EXPLORE THE ARCHIVE

Jacob DeAngelo

Publications and source records attributed to Jacob DeAngelo.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2026

Quantitative mineral resource assessment of lithium pegmatite deposits in the southern Appalachian orogen

The first quantitative mineral resource assessment for undiscovered lithium pegmatite deposits in the southern Appalachian region of the United States was conducted. Permissive tracts for lithium pegmatite deposits were delineated by integrating lithological, tectonic, geochemical, geophysical and mineral occurrence data. Lithium pegmatite prospectivity of the tracts was ranked with simplified mappable criteria, including proximity to Paleozoic felsic intrusions and major lithotectonic structures, stream sediment geochemical anomalies, and pegmatite occurrence data. The geospatial data and permissive tracts were used to estimate the number of undiscovered lithium pegmatite deposits. These estimates were integrated into probabilistic simulations along with a new global lithium pegmatite grade and tonnage dataset to quantify potential contained undiscovered lithium resources. An economic filter was applied to convert the probabilistic estimates of contained lithium into recoverable material. The identified lithium pegmatite resources for the Carolina Lithium and Kings Mountain deposits, North Carolina, contain 1589 thousand tons (kt) of Li 2 O. The median contained undiscovered resource for the southern Appalachian orogen was estimated to be 2240 kt Li 2 O. At 90% confidence, the region contains at least 130 kt Li 2 O, and 10,700 kt at 10% confidence. After applying economic filters, the median recoverable contained resource was 1430 kt Li 2 O, corresponding to approximately 201 years of current lithium imports for consumption in the United States. North and South Carolina are likely to contain most of these resources. Coarse data resolution and intra-state variations in the geological data contribute to uncertainty of undiscovered lithium pegmatite resources. Continued efforts to harmonize disparate geospatial datasets with updated or new information can improve the accuracy and precision of estimated undiscovered lithium pegmatite resources in the study area and at broader scales.

Alabama, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South ↗

USGS2026

Conventional hydrothermal power-producing systems of the Great Basin, USA

As part of the update to the electric-grade conventional hydrothermal assessment of the Great Basin, USA, Monte Carlo analyses of identified resources within explored regions will be performed to make estimates of discovered resources and associated uncertainty. Analyses use conditional statistics where estimates are conditioned upon a hydrothermal favorability map, allowing for the likelihood that more resources exist in regions of higher hydrothermal favorability. For these analyses, a dataset of identified hydrothermal systems is compiled, and the new compilation is described herein. Recognizing that a single hydrothermal system may be developed with multiple power plants, and that the hydrothermal upflow zone may be several kilometers across with many measurements characterizing a single hydrothermal system, a procedure was developed and employed to create clusters of points (power plants, measurements, etc.) that are associated with a single system, and a new central point was defined as the best estimator of the center of the hydrothermal system. Hydrothermal systems were uniquely identified by grouping electric-grade hydrothermal measurements and operating power plants within a distance of 10 km. Groups that are >10 km apart are assumed to be different electric-grade hydrothermal systems. While 10 km was used as the threshold, most systems were significantly further apart, and most points within groups were typically within 5 km of each other. A well measurement was considered an electric-grade measurement of a hydrothermal system if it had two properties: a measured temperature of >85 °C and evidence of hydrothermal convection. Other points that were added to the dataset are locations of operating powerplants or locations that have been classified as an electric-grade hydrothermal resource by either the U.S Geological Survey (USGS) or the Great Basin Center for Geothermal Energy. After all points are assigned to systems, new points were computed with the goal of identifying the center of the throat of the hydrothermal upflow zone. If operating powerplants exist for a system, then the arithmetic average of all power plant locations is used. Otherwise, if USGS made an estimate, that location is used. In the absence of both powerplants or USGS estimates, the arithmetic average of all electric-grade measurement locations is used. An example is shown of how these newly compiled locations might be ranked for uncertainty analyses, where higher confidence is assumed if measured temperature is higher and there are many supporting measurements indicating an electric-grade resource. In summary, 28 systems have operating power plants, an additional 78 systems are known identified electric-grade hydrothermal resources, and 99 new systems were identified as probable electric-grade systems with varying levels of confidence. These 205 locations are shown as a function of a recent hydrothermal favorability map, conceptually illustrating the conditional statistics that can be used to make estimates of the undiscovered resources of the Great Basin. An accompanying data release provides summaries of developed capacity by system and USGS estimates of likely total capacity and associated uncertainty.

Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah↗

USGS2025

Favorability mapping for hydrothermal power resource assessments of the Great Basin, USA

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is updating the 2008 assessment of conventional hydrothermal resources for the Great Basin in the western United States. As part of this work, the workflow for hydrothermal resource favorability maps is being modified to integrate modern data-driven machine learning (ML) methods. Improvements include: [1] using new and refined evidence layers (features); [2] using an order of magnitude more training sites (labeled examples); [3] utilizing simple but non-linear supervised ML algorithms; [4] representing positive training sites (wells with measured heat flow) with their ordinal value proportional to the magnitude of convective upflow (i.e., low, high, or very high convective signals instead of past strategies using positive-negative labels); [5] supplementing training sites with additional sites with low convective signals to represent diverse under-sampled areas where hydrothermal systems are unlikely to exist; [6] comparing with competing approaches; and [7] utilizing Monte Carlo cross-validation to estimate and evaluate prediction uncertainty. For the new favorability map, over half of the power-producing systems (i.e., 15 of 28) are predicted in the 99th percentile of most favorable locations (i.e., the highest 1 % of favorability, corresponding to 1 % of the map area), exceeding the performance of past models that have explicitly used power plants as training sites. Previous favorability maps predicted approximately half of the power-producing hydrothermal systems above the 80th percentile (i.e., 20 % of the map area). For the new favorability map, 93 % of power-producing systems (i.e., 26 of 28) are above the 80th percentile. The power-producing systems for which the new model does not perform well are either comparatively small, low-temperature systems or systems also not predicted well by prior modeling approaches, suggesting that these few systems are unusual when compared with most power-producing systems. Focusing research on these known, seemingly different systems may yield new insights and subsequent discovery of new prospects.

California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah↗

USGS2025

Preventing overfitting when using tree-based methods for mapping hydrothermal favorability

Ensemble tree-based algorithms are robust tools for estimating sparsely distributed resources with non-linear dependencies (e.g., hydrothermal systems). These algorithms naturally accommodate the threshold conditions necessary to enable and support hydrothermal systems (e.g., having sufficient heat and permeability) and are simpler than many other non-linear machine learning strategies (e.g., artificial neural networks), which is an advantage when working with few labeled examples from which to learn. In previous work, we used eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) to produce regional prediction and uncertainty maps of hydrothermal favorability; however, recent studies suggest that, even when properly applied, XGBoost has some risk of overfitting when there are few labeled examples from which to learn. To evaluate overfitting when constructing hydrothermal favorability maps with tree-based methods, we compare XGBoost with Extremely Randomized Trees (ExtraTrees), another ensemble tree-based algorithm that has the potential to underfit when using few labeled examples. We hold all other modeling parameters constant, resulting in two contrasting favorability maps of conventional geothermal resources for the Great Basin. Our results indicate that ExtraTrees demonstrably reduces overfitting compared with XGBoost. After considering overall performance, we conclude that ExtraTrees provides a more suitable modeling approach than XGBoost for the purposes of conventional hydrothermal resource assessments.

Conference Paper↗