selected mines, deposits, and districts of critical minerals"},{"id":336929,"rank":2,"type":{"id":8,"text":"Cover"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/pp1802_frontbackcovers.pdf","text":"Front and Back Covers","size":"1.23 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"},"description":"PP 1802"},{"id":352473,"rank":7,"type":{"id":12,"text":"Errata"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/pp1802_erratum-march132018.txt","text":"Erratum","size":"1 KB","linkFileType":{"id":2,"text":"txt"}},{"id":336933,"rank":3,"type":{"id":2,"text":"Additional Report Piece"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/cover/pp1802frontmatter.pdf","text":"Professional Paper 1802 - Front Matter","size":"326 KB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"},"description":"PP 1802","linkHelpText":" - Front Matter"},{"id":336928,"rank":1,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/coverthb.jpg"},{"id":350094,"rank":6,"type":{"id":11,"text":"Document"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/pp1802_entirebook.pdf","text":"Report (Entire Book)","size":"148 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"}},{"id":349464,"rank":4,"type":{"id":30,"text":"Data Release"},"url":"https://doi.org/10.5066/F7GH9GQR","text":"USGS data release","description":"USGS data release","linkHelpText":"Global Distribution of Selected Mines, Deposits, and Districts of Critical Minerals"}],"contact":"Mineral Resources Program Coordinator
U.S. Geological Survey
913 National Center
Reston, VA 20192
Email: minerals@usgs.gov
http://minerals.usgs.gov
Antimony is an important mineral commodity used widely in modern industrialized societies. The element imparts strength, hardness, and corrosion resistance to alloys that are used in many areas of industry, including in lead-acid storage batteries. Antimony’s leading use is as a fire retardant in safety equipment and in household goods, such as mattresses. The U.S. Government has considered antimony to be a critical mineral mainly because of its use in military applications. The great majority of the world’s antimony comes from China, and much of the remainder is shipped to China for smelting. Antimony resources are unevenly distributed around the world. China has the bulk of the world’s identified resources; other countries that have identified antimony resources include Bolivia, Canada, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, Tajikistan, and Turkey. Resources in the United States are located mainly in Alaska, Idaho, Montana, and Nevada. The most significant antimony mineral deposits occur in geologic environments with a thick sequence of siliciclastic sedimentary rocks in areas with significant fault and fracture systems. The most common antimony ore mineral is stibnite (Sb2 S3 ), but more than 100 other minerals also contain antimony. The presence of antimony in surface waters and groundwaters results primarily from rock weathering, soil runoff, and anthropogenic sources. Global emissions of antimony to the atmosphere average 6,100 metric tons per year. Empirical data suggest that the acid-generating potential of antimony mine waste is low.
","largerWorkType":{"id":18,"text":"Report"},"largerWorkTitle":"Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply","largerWorkSubtype":{"id":5,"text":"USGS Numbered Series"},"language":"English","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","publisherLocation":"Reston, VA","doi":"10.3133/pp1802C","isbn":"978-1-4113-3991-0","usgsCitation":"Seal, R.R., II, Schulz, K.J., and DeYoung, J.H., Jr., with contributions from David M. Sutphin, Lawrence J. Drew, James F. Carlin, Jr., and Byron R. Berger, 2017, Antimony, chap. C of Schulz, K.J., DeYoung, J.H., Jr., Seal, R.R., II, and Bradley, D.C., eds., Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1802, p. C1–C17, https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1802C.","productDescription":"vii, 17 p.","numberOfPages":"30","onlineOnly":"N","additionalOnlineFiles":"N","ipdsId":"IP-078901","costCenters":[{"id":245,"text":"Eastern Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":352475,"rank":3,"type":{"id":12,"text":"Errata"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/pp1802_erratum-march132018.txt","text":"Erratum","size":"1 KB","linkFileType":{"id":2,"text":"txt"}},{"id":339520,"rank":0,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/c/coverthb1.jpg"},{"id":339513,"rank":2,"type":{"id":11,"text":"Document"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/c/pp1802c.pdf","text":"Report","size":"7.05 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"},"description":"PP 1802 C"}],"contact":"Mineral Resources Program Coordinator
U.S. Geological Survey
913 National Center
Reston, VA 20192
Email: minerals@usgs.gov
https://minerals.usgs.gov
Many changes have taken place in the mineral resource sector since the publication by the U.S. Geological Survey of Professional Paper 820, “United States Mineral Resources,” which is a review of the long-term United States resource position for 65 mineral commodities or commodity groups. For example, since 1973, the United States has continued to become increasingly dependent on imports to meet its demands for an increasing number of mineral commodities. The global demand for mineral commodities is at an alltime high and is expected to continue to increase, and the development of new technologies and products has led to the use of a greater number of mineral commodities in increasing quantities to the point that, today, essentially all naturally occurring elements have several significant industrial uses. Although most mineral commodities are present in sufficient amounts in the earth to provide adequate supplies for many years to come, their availability can be affected by such factors as social constraints, politics, laws, environmental regulations, land-use restrictions, economics, and infrastructure.
This volume presents updated reviews of 23 mineral commodities and commodity groups viewed as critical to a broad range of existing and emerging technologies, renewable energy, and national security. The commodities or commodity groups included are antimony, barite, beryllium, cobalt, fluorine, gallium, germanium, graphite, hafnium, indium, lithium, manganese, niobium, platinum-group elements, rare-earth elements, rhenium, selenium, tantalum, tellurium, tin, titanium, vanadium, and zirconium. All these commodities have been listed as critical and (or) strategic in one or more of the recent studies based on assessed likelihood of supply interruption and the possible cost of such a disruption to the assessor. For some of the minerals, current production is limited to only one or a few countries. For many, the United States currently has no mine production or any significant identified resources and is largely dependent on imports to meet its needs. As a result, the emphasis in this volume is on the global distribution and availability of each mineral commodity. The environmental issues related to production of each mineral commodity, including current mitigation and remediation approaches to deal with these challenges, are also addressed.
This introductory chapter provides an overview of the mineral resource classifications, terms, and definitions used in this volume. A review of the history of the use and meaning of the term “critical” minerals (or materials) is included as an appendix to the chapter.
","largerWorkType":{"id":18,"text":"Report"},"largerWorkTitle":"Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply","largerWorkSubtype":{"id":5,"text":"USGS Numbered Series"},"language":"English","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","publisherLocation":"Reston, VA","doi":"10.3133/pp1802A","isbn":"978-1-4113-3991-0","usgsCitation":"Schulz, K.J., DeYoung, J.H., Jr., Bradley, D.C., and Seal, R.R., II, 2017, Critical mineral resources of the United States—An introduction, chap. A of Schulz, K.J., DeYoung, J.H., Jr., Seal, R.R., II, and Bradley, D.C., eds., Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1802, p. A1–A14, https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1802A.","productDescription":"iii, 14 p.","numberOfPages":"22","onlineOnly":"N","additionalOnlineFiles":"N","ipdsId":"IP-075025","costCenters":[{"id":245,"text":"Eastern Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":339518,"rank":1,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/a/coverthb.jpg"},{"id":339512,"type":{"id":11,"text":"Document"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/a/pp1802a.pdf","text":"Report","size":"1.79 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"},"description":"PP 1802 A"}],"contact":"Mineral Resources Program Coordinator
U.S. Geological Survey
913 National Center
Reston, VA 20192
Email: minerals@usgs.gov
https://minerals.usgs.gov
Graphite is a form of pure carbon that normally occurs as black crystal flakes and masses. It has important properties, such as chemical inertness, thermal stability, high electrical conductivity, and lubricity (slipperiness) that make it suitable for many industrial applications, including electronics, lubricants, metallurgy, and steelmaking. For some of these uses, no suitable substitutes are available. Steelmaking and refractory applications in metallurgy use the largest amount of produced graphite; however, emerging technology uses in large-scale fuel cell, battery, and lightweight high-strength composite applications could substantially increase world demand for graphite.
Graphite ores are classified as “amorphous” (microcrystalline), and “crystalline” (“flake” or “lump or chip”) based on the ore’s crystallinity, grain-size, and morphology. All graphite deposits mined today formed from metamorphism of carbonaceous sedimentary rocks, and the ore type is determined by the geologic setting. Thermally metamorphosed coal is the usual source of amorphous graphite. Disseminated crystalline flake graphite is mined from carbonaceous metamorphic rocks, and lump or chip graphite is mined from veins in high-grade metamorphic regions. Because graphite is chemically inert and nontoxic, the main environmental concerns associated with graphite mining are inhalation of fine-grained dusts, including silicate and sulfide mineral particles, and hydrocarbon vapors produced during the mining and processing of ore. Synthetic graphite is manufactured from hydrocarbon sources using high-temperature heat treatment, and it is more expensive to produce than natural graphite.
Production of natural graphite is dominated by China, India, and Brazil, which export graphite worldwide. China provides approximately 67 percent of worldwide output of natural graphite, and, as the dominant exporter, has the ability to set world prices. China has significant graphite reserves, and China’s graphite production is expected to increase, although rising labor costs and some mine production problems are developing. China is expected to continue to be the dominant exporter for the near future. Mexico and Canada export graphite mainly to the United States, which has not had domestic production of natural graphite since the 1950s. Most graphite deposits in the United States are too small, low-grade, or remote to be of commercial value in the near future, and the likelihood of discovering larger, higher-grade, or favorably located domestic deposits is unlikely. The United States is a major producer of synthetic graphite.
","largerWorkType":{"id":18,"text":"Report"},"largerWorkTitle":"Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply","largerWorkSubtype":{"id":5,"text":"USGS Numbered Series"},"language":"English","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","publisherLocation":"Reston, VA","doi":"10.3133/pp1802J","usgsCitation":"Robinson, G.R., Jr., Hammarstrom, J.M., and Olson, D.W., 2017, Graphite, chap. J of Schulz, K.J., DeYoung, J.H., Jr., Seal, R.R., II, and Bradley, D.C., eds., Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1802, p. J1–J24, https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1802J.","productDescription":"viii, 24 p.","numberOfPages":"36","onlineOnly":"N","additionalOnlineFiles":"N","ipdsId":"IP-044217","costCenters":[{"id":245,"text":"Eastern Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":334578,"rank":2,"type":{"id":11,"text":"Document"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/j/pp1802j.pdf","text":"Report","size":"4.30 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"},"description":"PP 1802 J"},{"id":334577,"rank":1,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/j/coverthb1.jpg"}],"contact":"Mineral Resources Program Coordinator
U.S. Geological Survey
913 National Center
Reston, VA 20192
Email: minerals@usgs.gov
https://minerals.usgs.gov
Niobium and tantalum are transition metals that are almost always found together in nature because they have very similar physical and chemical properties. Their properties of hardness, conductivity, and resistance to corrosion largely determine their primary uses today. The leading use of niobium (about 75 percent) is in the production of high-strength steel alloys used in pipelines, transportation infrastructure, and structural applications. Electronic capacitors are the leading use of tantalum for high-end applications, including cell phones, computer hard drives, and such implantable medical devices as pacemakers. Niobium and tantalum are considered critical and strategic metals based on the potential risks to their supply (because current production is restricted to only a few countries) and the significant effects that a restriction in supply would have on the defense, energy, high-tech industrial, and medical sectors.
The average abundance of niobium and tantalum in bulk continental crust is relatively low—8.0 parts per million (ppm) niobium and 0.7 ppm tantalum. Their chemical characteristics, such as small ionic size and high electronic field strength, significantly reduce the potential for these elements to substitute for more common elements in rock-forming minerals and make niobium and tantalum essentially immobile in most aqueous solutions. Niobium and tantalum do not occur naturally as pure metals but are concentrated in a variety of relatively rare oxide and hydroxide minerals, as well as in a few rare silicate minerals. Niobium is primarily derived from the complex oxide minerals of the pyrochlore group ((Na,Ca,Ce)2(Nb,Ti,Ta)2(O,OH,F)7), which are found in some alkaline granite-syenite complexes (that is, igneous rocks containing sodium- or potassium-rich minerals and little or no quartz) and carbonatites (that is, igneous rocks that are more than 50 percent composed of primary carbonate minerals, by volume). Tantalum is derived mostly from the mineral tantalite ((Fe,Mn)(Ta,Nb)2O6), which is found as an accessory mineral in rare-metal granites and pegmatites that are also enriched in lithium and cesium (termed lithium-cesium-tantalum (LCT)-type pegmatites).
Brazil and Canada are the leading nations that produce niobium mineral concentrates, but Brazil is by far the leading producer, accounting for about 90 percent of production, which comes mostly from weathered material derived from carbonatites. Brazil and Canada also have the largest identified niobium resources; additional resources, although they are less well reported, occur in Angola, Australia, China, Greenland, Malawi, Russia, and South Africa. Australia and Brazil have been the leading producers of tantalum mineral concentrates, although recently Ethiopia and Mozambique have also been significant suppliers of tantalum. Artisanal mining of columbite-tantalite (also called coltan) is practiced in many countries, particularly Burundi, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (Congo [Kinshasa]), Nigeria, Rwanda, and Uganda. Brazil has about 40 percent of the identified tantalum resources; other countries and regions with identified tantalum resources include, in decreasing order of resources, Australia, Asia, Russia and the Middle East, Africa, North America, and Europe. Identified niobium and tantalum resources in the United States are small, low grade, and difficult to recover and process, and are thus not commercially recoverable at current prices. Consequently, the United States meets its current and expected future needs for niobium and tantalum through imports of primary mineral concentrates and alloys and through recovery from foreign and domestic alloy scrap that contain the metals.
Environmentally, the main issues related to niobium and tantalum mining are land disruptions, the volume of waste materials and their disposal, and the radioactivity of some tailings and waste materials that contain thorium and uranium. Because of the relative biological inertness of niobium and tantalum, human and ecological health concerns are generally minimal under most natural conditions.
Demand for both niobium and tantalum is expected to increase as the world economy continues to recover from the downturn that began in 2008. Increased demand for niobium is linked to increased consumption of microalloyed steel, which is used in the manufacture of cars, buildings, ships, and refinery equipment. Demand for these steels will likely increase with continued economic development in such countries as Brazil, China, and India. In addition, increased global demand for cars, cell phones, computers, superconducting magnets, and other high-tech devices will likely spur increased demand for both niobium and tantalum. The estimated global reserves and resources of niobium and tantalum are large and appear more than sufficient to meet global demand for the foreseeable future, possibly the next 500 years. The sale of “conflict coltan” attributed to rebel forces waging a civil war in Congo (Kinshasa) has been of recent concern and has highlighted the need for a transparent and traceable global supply chain that can exclude illegal columbite-tantalite from the conventional market while discerning legitimate artisanal mine production in central Africa.
","largerWorkType":{"id":18,"text":"Report"},"largerWorkTitle":"Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply","largerWorkSubtype":{"id":5,"text":"USGS Numbered Series"},"language":"English","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","publisherLocation":"Reston, VA","doi":"10.3133/pp1802M","isbn":"978-1-4113-3991-0","usgsCitation":"Schulz, K.J., Piatak, N.M., and Papp, J.F., 2017, Niobium and tantalum, chap. M of Schulz, K.J., DeYoung, J.H., Jr., Seal, R.R., II, and Bradley, D.C., eds., Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1802, p. M1–M34, https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1802M.","productDescription":"viii, 34 p.","numberOfPages":"46","onlineOnly":"N","additionalOnlineFiles":"N","ipdsId":"IP-045581","costCenters":[{"id":245,"text":"Eastern Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":334595,"rank":1,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/m/coverthb1.jpg"},{"id":334596,"rank":2,"type":{"id":11,"text":"Document"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/m/pp1802m.pdf","text":"Report","size":"15.2 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"},"description":"PP 1802 M"}],"contact":"Mineral Resources Program Coordinator
U.S. Geological Survey
913 National Center
Reston, VA 20192
Email: minerals@usgs.gov
https://minerals.usgs.gov
Selenium (Se) was discovered in 1817 in pyrite from copper mines in Sweden. It is a trace element in Earth’s crust, with an abundance of three to seven orders of magnitude less than the major rock-forming elements. Commercial use of selenium began in the United States in 1910, when it was used as a pigment for paints, ceramic glazes, and red glass. Since that time, it has had many other economic uses—notably, in the 1930s and 1940s, when it was used in rectifiers (which change alternating current to direct current), and in the 1960s, when it began to be used in the liner of photocopier drums. In the 21st century, other compounds have replaced selenium in these older products; modern uses for selenium include energy-efficient windows that limit heat transfer and thin-film photovoltaic cells that convert solar energy into electricity.
In Earth’s crust, selenium is found as selenide minerals, selenate and selenite salts, and as substitution for sulfur in sulfide minerals. It is the sulfide minerals, most commonly those in porphyry copper deposits, that provide the bulk of the selenium produced for the international commodity market. Selenium is obtained as a byproduct of copper refining and recovered from the anode slimes generated in electrolytic production of copper. Because of this, the countries that have the largest resources and (or) reserves of copper also have the largest resources and (or) reserves of selenium.
Because selenium occurs naturally in Earth’s crust, its presence in air, water, and soil results from both geologic reactions and human activity. Selenium is found concentrated naturally in soils that overlie bedrock with high selenium concentrations. Selenium mining, processing, use in industrial and agricultural applications, and disposal may all contribute selenium to the environment. A well-known case of selenium contamination from agricultural practices was discovered in 1983 in the Kesterson National Wildlife Refuge in California. There, waters draining from agricultural fields created wetlands with high concentrations of dissolved selenium in the water. The selenium was taken up by aquatic wildlife and caused massive numbers of embryonic deformities and deaths.
Regulatory agencies have since worked to safeguard ecological and human health by creating environmental exposure guidelines based upon selenium concentrations in water and in fish tissue. Any attempt to regulate selenium concentrations requires a delicate balance because selenium occurs naturally and is also a vital nutrient for the health of wildlife, domestic stock, and humans. Selenium is commonly added as a vitamin to animal feed, and in some regions of the United States and the world, it is added as an amendment to soils for uptake by agricultural crops.
The important role of selenium in economic products, energy supply, agriculture, and health will continue for well into the future. The challenge to society is to balance the benefits of selenium use with the environmental consequences of its extraction. Increased understanding of the elemental cycle of selenium in the earth may lead to new (or unconventional) sources of selenium, the discovery of new methods of extraction, and new technologies for minimizing the transfer of selenium from rock to biota, so to protect environmental and human health.
","largerWorkType":{"id":18,"text":"Report"},"largerWorkTitle":"Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply","largerWorkSubtype":{"id":5,"text":"USGS Numbered Series"},"language":"English","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","publisherLocation":"Reston, VA","doi":"10.3133/pp1802Q","isbn":"978-1-4113-3991-0","usgsCitation":"Stillings, L.L., 2017, Selenium, chap. Q of Schulz, K.J., DeYoung, J.H., Jr., Seal, R.R., II, and Bradley, D.C., eds., Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1802, p. Q1–Q55, https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1802Q.","productDescription":"viii, 55 p.","numberOfPages":"68","onlineOnly":"N","additionalOnlineFiles":"N","ipdsId":"IP-059321","costCenters":[{"id":245,"text":"Eastern Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":335230,"rank":1,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/q/coverthb.jpg"},{"id":335231,"rank":2,"type":{"id":11,"text":"Document"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/q/pp1802q.pdf","text":"Report","size":"9.55 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"},"description":"PP 1802 Q"}],"contact":"Mineral Resources Program Coordinator
U.S. Geological Survey
913 National Center
Reston, VA 20192
Email: minerals@usgs.gov
https://minerals.usgs.gov
Throughout most of human history, environmental stewardship during mining has not been a priority partly because of the lack of applicable laws and regulations and partly because of ignorance about the effects that mining can have on the environment. In the United States, the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, in conjunction with related laws, codified a more modern approach to mining, including the responsibility for environmental stewardship, and provided a framework for incorporating environmental protection into mine planning. Today, similar frameworks are in place in the other developed countries of the world, and international mining companies generally follow similar procedures wherever they work in the world. The regulatory guidance has fostered an international effort among all stakeholders to identify best practices for environmental stewardship.
The modern approach to mining using best practices involves the following: (a) establishment of a pre-mining baseline from which to monitor environmental effects during mining and help establish geologically reasonable closure goals; (b) identification of environmental risks related to mining through standardized approaches; and (c) formulation of an environmental closure plan before the start of mining. A key aspect of identifying the environmental risks and mitigating those risks is understanding how the risks vary from one deposit type to another—a concept that forms the basis for geoenvironmental mineral-deposit models.
Accompanying the quest for best practices is the goal of making mining sustainable into the future. Sustainable mine development is generally considered to be development that meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. The concept extends beyond the availability of nonrenewable mineral commodities and includes the environmental and social effects of mine development.
Global population growth, meanwhile, has decreased the percentage of inhabitable land available to support society’s material needs. Presently, the land area available to supply the mineral resources, energy resources, water, food, shelter, and waste disposal needs of all Earth’s inhabitants is estimated to be 135 square meters per person. Continued global population growth will only increase the challenges of sustainable mining.
Current trends in mining are also expected to lead to new environmental challenges in the future, among which are mine-waste management issues related to mining larger deposits for lower ore grade; water-management issues related to both the mining of larger deposits and the changes in precipitation brought about by climate change; and greenhouse gas issues related to reducing the carbon footprint of larger, more energy-intensive mining operations.
","largerWorkType":{"id":18,"text":"Report"},"largerWorkTitle":"Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply","largerWorkSubtype":{"id":5,"text":"USGS Numbered Series"},"language":"English","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","publisherLocation":"Reston, VA","doi":"10.3133/pp1802B","isbn":"978-1-4113-3991-0","usgsCitation":"Seal, R.R., II, Piatak, N.M., Kimball, B.E., and Hammarstrom, J.M., 2017, Environmental considerations related to mining of nonfuel minerals, chap. B of Schulz, K.J., DeYoung, J.H., Jr., Seal, R.R., II, and Bradley, D.C., eds., Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1802, p. B1–B16, https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1802B.","productDescription":"vii, 16 p.","numberOfPages":"28","onlineOnly":"N","additionalOnlineFiles":"N","ipdsId":"IP-056555","costCenters":[{"id":245,"text":"Eastern Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":334557,"rank":1,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/b/coverthb1.jpg"},{"id":334560,"rank":2,"type":{"id":11,"text":"Document"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/b/pp1802b.pdf","text":"Report","size":"2.20 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"},"description":"PP 1802 B"}],"contact":"Mineral Resources Program Coordinator
U.S. Geological Survey
913 National Center
Reston, VA 20192
Email: minerals@usgs.gov
https://minerals.usgs.gov
Manganese is an essential element for modern industrial societies. Its principal use is in steelmaking, where it serves as a purifying agent in iron-ore refining and as an alloy that converts iron into steel. Although the amount of manganese consumed to make a ton of steel is small, ranging from 6 to 9 kilograms, it is an irreplaceable component in the production of this fundamental material. The United States has been totally reliant on imports of manganese for many decades and will continue to be so for at least the near future. There are no domestic reserves, and although some large low-grade resources are known, they are far inferior to manganese ores readily available on the international market. World reserves of manganese are about 630 million metric tons, and annual global consumption is about 16 million metric tons. Current reserves are adequate to meet global demand for several decades. Global resources in traditional land-based deposits, including both reserves and rocks sufficiently enriched in manganese to be ores in the future, are much larger, at about 17 billion metric tons. Manganese resources in seabed deposits of ferromanganese nodules and crusts are larger than those on land and have not been fully quantified. No production from seabed deposits has yet been done, but current research and development activities are substantial and may bring parts of these seabed resources into production in the future. The advent of economically successful seabed mining could substantially alter the current scenario of manganese supply by providing a large new source of manganese in addition to traditional land-based deposits.
From a purely geologic perspective, there is no global shortage of proven ores and potential new ores that could be developed from the vast tonnage of identified resources. Reserves and resources are very unevenly distributed, however. The Kalahari manganese district in South Africa contains 70 percent of the world’s identified resources and about 25 percent of its reserves. South Africa, Brazil, and Ukraine together accounted for nearly 65 percent of reserves in 2013. The combination of total import reliance for manganese, the mineral commodity’s essential uses in our industrialized society, and the potential for supply disruptions because of the limited sources of the ore makes manganese among the most critical minerals for the United States.
Manganese is the 12th most abundant element in Earth’s crust. Its concentration varies among common types of rocks, mostly in the range of from 0.1 to 0.2 percent. The highest quality manganese ores contain from 40 to 45 percent manganese. The formation of these ores requires specialized geologic conditions that concentrate manganese at several hundred times its average crustal abundance. The dominant processes in forming the world’s principal deposits take place in the oceans. As a result, most important manganese deposits occur in ancient marine sedimentary rocks that are now exposed on continents as a result of subsequent tectonic uplift and erosion. In many cases, other processes have further enriched these manganiferous sedimentary rocks to form some of today’s highest grade ores. Modern seabed resources of ferromanganese nodules cover vast areas of the present ocean floor and are still forming by complex interactions of marine microorganisms, manganese dissolved in seawater, and chemical processes on the seabed.
Manganese is ubiquitous in soil, water, and air. It occurs most often in solid form but can become soluble under acidic conditions. Manganese mining, like any activity that disturbs large areas of Earth’s surface, has the potential to produce increases in manganese concentrations that could be harmful to humans or the environment if not properly controlled. Although manganese is an essential nutrient for humans and most other organisms, overexposure can lead to neurotoxicity in humans. Workers at manganese mining and processing facilities have the greatest potential to inhale manganese-rich dust. Without proper protective equipment, these workers may develop a permanent neurological disorder known as manganism. Each manganese mine is unique and presents its own suite of potential hazards and preventative measures. Likewise, various nations have their own sets of standards to ensure safe mining, isolation of mine waste, treatment of mine waters, and mine closure and restoration. Interest in mining trace metals contained in ferromanganese nodules and crusts on the seabed has increased rapidly in the past decade. Prime areas for future research include overcoming the technological challenges presented by mining as deep as 6,500 meters below sea level and understanding and mitigating the potential impacts of seabed mining on marine ecosystems.
","largerWorkType":{"id":18,"text":"Report"},"largerWorkTitle":"Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply","largerWorkSubtype":{"id":5,"text":"USGS Numbered Series"},"language":"English","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","publisherLocation":"Reston, VA","doi":"10.3133/pp1802L","isbn":"978-1-4113-3991-0","usgsCitation":"Cannon, W.F., Kimball, B.E., and Corathers, L.A., 2017, Manganese, chap. L of Schulz, K.J., DeYoung, J.H., Jr., Seal, R.R., II, and Bradley, D.C., eds., Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1802, p. L1–L28, https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1802L.","productDescription":"viii, 28 p.","numberOfPages":"40","onlineOnly":"N","additionalOnlineFiles":"N","ipdsId":"IP-046161","costCenters":[{"id":245,"text":"Eastern Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":334193,"rank":2,"type":{"id":11,"text":"Document"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/l/pp1802l.pdf","text":"Report","size":"7.29 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"},"description":"PP 1802 K"},{"id":334192,"rank":1,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/l/coverthb1.jpg"}],"contact":"Mineral Resources Program Coordinator
U.S. Geological Survey
913 National Center
Reston, VA 20192
Email: minerals@usgs.gov
https://minerals.usgs.gov
Barite (barium sulfate, BaSO4) is vital to the oil and gas industry because it is a key constituent of the mud used to drill oil and gas wells. Elemental barium is an additive in optical glass, ceramic glazes, and other products. Within the United States, barite is produced mainly from mines in Nevada. Imports in 2011 (the latest year for which complete data were available) accounted for 78 percent of domestic consumption and came mostly from China.
Barite deposits can be divided into the following four main types: bedded-sedimentary; bedded-volcanic; vein, cavity-fill, and metasomatic; and residual. Bedded-sedimentary deposits, which are found in sedimentary rocks with characteristics of high biological productivity during sediment accumulation, are the major sources of barite production and account for the majority of reserves, both in the United States and worldwide. In 2013, China and India were the leading producers of barite, and they have large identified resources that position them to be significant producers for the foreseeable future. The potential for undiscovered barite resources in the United States and in many other countries is considerable, however. The expected tight supply and rising costs in the coming years will likely be met by increased production from such countries as Kazakhstan, Mexico, Morocco, and Vietnam.
Barium has limited mobility in the environment and exposed barium in the vicinity of barite mines poses minimal risk to human or ecosystem health. Of greater concern is the potential for acidic metal-bearing drainage at sites where the barite ores or waste rocks contain abundant sulfide minerals. This risk is lessened naturally if the host rocks at the site are acid-neutralizing, and the risk can also be lessened by engineering measures.
","largerWorkType":{"id":18,"text":"Report"},"largerWorkTitle":"Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply","largerWorkSubtype":{"id":5,"text":"USGS Numbered Series"},"language":"English","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","publisherLocation":"Reston, VA","doi":"10.3133/pp1802D","isbn":"978-1-4113-3991-0","usgsCitation":"Johnson, C.A., Piatak, N.M., and Miller, M.M., 2017, Barite (Barium), chap. D of Schulz, K.J., DeYoung, J.H., Jr., Seal, R.R., II, and Bradley, D.C., eds., Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1802, p. D1–D18, https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1802D.","productDescription":"vii, 18 p.","numberOfPages":"30","onlineOnly":"N","additionalOnlineFiles":"N","ipdsId":"IP-045302","costCenters":[{"id":211,"text":"Crustal Geophysics and Geochemistry Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true},{"id":245,"text":"Eastern Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":334561,"rank":1,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/d/coverthb1.jpg"},{"id":334562,"rank":2,"type":{"id":11,"text":"Document"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/d/pp1802d.pdf","text":"Report","size":"3.91 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"}}],"contact":"Mineral Resources Program Coordinator
U.S. Geological Survey
913 National Center
Reston, VA 20192
Email: minerals@usgs.gov
httsp://minerals.usgs.gov
Titanium is a mineral commodity that is essential to the smooth functioning of modern industrial economies. Most of the titanium produced is refined into titanium dioxide, which has a high refractive index and is thus able to impart a durable white color to paint, paper, plastic, rubber, and wallboard. Because of their high strength-to-weight ratio and corrosion resistance, titanium metal and titanium metal alloys are used in the aerospace industry as well as for welding rod coatings, biological implants, and consumer goods.
Ilmenite and rutile are currently the principal titanium-bearing ore minerals, although other minerals, including anatase, perovskite, and titanomagnetite, could have economic importance in the future. Ilmenite is currently being mined from two large magmatic deposits hosted in rocks of Proterozoic-age anorthosite plutonic suites. Most rutile and nearly one-half of the ilmenite produced are from heavy-mineral alluvial, fluvial, and eolian deposits. Titanium-bearing minerals occur in diverse geologic settings, but many of the known deposits are currently subeconomic for titanium because of complications related to the mineralogy or because of the presence of trace contaminants that can compromise the pigment production process.
Global production of titanium minerals is currently dominated by Australia, Canada, Norway, and South Africa; additional amounts are produced in Brazil, India, Madagascar, Mozambique, Sierra Leone, and Sri Lanka. The United States accounts for about 4 percent of the total world production of titanium minerals and is heavily dependent on imports of titanium mineral concentrates to meet its domestic needs.
Titanium occurs only in silicate or oxide minerals and never in sulfide minerals. Environmental considerations for titanium mining are related to waste rock disposal and the impact of trace constituents on water quality. Because titanium is generally inert in the environment, human health risks from titanium and titanium mining are minimal; however, the processes required to extract titanium from titanium feedstock can produce industrial waste.
","largerWorkType":{"id":18,"text":"Report"},"largerWorkTitle":"Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply","largerWorkSubtype":{"id":5,"text":"USGS Numbered Series"},"language":"English","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","publisherLocation":"Reston, VA","doi":"10.3133/pp1802T","isbn":"978-1-4113-3991-0","usgsCitation":"Woodruff, L.G., Bedinger, G.M., and Piatak, N.M., 2017, Titanium, chap. T of Schulz, K.J., DeYoung, J.H., Jr., Seal, R.R., II, and Bradley, D.C., eds., Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1802, p. T1–T23, https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1802T.","productDescription":"viii, 23 p.","numberOfPages":"36","onlineOnly":"N","additionalOnlineFiles":"N","ipdsId":"IP-045879","costCenters":[{"id":245,"text":"Eastern Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":334850,"rank":1,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/t/coverthb1.jpg"},{"id":334851,"rank":2,"type":{"id":11,"text":"Document"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/t/pp1802t.pdf","text":"Report","size":"10.7 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"},"description":"PP 1802 T"}],"contact":"Mineral Resources Program Coordinator
U.S. Geological Survey
913 National Center
Reston, VA 20192
Email: minerals@usgs.gov
https://minerals.usgs.gov
Beryllium is a mineral commodity that is used in a variety of industries to make products that are essential for the smooth functioning of a modern society. Two minerals, bertrandite (which is supplied domestically) and beryl (which is currently supplied solely by imports), are necessary to ensure a stable supply of high-purity beryllium metal, alloys, and metal-matrix composites and beryllium oxide ceramics. Although bertrandite is the source mineral for more than 90 percent of the beryllium produced globally, industrial beryl is critical for the production of the very high purity beryllium metal needed for some strategic applications. The current sole domestic source of beryllium is bertrandite ore from the Spor Mountain deposit in Utah; beryl is imported mainly from Brazil, China, Madagascar, Mozambique, and Portugal. High-purity beryllium metal is classified as a strategic and critical material by the Strategic Materials Protection Board of the U.S. Department of Defense because it is used in products that are vital to national security. Beryllium is maintained in the U.S. stockpile of strategic materials in the form of hot-pressed beryllium metal powder.
Because of its unique chemical properties, beryllium is indispensable for many important industrial products used in the aerospace, computer, defense, medical, nuclear, and telecommunications industries. For example, high-performance alloys of beryllium are used in many specialized, high-technology electronics applications, as they are energy efficient and can be used to fabricate miniaturized components. Beryllium-copper alloys are used as contacts and connectors, switches, relays, and shielding for everything from cell phones to thermostats, and beryllium-nickel alloys excel in producing wear-resistant and shape-retaining high-temperature springs. Beryllium metal composites, which combine the fabrication ability of aluminum with the thermal conductivity and highly elastic modulus of beryllium, are ideal for producing aircraft and satellite structural components that have a high stiffness-to-weight ratio and low surface vibration. Beryllium oxide ceramics are used in a wide range of applications, including missile guidance systems, radar applications, and cell phone transmitters, and they are critical to medical technologies, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) machines, medical lasers, and portable defibrillators.
The United States is expected to remain self-sufficient with respect to most of its beryllium requirements, based on information available at the time this chapter was prepared (2013). The United States is one of only three countries that currently process beryllium ores and concentrate them into beryllium products, and these three countries supply most of the rest of the world with these products. Exploration for new deposits in the United States is limited because domestic beryllium production is dominated by a single producer that effectively controls the domestic beryllium market, which is relatively small and specialized, and the market cannot readily accommodate new competition on the raw material supply side.
","largerWorkType":{"id":18,"text":"Report"},"largerWorkTitle":"Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply","largerWorkSubtype":{"id":5,"text":"USGS Numbered Series"},"language":"English","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","publisherLocation":"Reston, VA","doi":"10.3133/pp1802E","isbn":"978-1-4113-3991-0","usgsCitation":"Foley, N.K., Jaskula, B.W., Piatak, N.M., and Schulte, R.F., 2017, Beryllium, chap. E of Schulz, K.J., DeYoung, J.H., Jr., Seal, R.R., II, and Bradley, D.C., eds., Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1802, p. E1–E32, https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1802E.","productDescription":"viii, 32 p.","numberOfPages":"44","onlineOnly":"N","additionalOnlineFiles":"N","ipdsId":"IP-045146","costCenters":[{"id":245,"text":"Eastern Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":334565,"rank":2,"type":{"id":11,"text":"Document"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/e/pp1802e.pdf","text":"Report","size":"15.7 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"},"description":"Professional Paper 1802 E"},{"id":334564,"rank":1,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/e/coverthb1.jpg"}],"contact":"Mineral Resources Program Coordinator
U.S. Geological Survey
913 National Center
Reston, VA 20192
Email: minerals@usgs.gov
https://minerals.usgs.gov
Gallium is a soft, silvery metallic element with an atomic number of 31 and the chemical symbol Ga. Gallium is used in a wide variety of products that have microelectronic components containing either gallium arsenide (GaAs) or gallium nitride (GaN). GaAs is able to change electricity directly into laser light and is used in the manufacture of optoelectronic devices (laser diodes, light-emitting diodes [LEDs], photo detectors, and solar cells), which are important for aerospace and telecommunications applications and industrial and medical equipment. GaAs is also used in the production of highly specialized integrated circuits, semiconductors, and transistors; these are necessary for defense applications and high-performance computers. For example, cell phones with advanced personal computer-like functionality (smartphones) use GaAs-rich semiconductor components. GaN is used principally in the manufacture of LEDs and laser diodes, power electronics, and radio-frequency electronics. Because GaN power transistors operate at higher voltages and with a higher power density than GaAs devices, the uses for advanced GaN-based products are expected to increase in the future. Gallium technologies also have large power-handling capabilities and are used for cable television transmission, commercial wireless infrastructure, power electronics, and satellites. Gallium is also used for such familiar applications as screen backlighting for computer notebooks, flat-screen televisions, and desktop computer monitors.
Gallium is dispersed in small amounts in many minerals and rocks where it substitutes for elements of similar size and charge, such as aluminum and zinc. For example, gallium is found in small amounts (about 50 parts per million) in such aluminum-bearing minerals as diaspore-boehmite and gibbsite, which form bauxite deposits, and in the zinc-sulfide mineral sphalerite, which is found in many mineral deposits. At the present time, gallium metal is derived mainly as a byproduct of the processing of bauxite ore for aluminum; lesser amounts of gallium metal are produced from the processing of sphalerite ore from three types of deposits (sediment-hosted, Mississippi Valley-type, and volcanogenic massive sulfide) for zinc. The United States is expected to meet its current and expected future needs for gallium through imports of primary, recycled, and refined gallium, as well as through domestic production of recycled and refined gallium. The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that world resources of gallium in bauxite exceed 1 billion kilograms, and a considerable quantity of gallium could be present in world zinc reserves.
","largerWorkType":{"id":18,"text":"Report"},"largerWorkTitle":"Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply","largerWorkSubtype":{"id":5,"text":"USGS Numbered Series"},"language":"English","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","publisherLocation":"Reston VA","doi":"10.3133/pp1802H","isbn":"978-1-4113-3991-0","usgsCitation":"Foley, N.K., Jaskula, B.W., Kimball, B.E., and Schulte, R.F., 2017, Gallium, chap. H of Schulz, K.J., DeYoung, J.H., Jr., Seal, R.R., II, and Bradley, D.C., eds., Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1802, p. H1–H35, https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1802H.","productDescription":"viii, 35 p.","numberOfPages":"48","onlineOnly":"N","additionalOnlineFiles":"N","ipdsId":"IP-045147","costCenters":[{"id":245,"text":"Eastern Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":334570,"rank":1,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/h/coverthb1.jpg"},{"id":334571,"rank":2,"type":{"id":11,"text":"Document"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/h/pp1802h.pdf","text":"Report","size":"21.5 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"},"description":"PP 1802 H"}],"contact":"Mineral Resources Program Coordinator
U.S. Geological Survey
913 National Center
Reston, VA 20192
Email: minerals@usgs.gov
https://minerals.usgs.gov
Cobalt is a silvery gray metal that has diverse uses based on certain key properties, including ferromagnetism, hardness and wear-resistance when alloyed with other metals, low thermal and electrical conductivity, high melting point, multiple valences, and production of intense blue colors when combined with silica. Cobalt is used mostly in cathodes in rechargeable batteries and in superalloys for turbine engines in jet aircraft. Annual global cobalt consumption was approximately 75,000 metric tons in 2011; China, Japan, and the United States (in order of consumption amount) were the top three cobalt-consuming countries. In 2011, approximately 109,000 metric tons of recoverable cobalt was produced in ores, concentrates, and intermediate products from cobalt, copper, nickel, platinum-group-element (PGE), and zinc operations. The Democratic Republic of the Congo (Congo [Kinshasa]) was the principal source of mined cobalt globally (55 percent). The United States produced a negligible amount of byproduct cobalt as an intermediate product from a PGE mining and refining operation in southeastern Montana; no U.S. production was from mines in which cobalt was the principal commodity. China was the leading refiner of cobalt, and much of its production came from cobalt ores, concentrates, and partially refined materials imported from Congo (Kinshasa).
The mineralogy of cobalt deposits is diverse and includes both primary (hypogene) and secondary (supergene) phases. Principal terrestrial (land-based) deposit types, which represent most of world’s cobalt mine production, include primary magmatic Ni-Cu(-Co-PGE) sulfides, primary and secondary stratiform sediment-hosted Cu-Co sulfides and oxides, and secondary Ni-Co laterites. Seven additional terrestrial deposit types are described in this chapter. The total terrestrial cobalt resource (reserves plus other resources) plus past production, where available, is calculated to be 25.5 million metric tons. Additional resources of cobalt are known to occur on the modern sea floor in aerially extensive deposits of Fe-Mn(-Ni-Cu-Co-Mo) nodules and Fe-Mn(-Co-Mo-rare-earth-element) crusts. Legal, economic, and technological barriers have prevented exploitation of these cobalt resources, which lie at water depths of as great as 6,000 meters, although advances in technology may soon allow production of these resources to be economically viable.
Environmental issues related to cobalt mining concern mainly the elevated cobalt contents in soils and waters. Although at low levels cobalt is essential to human health (it is the central atom in the critical nutrient vitamin B12), overexposure to high levels of cobalt may cause lung and heart dysfunction, as well as dermatitis. The ecological impacts of cobalt vary widely and can be severe for some species of fish and plants, depending on various environmental factors.
","largerWorkType":{"id":18,"text":"Report"},"largerWorkTitle":"Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply","largerWorkSubtype":{"id":5,"text":"USGS Numbered Series"},"language":"English","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","publisherLocation":"Reston, VA","doi":"10.3133/pp1802F","isbn":"978-1-4113-3991-0","usgsCitation":"Slack, J.F., Kimball, B.E., and Shedd, K.B., 2017, Cobalt, chap. F of Schulz, K.J., DeYoung, J.H., Jr., Seal, R.R., II, and Bradley, D.C., eds., Critical mineral resources of the United States—Economic and environmental geology and prospects for future supply: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1802, p. F1–F40, https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1802F.","productDescription":"viii, 40 p.","numberOfPages":"52","onlineOnly":"N","additionalOnlineFiles":"N","ipdsId":"IP-078704","costCenters":[{"id":245,"text":"Eastern Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":339507,"type":{"id":11,"text":"Document"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/f/pp1802f.pdf","text":"Report ","size":"4.44 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"},"description":"PP 1802 F"},{"id":339523,"rank":1,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1802/f/coverthb1.jpg"}],"contact":"Mineral Resources Program Coordinator
U.S. Geological Survey
913 National Center
Reston, VA 20192
Email: minerals@usgs.gov
https://minerals.usgs.gov
The Yellowstone Plateau is one of the largest manifestations of silicic volcanism on Earth, and marks the youngest focus of magmatism associated with the Yellowstone Hot Spot. The earliest products of Yellowstone Hot Spot volcanism are from ~17 million years ago, but may be as old as ~32 Ma, and include contemporaneous eruption of voluminous mafic and silicic magmas, which are mostly located in the region of northwestern Nevada and southeastern Oregon. Since 17 Ma, the main locus of Yellowstone Hot Spot volcanism has migrated northeastward producing numerous silicic caldera complexes that generally remain active for ~2–4 million years, with the present-day focus being the Yellowstone Plateau. Northeastward migration of volcanism associated with the Yellowstone Hot Spot resulted in the formation of the Snake River Plain, a low relief physiographic feature extending ~750 kilometers from northern Nevada to eastern Idaho. Most of the silicic volcanic centers along the Snake River Plain have been inundated by younger basalt volcanism, but many of their ignimbrites and lava flows are exposed in the extended regions at the margins of the Snake River Plain.
","language":"English","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","publisherLocation":"Reston, VA","doi":"10.3133/sir20175022Q","usgsCitation":"Vazquez, J., Stelten, M., Bindeman, I., and Cooper, K., 2017, A field trip guide to the petrology of Quaternary volcanism on the Yellowstone Plateau: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2017–5022–Q, 68 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20175022q.","productDescription":"x, 68 p.","numberOfPages":"82","onlineOnly":"Y","ipdsId":"IP-078151","costCenters":[{"id":617,"text":"Volcano Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":350111,"rank":1,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2017/5022/q/coverthb.jpg"},{"id":350112,"rank":2,"type":{"id":11,"text":"Document"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2017/5022/q/sir20175022q_.pdf","text":"Report","size":"9 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"},"description":"SIR 2017-5022-Q"}],"country":"United States","state":"Wyoming","otherGeospatial":"Yellowstone National Park","geographicExtents":"{\n \"type\": \"FeatureCollection\",\n \"features\": [\n {\n \"type\": \"Feature\",\n \"properties\": {},\n \"geometry\": {\n \"type\": \"Polygon\",\n \"coordinates\": [\n [\n [\n -111.05529785156249,\n 44.04811573082351\n ],\n [\n -110.19012451171875,\n 44.04811573082351\n ],\n [\n -110.19012451171875,\n 45.00170912094224\n ],\n [\n -111.05529785156249,\n 45.00170912094224\n ],\n [\n -111.05529785156249,\n 44.04811573082351\n ]\n ]\n ]\n }\n }\n ]\n}","contact":"Volcano Science Center - Menlo Park
U.S. Geological Survey
345 Middlefield Road, MS 910
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Tsala Apopka Lake is a complex system of lakes and wetlands, with intervening uplands, located in Citrus County in west-central Florida. It is located within the 2,100 square mile watershed of the Withlacoochee River, which drains north and northwest towards the Gulf of Mexico. The lake system is managed by the Southwest Florida Water Management District as three distinct “pools,” which from upstream to downstream are referred to as the Floral City Pool, Inverness Pool, and Hernando Pool. Each pool contains a mixture of deep-water lakes that remain wet year round, ephemeral (seasonal) ponds and wetlands, and dry uplands. Many of the major deep-water lakes are interconnected by canals. Flow from the Withlacoochee River, when conditions allow, can be diverted into the lake system. Flow thorough the canals can be used to control the distribution of water between the three pools. Flow in the canals is controlled using structures, such as gates and weirs.
Hydrogeologic units in the study area include a surficial aquifer consisting of Quaternary-age sediments, a discontinuous intermediate confining unit consisting of Miocene- and Pliocene-age sediments, and the underlying Upper Floridan aquifer, which consists of Eocene- and Oligocene-age carbonates. The fine-grained quartz sands that constitute the surficial aquifer are generally thin, typically less than 25 feet thick, within the vicinity of Tsala Apopka Lake. A thin, discontinuous, sandy clay layer forms the intermediate confining unit. The Upper Floridan aquifer is generally unconfined in the vicinity of Tsala Apopka Lake because the intermediate confining unit is discontinuous and breached by numerous karst features. In the study area, the Upper Floridan aquifer includes the upper Avon Park Formation and Ocala Limestone. The Ocala Limestone is the primary source of drinking water and spring flow in the area.
The objectives of this study are to document the interaction of Tsala Apopka Lake, the surficial aquifer, and the Upper Floridan aquifer; and to estimate an annual water budget for each pool and for the entire lake system for 2004–12. The hydrologic interactions were evaluated using hydraulic head and geochemical data. Geochemical data, including major ion, isotope, and age-tracer data, were used to evaluate sources of water and to distinguish flow paths. Hydrologic connection of the surficial environment (lakes, ponds, wetlands, and the surficial aquifer) was quantified on the basis of a conceptualized annual water-budget model. The model included the change in surface water and groundwater storage, precipitation, evapotranspiration, surface-water inflow and outflow, and net groundwater exchange with the underlying Upper Floridan aquifer. The control volume for each pool extended to the base of the surficial aquifer and covered an area defined to exceed the maximum inundated area for each pool during 2004–12 by 0.5 foot. Net groundwater flow was computed as a lumped value and was either positive or negative, with a negative value indicating downward or lateral leakage from the control volume and a positive value indicating upward leakage to the control volume.
The annual water budget for Tsala Apopka Lake was calculated using a combination of field observations and remotely sensed data for each of three pools and for the composite three pool area. A digital elevation model at a 5-foot grid spacing and bathymetric survey data were used to define the land-surface elevation and volume of each pool and to calculate the changes in inundated area with change in lake stage. Continuous lake-stage and groundwater-level data were used to define the change in storage for each pool. The rainfall data used in the water-budget calculations were based on daily radar reflectance data and measured rainfall from weather stations. Evapotranspiration was computed as a function of reference evapotranspiration, adjusted to actual evapotranspiration using a monthly land-cover coefficient (based on evapotranspiration measurements at stations located in representative landscapes). Surface-water inflows and outflows were determined using stage data collected at a series of streamgages installed primarily at the water-control structures. Discharge was measured under varying flow regimes and ratings were developed for the water-control structures. The discharge data collected during the study period were used to calibrate a surface-water flow model for 2004–12. Flows predicted by the model were used in the water-budget analysis. Net groundwater flow was determined as the residual term in the water-budget equation.
The results of the water-budget analysis indicate that rainfall was the largest input of water to Tsala Apopka Lake, whereas evapotranspiration was the largest output. For the 2004–12 analysis period, surface-water inflow accounted for 11 percent of the inputs, net groundwater inflow accounted for 1 percent of inputs (annual periods with positive net groundwater flow were included as inputs, while annual periods with negative net groundwater flow were counted as outputs), and rainfall accounted for the remaining 88 percent. For the same period, the outputs consisted of 2 percent surface-water outflow, 12 percent net groundwater outflow, and 86 percent evapotranspiration. Net groundwater inflows and surface-water/groundwater storage were negligible during the water-budget period but could be important components of the budget in individual years.
The net groundwater flow was negative (downward) for 8 out of the 9 years modeled (2004–12), indicating that the Tsala Apopka Lake study area was primarily a recharge area for the underlying Upper Floridan aquifer during this time period. Groundwater-level elevation in paired wells (adjacent wells completed in the surficial aquifer and Upper Floridan aquifer) typically was higher in the surficial aquifer than the Upper Floridan aquifer. However, hydraulic head data indicate that the surficial aquifer often has discharge potential to the surface-water system, especially in the low lying areas near the major lakes. Surficial-aquifer water levels were often higher than lake stages, especially during wet periods, which is likely an indication of aquifer-to-lake seepage in these areas. East of the major lakes, hydraulic head data were nearly equal in the surficial aquifer and Upper Floridan aquifer, which is an indication that the Upper Floridan aquifer is unconfined. Based on deuterium and oxygen stable isotope data collected in December 2011 and December 2012, there was no evidence of recharge to the Upper Floridan aquifer from the wetlands east of the major lakes; aquifer isotopic ratios did not indicate an enriched source, which is typical of lake and wetland sources. West of the major lakes, there was evidence of enriched isotopic ratios in water samples from the Upper Floridan aquifer. Differences in hydraulic head at paired wells in the surficial aquifer and Upper Floridan aquifer indicated that the surficial aquifer has the potential to recharge the Upper Floridan aquifer in the western part of the pools and west of the major lakes.
","language":"English","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","publisherLocation":"Reston, VA","doi":"10.3133/sir20175132","collaboration":"Prepared in cooperation with the Southwest Florida Water Management District","usgsCitation":"McBride, W.S., Metz, P.A., Ryan, P.J., Fulkerson, Mark, and Downing, H.C., 2017, Groundwater levels, geochemistry, and water budget of the Tsala Apopka Lake system, west-central Florida, 2004–12: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2017–5132, 100 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20175132.","productDescription":"xi, 100 p.","numberOfPages":"116","onlineOnly":"Y","ipdsId":"IP-059771","costCenters":[{"id":270,"text":"FLWSC-Tampa","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":350056,"rank":2,"type":{"id":11,"text":"Document"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2017/5132/sir20175132.pdf","text":"Report","size":"14.0 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"},"description":"SIR 2017–5132"},{"id":350055,"rank":1,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2017/5132/coverthb.jpg"}],"country":"United States","state":"Florida","otherGeospatial":"Tsala Apopka Lake System","geographicExtents":"{\n \"type\": \"FeatureCollection\",\n \"features\": [\n {\n \"type\": \"Feature\",\n \"properties\": {},\n \"geometry\": {\n \"type\": \"Polygon\",\n \"coordinates\": [\n [\n [\n -82.452392578125,\n 28.66890107414433\n ],\n [\n -82.0520782470703,\n 28.66890107414433\n ],\n [\n -82.0520782470703,\n 29.00693934321682\n ],\n [\n -82.452392578125,\n 29.00693934321682\n ],\n [\n -82.452392578125,\n 28.66890107414433\n ]\n ]\n ]\n }\n }\n ]\n}","contact":"Director, Caribbean-Florida Water Science Center
U.S. Geological Survey
4446 Pet Lane, Suite 108
Lutz, FL 33559
The New England cottontail (Sylvilagus transitionalis) is a species of high conservation priority in the Northeastern United States, and was a candidate for federal listing under the Endangered Species Act until a recent decision determined that conservation actions were sufficient to preclude listing. The aim of this study was to develop a suite of microsatellite loci to guide future research efforts such as the analysis of population genetic structure, genetic variation, dispersal, and genetic mark-recapture population estimation.
Thirty-five microsatellite markers containing tri- and tetranucleotide sequences were developed from shotgun genomic sequencing of tissue from S. transitionalis, S. obscurus, and S. floridanus. These loci were screened in n = 33 wild S. transitionalis sampled from a population in eastern Massachusetts, USA. Thirty-two of the 35 loci were polymorphic with 2–6 alleles, and observed heterozygosities of 0.06–0.82. All loci conformed to Hardy–Weinberg Equilibrium proportions and there was no evidence of linkage disequilibrium or null alleles. Primers for 33 of the 35 loci amplified DNA extracted from n = 6 eastern cottontail (S. floridanus) samples, of which nine revealed putative species-diagnostic alleles. These loci will provide a useful tool for conservation genetics investigations of S. transitionalis and a potential diagnostic species assay for differentiating sympatric eastern and New England cottontails.
","language":"English","publisher":"Springer Nature","doi":"10.1186/s13104-017-3062-2","usgsCitation":"King, T.L., Eackles, M.S., Aunins, A.W., McGreevy, T.J., Husband, T.P., Tur, A., and Kovach, A.I., 2017, Microsatellite marker development from next-generation sequencing in the New England cottontail (Sylvilagus transitionalis) and cross-amplification in the eastern cottontail (S. floridanus): BMC Research Notes, no. 10, 741, 7 p., https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-017-3062-2.","productDescription":"741, 7 p.","ipdsId":"IP-089217","costCenters":[{"id":365,"text":"Leetown Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":469233,"rank":0,"type":{"id":40,"text":"Open Access Publisher Index Page"},"url":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-017-3062-2","text":"Publisher Index Page"},{"id":367381,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/thumbnails/outside_thumb.jpg"}],"country":"United States","state":"Massachusetts","otherGeospatial":"Cape Cod","geographicExtents":"{\n \"type\": \"FeatureCollection\",\n \"features\": [\n {\n \"type\": \"Feature\",\n \"properties\": {},\n \"geometry\": {\n \"type\": \"Polygon\",\n \"coordinates\": [\n [\n [\n -70.2520751953125,\n 42.06356771883277\n ],\n [\n -70.19989013671875,\n 42.002366213375524\n ],\n [\n -70.16143798828125,\n 42.04317376494972\n ],\n [\n -70.07904052734375,\n 41.89818843043047\n ],\n [\n -70.02960205078125,\n 41.80407814427234\n ],\n [\n -70.43060302734375,\n 41.759019938155404\n ],\n [\n -70.48004150390625,\n 41.777456667491066\n ],\n [\n -70.55419921875,\n 41.77336007442076\n ],\n [\n -70.63934326171875,\n 41.73033005046653\n ],\n [\n -70.69976806640625,\n 41.549700145132725\n ],\n [\n -70.6201171875,\n 41.50446357504803\n ],\n [\n -70.477294921875,\n 41.539421883822854\n ],\n [\n -70.28228759765625,\n 41.60928183876483\n ],\n [\n -69.99114990234375,\n 41.64213096472801\n ],\n [\n -69.85107421874999,\n 41.654445072031244\n ],\n [\n -69.99938964843749,\n 42.049292638686836\n ],\n [\n -70.13397216796875,\n 42.10026033308264\n ],\n [\n -70.25482177734375,\n 42.09822241118974\n ],\n [\n -70.2520751953125,\n 42.06356771883277\n ]\n ]\n ]\n }\n }\n ]\n}","issue":"10","publishingServiceCenter":{"id":10,"text":"Baltimore PSC"},"noUsgsAuthors":false,"publicationDate":"2017-12-16","publicationStatus":"PW","contributors":{"authors":[{"text":"King, Tim L. tlking@usgs.gov","contributorId":3520,"corporation":false,"usgs":true,"family":"King","given":"Tim","email":"tlking@usgs.gov","middleInitial":"L.","affiliations":[{"id":365,"text":"Leetown Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"preferred":true,"id":770733,"contributorType":{"id":1,"text":"Authors"},"rank":1},{"text":"Eackles, Michael S. 0000-0001-5624-5769 meackles@usgs.gov","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5624-5769","contributorId":218936,"corporation":false,"usgs":true,"family":"Eackles","given":"Michael","email":"meackles@usgs.gov","middleInitial":"S.","affiliations":[{"id":365,"text":"Leetown Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"preferred":true,"id":770732,"contributorType":{"id":1,"text":"Authors"},"rank":2},{"text":"Aunins, Aaron W. 0000-0001-5240-1453 aaunins@usgs.gov","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5240-1453","contributorId":5863,"corporation":false,"usgs":true,"family":"Aunins","given":"Aaron","email":"aaunins@usgs.gov","middleInitial":"W.","affiliations":[{"id":365,"text":"Leetown Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"preferred":true,"id":770731,"contributorType":{"id":1,"text":"Authors"},"rank":3},{"text":"McGreevy, Thomas J. 0000-0002-8542-4210","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8542-4210","contributorId":218938,"corporation":false,"usgs":false,"family":"McGreevy","given":"Thomas","email":"","middleInitial":"J.","affiliations":[{"id":6922,"text":"University of Rhode Island","active":true,"usgs":false}],"preferred":false,"id":770734,"contributorType":{"id":1,"text":"Authors"},"rank":4},{"text":"Husband, Thomas P.","contributorId":174902,"corporation":false,"usgs":false,"family":"Husband","given":"Thomas","email":"","middleInitial":"P.","affiliations":[],"preferred":false,"id":770735,"contributorType":{"id":1,"text":"Authors"},"rank":5},{"text":"Tur, Anthony","contributorId":218956,"corporation":false,"usgs":false,"family":"Tur","given":"Anthony","email":"","affiliations":[],"preferred":false,"id":770737,"contributorType":{"id":1,"text":"Authors"},"rank":6},{"text":"Kovach, Adrienne I. 0000-0002-6791-0610","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6791-0610","contributorId":218939,"corporation":false,"usgs":false,"family":"Kovach","given":"Adrienne","email":"","middleInitial":"I.","affiliations":[{"id":12667,"text":"University of New Hampshire","active":true,"usgs":false}],"preferred":false,"id":770736,"contributorType":{"id":1,"text":"Authors"},"rank":7}]}} ,{"id":70187491,"text":"sir20175015 - 2017 - Generalized hydrogeologic framework and groundwater budget for a groundwater availability study for the glacial aquifer system of the United States","interactions":[],"lastModifiedDate":"2018-02-06T11:31:51","indexId":"sir20175015","displayToPublicDate":"2017-12-14T00:00:00","publicationYear":"2017","noYear":false,"publicationType":{"id":18,"text":"Report"},"publicationSubtype":{"id":5,"text":"USGS Numbered Series"},"seriesTitle":{"id":334,"text":"Scientific Investigations Report","code":"SIR","onlineIssn":"2328-0328","printIssn":"2328-031X","active":true,"publicationSubtype":{"id":5}},"seriesNumber":"2017-5015","title":"Generalized hydrogeologic framework and groundwater budget for a groundwater availability study for the glacial aquifer system of the United States","docAbstract":"The glacial aquifer system groundwater availability study seeks to quantify (1) the status of groundwater resources in the glacial aquifer system, (2) how these resources have changed over time, and (3) likely system response to future changes in anthropogenic and environmental conditions. The glacial aquifer system extends from Maine to Alaska, although the focus of this report is the part of the system in the conterminous United States east of the Rocky Mountains. The glacial sand and gravel principal aquifer is the largest source of public and self-supplied industrial supply for any principal aquifer and also is an important source for irrigation supply. Despite its importance for water supply, water levels in the glacial aquifer system are generally stable varying with climate and only locally from pumping. The hydrogeologic framework developed for this study includes the information from waterwell records and classification of material types from surficial geologic maps into likely aquifers dominated by sand and gravel deposits. Generalized groundwater budgets across the study area highlight the variation in recharge and discharge primarily driven by climate.
","language":"English","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","publisherLocation":"Reston, VA","doi":"10.3133/sir20175015","collaboration":"Water Availability and Use Science Program","usgsCitation":"Reeves, H.W., Bayless, E.R., Dudley, R.W., Feinstein, D.T., Fienen, M.N., Hoard, C.J., Hodgkins, G.A., Qi, S.L., Roth, J.L., and Trost, J.J., 2017, Generalized hydrogeologic framework and groundwater budget for a groundwater availability study for the glacial aquifer system of the United States: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2017–5015, 49 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20175015.","productDescription":"vii, 49 p.","numberOfPages":"62","onlineOnly":"N","ipdsId":"IP-066369","costCenters":[{"id":191,"text":"Colorado Water Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true},{"id":382,"text":"Michigan Water Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true},{"id":392,"text":"Minnesota Water Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true},{"id":466,"text":"New England Water Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true},{"id":677,"text":"Wisconsin Water Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true},{"id":35860,"text":"Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Water Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":349670,"rank":1,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2017/5015/coverthb.jpg"},{"id":349673,"rank":3,"type":{"id":11,"text":"Document"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2017/5015/sir20175015.pdf","text":"Report","size":"11.5 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"},"description":"SIR 2017–5015"},{"id":349672,"rank":2,"type":{"id":18,"text":"Project Site"},"url":"https://water.usgs.gov/wausp/gw/regional.html","text":"Water Availability and Use Science Program"}],"country":"United States","otherGeospatial":"Glacial Aquifer System","geographicExtents":"{\n \"type\": \"FeatureCollection\",\n \"features\": [\n {\n \"type\": \"Feature\",\n \"properties\": {},\n \"geometry\": {\n \"type\": \"Polygon\",\n \"coordinates\": [\n [\n [\n -124.541015625,\n 37.579412513438385\n ],\n [\n -67.060546875,\n 37.579412513438385\n ],\n [\n -67.060546875,\n 49.210420445650286\n ],\n [\n -124.541015625,\n 49.210420445650286\n ],\n [\n -124.541015625,\n 37.579412513438385\n ]\n ]\n ]\n }\n },\n {\n \"type\": \"Feature\",\n \"properties\": {},\n \"geometry\": {\n \"type\": \"Polygon\",\n \"coordinates\": [\n [\n [\n -158.37890625,\n 54.470037612805754\n ],\n [\n -129.990234375,\n 54.470037612805754\n ],\n [\n -129.990234375,\n 63.860035895395306\n ],\n [\n -158.37890625,\n 63.860035895395306\n ],\n [\n -158.37890625,\n 54.470037612805754\n ]\n ]\n ]\n }\n }\n ]\n}","contact":"Director, Upper Midwest Water Science Center
U.S. Geological Survey
6520 Mercantile Way
Suite 5
Lansing, MI 48911–5991
The surficial geologic map of Berrien County, southwestern Michigan (sheet 1), shows the distribution of glacial and postglacial deposits at the land surface and in the adjacent offshore area of Lake Michigan. The geologic map differentiates surficial materials of Quaternary age on the basis of their lithologic characteristics, stratigraphic relationships, and age. Drill-hole information correlated in cross sections provides details of typical stratigraphic sequences that compose one or more penetrated geologic map units. A new bedrock geologic map (on sheet 2) includes contours of the altitude of the eroded top of bedrock and shows the distribution of middle Paleozoic shale and carbonate units in the subcrop. A sediment thickness map (also on sheet 2) portrays the extent of as much as 150 meters of surficial materials that overlie the bedrock surface.
The major physical features of the county are related principally to deposits of the last Laurentide ice sheet that advanced and then retreated back through the region from about 19,000 to 14,000 radiocarbon years before present. Glacial and postglacial deposits underlie the entire county; shale bedrock crops out only in the adjacent offshore area on the bottom of Lake Michigan. All glacial deposits and glacial meltwater deposits in Berrien County are related to the late Wisconsinan glacial advances of the Lake Michigan ice lobe and its three regional recessional moraines, which cross the county as three north-northeast-trending belts.
From east to west (oldest to youngest), the three moraine belts are known as the Kalamazoo, Valparaiso, and Lake Border morainic systems. The till-ridge morainic systems (Lake Border and local Valparaiso morainic systems) consist of multiple, elongate moraine ridges separated by till plains and lake-bottom plains. Tills in ground and end moraines in Berrien County are distinguished as informal units, and are correlated with three proposed regional till units in southwestern Michigan, characterized as clayey till, loamy till, or sandy loamy till that are based in part on correlation of silty tills and clay mineralogy. The stratified morainic systems (local Valparaiso and Kalamazoo morainic systems) are composed of multiple ice-marginal glacial-lake deltas and glaciolacustrine fans that form a contiguous array of deposits, welded together at their onlapping contacts, further related by the accordant altitudes of their delta topset plains. Their bounding ice-contact slopes repeatedly are aligned parallel to the regional trend of the receding ice margin. Ice-marginal (ice-contact) deltas were deposited in glacial lakes that expanded northward as the ice sheet retreated. Glaciofluvial topset beds, which overlie deltaic foreset and bottomset facies, fine away from the ice margin. Stratified deposits associated with the Valparaiso moraine were deposited in glacial Lakes Madron and Dowagiac. Subsequent deposits of glacial Lake Baroda preceded basin-wide deposits associated with various levels of Lake Michigan.
Sheet 2 includes a series of 10 map figures that show cut-away three-dimensional time slices of the stratigraphic succession, from basal tills on bedrock, to ice-marginal deltas in the three large proglacial lakes, to stacked till/lake-bottom deposits related to the Lake Border ice margin readvances, to young deposits of glacial Lake Chicago and younger phases of other glacial lakes and the Chippewa lake lowstand.
The pamphlet contains a discussion of the stratigraphic framework, descriptions of each depositional unit, and graphic logs of U.S. Geological Survey stratigraphic drill holes. The pamphlet also relates the geologic history of Berrien County, beginning with bedrock Paleozoic marine deposits, continuing through erosional effects of multiple glaciations and the detailed steps of late Wisconsinan ice-margin recession as recorded in the moraines, and the rise and fall of postglacial lake levels in the Lake Michigan basin.
","language":"English","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","publisherLocation":"Reston, VA","doi":"10.3133/sim3383","isbn":"978-1-4113-4154-8","collaboration":"Prepared in cooperation with the Michigan Geological Survey and the Great Lakes Geologic Mapping Coalition","usgsCitation":"Stone, B.D., Kincare, K.A., O'Leary, D.W., Newell, W.L., Taylor, E.M., Williams, V.S., Lundstrom, S.C., Abraham, J.E., and Powers, M.H., 2017, Surficial geologic map of Berrien County, Michigan, and the adjacent offshore area of Lake Michigan: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map 3383, 2 sheets, scale 1:50,000, and 49-p. pamphlet, https://doi.org/10.3133/sim3383.","productDescription":"Report: iv, 49 p.; Sheets: 41.50 x 58.50 inches; 3 Geodatabases; Read Me","onlineOnly":"N","additionalOnlineFiles":"Y","ipdsId":"IP-005974","costCenters":[{"id":243,"text":"Eastern Geology and Paleoclimate Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":349747,"rank":6,"type":{"id":23,"text":"Spatial Data"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/sim/3383/sim3383_open.zip","text":"Geodatabase","size":"12.4 MB","linkFileType":{"id":6,"text":"zip"},"linkHelpText":"- Complete, automatic translation of SIM 3383.gdb into shapefiles and other files; contains metadata"},{"id":349748,"rank":7,"type":{"id":23,"text":"Spatial Data"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/sim/3383/sim3383_simple.zip","text":"Geodatabase","size":"12.4 MB","linkFileType":{"id":6,"text":"zip"},"linkHelpText":"- Automatic translation of most of the contents of SIM 3383.gdb into simple flat shapefiles; contains metadata"},{"id":345906,"rank":2,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/sim/3383/coverthb.jpg"},{"id":345910,"rank":5,"type":{"id":23,"text":"Spatial Data"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/sim/3383/sim3383_GeMS.zip","text":"Geodatabase","size":"9.69 MB","linkFileType":{"id":6,"text":"zip"},"linkHelpText":"- Contains SIM 3383.gdb (an ESRI ArcGIS v. 10.5 file geodatabase), and metadata and other files"},{"id":345911,"rank":8,"type":{"id":20,"text":"Read Me"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/sim/3383/sim3383_readme.txt","size":"2.42 KB","linkFileType":{"id":2,"text":"txt"}},{"id":345907,"rank":1,"type":{"id":11,"text":"Document"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/sim/3383/sim3383.pdf","text":"Report (Pamphlet)","size":"2.49 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"},"description":"SIM 3383"},{"id":345908,"rank":3,"type":{"id":26,"text":"Sheet"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/sim/3383/sim3383_mapsheet1.pdf","text":"Map Sheet 1 ","size":"35.9 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"}},{"id":345909,"rank":4,"type":{"id":26,"text":"Sheet"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/sim/3383/sim3383_mapsheet2.pdf","text":"Map Sheet 2","size":"43.1 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"}}],"country":"United States","state":"Michigan","county":"Berrien County","otherGeospatial":"Lake Michigan","geographicExtents":"{\n \"type\": \"FeatureCollection\",\n \"features\": [\n {\n \"type\": \"Feature\",\n \"properties\": {},\n \"geometry\": {\n \"type\": \"Polygon\",\n \"coordinates\": [\n [\n [\n -86.82907104492188,\n 41.76106872528616\n ],\n [\n -86.2261962890625,\n 41.76106872528616\n ],\n [\n -86.2261962890625,\n 42.24478535602799\n ],\n [\n -86.82907104492188,\n 42.24478535602799\n ],\n [\n -86.82907104492188,\n 41.76106872528616\n ]\n ]\n ]\n }\n }\n ]\n}","contact":"Eastern Geology and Paleoclimate Science Center
U.S. Geological Survey
926A National Center
12201 Sunrise Valley Drive
Reston, VA 20192
Groundwater provides nearly 50 percent of the Nation’s drinking water. To help protect this vital resource, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Project assesses groundwater quality in aquifers that are important sources of drinking water (Burow and Belitz, 2014). The Piedmont and Blue Ridge crystalline-rock aquifers constitute one of the important areas being evaluated.
","language":"English","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","publisherLocation":"Reston, VA","doi":"10.3133/fs20173040","usgsCitation":"Lindsey, Bruce, 2017, Groundwater quality in the Piedmont and Blue Ridge crystalline-rock aquifers, eastern United States (ver. 1.1, September 2020): U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2017–3040, 4 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/fs20173040.","productDescription":"4 p.","numberOfPages":"4","ipdsId":"IP-083351","costCenters":[{"id":451,"text":"National Water Quality Assessment Program","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":378456,"rank":3,"type":{"id":25,"text":"Version History"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2017/3040/versionHist.txt","size":"2 KB","linkFileType":{"id":2,"text":"txt"}},{"id":346605,"rank":1,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2017/3040/coverthb.jpg"},{"id":346606,"rank":2,"type":{"id":11,"text":"Document"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2017/3040/fs20173040_ver1.1.pdf","text":"Report","size":"4.7 MB","linkFileType":{"id":1,"text":"pdf"},"description":"FS 2017-3040"}],"country":"United States","otherGeospatial":"Piedmont and Blue Ridge Crystalline-Rock Aquifers","geographicExtents":"{\n \"type\": \"FeatureCollection\",\n \"features\": [\n {\n \"type\": \"Feature\",\n \"properties\": {},\n \"geometry\": {\n \"type\": \"Polygon\",\n \"coordinates\": [\n [\n [\n -87,\n 32\n ],\n [\n -74,\n 32\n ],\n [\n -74,\n 41\n ],\n [\n -87,\n 41\n ],\n [\n -87,\n 32\n ]\n ]\n ]\n }\n }\n ]\n}","edition":"Version 1.0: December 7, 2017; Version 1.1: September 16, 2020","contact":"National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program
U.S. Geological Survey
413 National Center
12201 Sunrise Valley Drive
Reston, Virginia 20192
To estimate the carbon dioxide (CO2) injection and storage capacity of saline formations, we used Tough2‐ECO2N simulation software to develop a pressure‐limited (dynamic) simulation approach based on applying three‐dimensional (3D) numerical simulation only on the effective injection area (Aeff) surrounding each injection well. A statistical analysis was performed to account for existing reservoir heterogeneity and property variations. The accuracy of the model simulation results (such as CO2 plume extension and induced injection well bottomhole pressure values) were tested and verified against the data obtained from the Decatur CO2 injection study of the Mount Simon Formation. Next, we designed a full‐field CO2 injection pattern by populating the core sections of this formation with a series of the simulated effective injection areas such that each simulated Aeff acts as a closed domain. The results of this analysis were used to estimate the optimum number and location of the required CO2 injection wells, along with the dynamic annual CO2 injection rate and overall pressure‐limited storage capacity of this formation. This approach enabled us to model separate CO2 injection activities independently at different sections of the same saline formation and to model and simulate faults and natural barriers by considering them as boundary conditions for each simulated Aeff without constructing full‐field models. Using this approach, a series of modeled Aeff with relevant properties may be redesigned to model any other saline formation with a similar structure.
","language":"English","publisher":"Wiley","doi":"10.1002/ghg.1701","usgsCitation":"Jahediesfanjani, H., Warwick, P., and Anderson, S.T., 2017, 3D Pressure‐limited approach to model and estimate CO2 injection and storage capacity: saline Mount Simon Formation: Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, v. 7, no. 6, p. 1080-1096, https://doi.org/10.1002/ghg.1701.","productDescription":"17 p.","startPage":"1080","endPage":"1096","ipdsId":"IP-084315","costCenters":[{"id":241,"text":"Eastern Energy Resources Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":469251,"rank":0,"type":{"id":40,"text":"Open Access Publisher Index Page"},"url":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ghg.1701","text":"Publisher Index Page"},{"id":361078,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/thumbnails/outside_thumb.jpg"}],"country":"United States","otherGeospatial":"Mount Simon Formation","geographicExtents":"{\n \"type\": \"FeatureCollection\",\n \"features\": [\n {\n \"type\": \"Feature\",\n \"properties\": {},\n \"geometry\": {\n \"type\": \"Polygon\",\n \"coordinates\": [\n [\n [\n -91,\n 37\n ],\n [\n -84,\n 37\n ],\n [\n -84,\n 41\n ],\n [\n -91,\n 41\n ],\n [\n -91,\n 37\n ]\n ]\n ]\n }\n }\n ]\n}","volume":"7","issue":"6","noUsgsAuthors":false,"publicationDate":"2017-08-02","publicationStatus":"PW","contributors":{"authors":[{"text":"Jahediesfanjani, Hossein 0000-0001-6281-5166 hjahediesfanjani@usgs.gov","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6281-5166","contributorId":193397,"corporation":false,"usgs":false,"family":"Jahediesfanjani","given":"Hossein","email":"hjahediesfanjani@usgs.gov","affiliations":[{"id":241,"text":"Eastern Energy Resources Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"preferred":false,"id":756795,"contributorType":{"id":1,"text":"Authors"},"rank":1},{"text":"Warwick, Peter D. 0000-0002-3152-7783","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3152-7783","contributorId":207248,"corporation":false,"usgs":true,"family":"Warwick","given":"Peter D.","affiliations":[{"id":241,"text":"Eastern Energy Resources Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"preferred":true,"id":756796,"contributorType":{"id":1,"text":"Authors"},"rank":2},{"text":"Anderson, Steven T. 0000-0003-3481-3424 sanderson@usgs.gov","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3481-3424","contributorId":2532,"corporation":false,"usgs":true,"family":"Anderson","given":"Steven","email":"sanderson@usgs.gov","middleInitial":"T.","affiliations":[{"id":241,"text":"Eastern Energy Resources Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"preferred":true,"id":756797,"contributorType":{"id":1,"text":"Authors"},"rank":3}]}} ,{"id":70192271,"text":"ds1070 - 2017 - Single-beam bathymetry data collected in 2015 from Grand Bay, Alabama-Mississippi","interactions":[],"lastModifiedDate":"2025-05-13T16:26:15.809543","indexId":"ds1070","displayToPublicDate":"2017-12-01T12:00:00","publicationYear":"2017","noYear":false,"publicationType":{"id":18,"text":"Report"},"publicationSubtype":{"id":5,"text":"USGS Numbered Series"},"seriesTitle":{"id":310,"text":"Data Series","code":"DS","onlineIssn":"2327-638X","printIssn":"2327-0271","active":false,"publicationSubtype":{"id":5}},"seriesNumber":"1070","title":"Single-beam bathymetry data collected in 2015 from Grand Bay, Alabama-Mississippi","docAbstract":"As part of the Sea-level and Storm Impacts on Estuarine Environments and Shorelines (SSIEES) project, scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center conducted a single-beam bathymetry survey within the estuarine, open-bay, and tidal creek environments of Grand Bay, Alabama-Mississippi, from May to June 2015. The goal of the SSIEES project is to assess the physical controls of sediment and material exchange between wetlands and estuarine environments along the northern Gulf of Mexico, specifically Grand Bay, Alabama-Mississippi; Vermilion Bay, Louisiana; and, along the east coast, within Chincoteague Bay, Virginia-Maryland. The data described in this report provide baseline bathymetric information for future research investigating wetland-marsh evolution, sediment transport, erosion, recent and long-term geomorphic change, and can also support the modeling of changes in response to restoration and storm impacts. The survey area encompasses more than 40 square kilometers of Grand Bay’s waters.
","language":"English","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","publisherLocation":"Reston, VA","doi":"10.3133/ds1070","usgsCitation":"DeWitt, N.T., Stalk, C.A., Smith, C.G., Locker, S.D., Fredericks, J.J., McCloskey, T.A., and Wheaton, C.J., 2017, Single-beam bathymetry data collected in 2015 from Grand Bay, Alabama-Mississippi: U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 1070, https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1070.","productDescription":"HTML Document; Data Release","onlineOnly":"Y","additionalOnlineFiles":"Y","ipdsId":"IP-081056","costCenters":[{"id":574,"text":"St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":349002,"rank":2,"type":{"id":11,"text":"Document"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/1070","text":"Report HTML","linkFileType":{"id":5,"text":"html"},"description":"DS 1070"},{"id":349004,"rank":3,"type":{"id":30,"text":"Data Release"},"url":"https://dx.doi.org/10.5066/F7NP22M2","text":"USGS data release","description":"USGS data release","linkHelpText":"Single-Beam Bathymetry Data Collected in 2015 from Grand Bay, Mississippi/Alabama"},{"id":349001,"rank":1,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/1070/coverthb.jpg"}],"country":"United States","state":"Alabama, Mississippi","otherGeospatial":"Grand Bay","geographicExtents":"{\n \"type\": \"FeatureCollection\",\n \"features\": [\n {\n \"type\": \"Feature\",\n \"properties\": {},\n \"geometry\": {\n \"type\": \"Polygon\",\n \"coordinates\": [\n [\n [\n -88.41487884521484,\n 30.328434677542585\n ],\n [\n -88.30467224121092,\n 30.328434677542585\n ],\n [\n -88.30467224121092,\n 30.419960083267238\n ],\n [\n -88.41487884521484,\n 30.419960083267238\n ],\n [\n -88.41487884521484,\n 30.328434677542585\n ]\n ]\n ]\n }\n }\n ]\n}","contact":"St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center
U.S. Geological Survey
600 4th Street South
St. Petersburg, FL 33701
Noninvasive geophysical site characterization methods were used in two recent projects to obtain shear-wave velocity (VS) profiles to a minimum depth of 30 m and the time-averaged VS of the upper 30 meters (VS30) at seismic station sites. These projects include the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funded U.S. Geological Survey site characterization project for 191 sites in California and the Central-eastern United States (CEUS), and the 2012 Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) funded project for 33 additional CEUS sites. These sites are located in rural to urban settings with topographic conditions ranging from relatively flat sedimentary basins to mountaintop ridges. About 60 percent of the ARRA sites and 80 percent of the EPRI sites are located on rock or have thin sediment cover over rock, including Quaternary volcanic rock, Tertiary sediments and sedimentary rock, and Mesozoic (or older) crystalline or sedimentary rock. The remaining sites consist of thick sequences of Quaternary sediments overlying older sediments and rock.
ARRA sites were characterized using non-invasive active and passive surface-wave methods, including the horizontal-tovertical spectral ratio (HVSR) method and one or more of the following: spectral analysis of surface waves (SASW), multichannel analysis of surface waves (MASW; Rayleigh and Love waves) and, occasionally, array microtremor (linear and 2-D arrays) methods. P-wave seismic refraction data were also acquired at rock and shallow-rock sites. S-wave seismic refraction and/or Love-wave MASW methods were applied at sites where characterization proved difficult with Rayleighwave methods. Based on our experience from the ARRA project, we acquired Rayleigh- and Love-wave based MASW and P- and S-wave refraction data for the EPRI project at CEUS sites.
The HVSR method was found to be useful for identifying shallow-rock sites and for evaluating the relative variability of the depth-to-rock interface beneath the seismic station and the testing array(s). The fundamental mode modeling assumption was generally valid at most of these sites; nevertheless, multi-mode or effective-mode modeling routines were occasionally required, particularly in the case of shallow high-velocity layers. Deep sediment sites were characterized using active and, when appropriate, passive surface-wave based methods. Rock and shallow sediment sites were generally more challenging to characterize than deep sediment sites. About 10 percent of rock sites could not be characterized using surface wave methods, thus these sites were characterized using body-wave refraction methods. Love wave methods were found to be more effective than Rayleigh wave methods at some rock and shallow-rock sites (e.g., sites with shallow rock and sites with a thin low-velocity, highly attenuating surface layer). Lateral velocity variability was found to be very common at rock and shallow-rock sites, often causing significant scatter in the surface-wave dispersion data. Seismic refraction models have demonstrated that it may not be unusual for VS30 to vary by 20 percent, or more, over small distances (several tens of meters) at such sites. Based on these experiences, it is important to consider the application of combinations of methods when using noninvasive geophysical approaches to characterize seismic site conditions.
","conferenceTitle":"16th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 16WCEE 2017","conferenceDate":"January 9-13, 2017","conferenceLocation":"Santiago, Chile","language":"English","publisher":"International Association for Earthquake Engineering","usgsCitation":"Martin, A., Yong, A., Stephenson, W.J., Boatwright, J., and Diehl, J., 2017, Geophysical characterization of seismic station sites in the United States – The importance of a flexible, multi-method approach, 16th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 16WCEE 2017, Santiago, Chile, January 9-13, 2017, 19 p.","productDescription":"19 p.","ipdsId":"IP-080676","costCenters":[{"id":237,"text":"Earthquake Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"links":[{"id":481978,"type":{"id":24,"text":"Thumbnail"},"url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/thumbnails/outside_thumb.jpg"},{"id":481977,"rank":1,"type":{"id":15,"text":"Index Page"},"url":"https://www.wcee.nicee.org/wcee/sixteenth_conf_Santiago/","linkFileType":{"id":5,"text":"html"}}],"country":"United States","geographicExtents":"{\n \"type\": \"FeatureCollection\",\n \"features\": [\n {\n \"type\": \"Feature\",\n \"properties\": {},\n \"geometry\": {\n \"coordinates\": [\n [\n [\n -117.07855248193185,\n 32.53666625001908\n ],\n [\n -114.30928863190336,\n 32.63838082249163\n ],\n [\n -114.18940679698169,\n 34.53764946137473\n ],\n [\n -119.39424118924363,\n 38.572056705043025\n ],\n [\n -123.29737686526406,\n 37.63629841187134\n ],\n [\n -120.31399583477251,\n 34.0619554841515\n ],\n [\n -117.07855248193185,\n 32.53666625001908\n ]\n ]\n ],\n \"type\": \"Polygon\"\n }\n },\n {\n \"type\": \"Feature\",\n \"properties\": {},\n \"geometry\": {\n \"coordinates\": [\n [\n [\n -98.56029556803429,\n 36.997446902950074\n ],\n [\n -99.86195232972082,\n 34.14086982696833\n ],\n [\n -91.74686942614534,\n 33.02956856409422\n ],\n [\n -84.68084295679529,\n 31.754844006785248\n ],\n [\n -81.4025521969889,\n 32.03675981430574\n ],\n [\n -76.00210444134004,\n 35.756079891470606\n ],\n [\n -71.27311244517016,\n 44.469348399372535\n ],\n [\n -74.529776508883,\n 45.025831483992505\n ],\n [\n -77.26839093048407,\n 43.03532376235151\n ],\n [\n -81.20361675467349,\n 41.569243273876594\n ],\n [\n -86.76267624679905,\n 41.9776316577331\n ],\n [\n -91.49798799968512,\n 40.22868842092885\n ],\n [\n -98.56029556803429,\n 36.997446902950074\n ]\n ]\n ],\n \"type\": \"Polygon\"\n }\n }\n ]\n}","noUsgsAuthors":false,"publicationStatus":"PW","contributors":{"authors":[{"text":"Martin, Antony","contributorId":243672,"corporation":false,"usgs":false,"family":"Martin","given":"Antony","affiliations":[],"preferred":false,"id":927099,"contributorType":{"id":1,"text":"Authors"},"rank":1},{"text":"Yong, Alan 0000-0003-1807-5847","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1807-5847","contributorId":204730,"corporation":false,"usgs":true,"family":"Yong","given":"Alan","affiliations":[{"id":237,"text":"Earthquake Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"preferred":true,"id":927100,"contributorType":{"id":1,"text":"Authors"},"rank":2},{"text":"Stephenson, William J. 0000-0001-8699-0786 wstephens@usgs.gov","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8699-0786","contributorId":695,"corporation":false,"usgs":true,"family":"Stephenson","given":"William","email":"wstephens@usgs.gov","middleInitial":"J.","affiliations":[{"id":300,"text":"Geologic Hazards Science Center","active":true,"usgs":true}],"preferred":true,"id":927101,"contributorType":{"id":1,"text":"Authors"},"rank":3},{"text":"Boatwright, J.","contributorId":87297,"corporation":false,"usgs":true,"family":"Boatwright","given":"J.","email":"","affiliations":[],"preferred":false,"id":927172,"contributorType":{"id":1,"text":"Authors"},"rank":4},{"text":"Diehl, John","contributorId":350842,"corporation":false,"usgs":false,"family":"Diehl","given":"John","affiliations":[{"id":83844,"text":"GEOVision, Incorporated","active":true,"usgs":false}],"preferred":false,"id":927102,"contributorType":{"id":1,"text":"Authors"},"rank":5}]}} ]}