Geology topics

Minerals & deposits

Find USGS publications on mineral resources and deposits. Search commodities and geographic names, then check source reports for geology and assessment methods.

Follow this topic with RSS

272 records · Page 16Linked to original sources

USGS2025

Insights and strategic opportunities from the USGS 2024 Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Interagency Workshop

Introduction In 2021, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) published Circular 1490 titled, “Integrated Science for the Study of Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in the Environment: A Strategic Science Vision for the U.S. Geological Survey” (Tokranov and others, 2021). Circular 1490 was created to be a resource for USGS scientists prioritizing and planning research related to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and to be a guide for developing partnerships with other scientists, State and Federal agencies, and stakeholders engaged in PFAS research and management and mitigation of the environmental and human-health effects of PFAS. This USGS PFAS Strategic Science Vision document was intended to be the foundation for a “living strategic vision,” periodically providing updates on the state of USGS PFAS research, emerging PFAS data gaps and needs, and progress on interagency and stakeholder PFAS partnerships and priorities. To meet this objective, the USGS planned to host an Interagency and Stakeholder PFAS Workshop every 2–3 years. During September 10–12, 2024, the USGS hosted the first Interagency and Stakeholder PFAS Workshop in Reston, Virginia. The Workshop brought together experts from other Federal agencies (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Food and Drug Administration, Department of Defense [Air Force, Army]), State agencies (Washington Fish and Wildlife, Virginia Department of Transportation), and academia (Harvard University, University of Maryland) to address key challenges relating to the measurement and modeling of PFAS and the implications for environmental health. Participants engaged in in-depth discussions centered around six pivotal topics related to PFAS: (1) sampling protocols, methods and interpretation; (2) environmental sources, source apportionment, and occurrence; (3) environmental fate and transport; (4) human and wildlife exposure routes and risk; (5) bioconcentration, bioaccumulation, and biomagnification; and (6) ecotoxicology and effects. Each topic had three breakout sessions. A recurrent theme of workshop discussions was how data on a nationwide scale for PFAS occurrence in various environmental matrices, including air, water, food crops, biota, soil, and streambed sediment could help to advance scientific understanding. Participants noted significant geospatial data gaps, particularly in the midwestern and southern United States and the Pacific Northwest. PFAS data collection tends to be more robust along the eastern seaboard and in California. Participants stressed how enhancing the integration of large and small datasets across various agencies could help to support national scale understanding of PFAS. To address these gaps, attendees suggested leveraging datasets from Federal entities like the USGS and the U.S. Department of Defense, State agencies, and municipal utility services to develop predictive contaminant detection and transport models. Improved coordination between water quality programs and USGS research could help to facilitate access to valuable data, leading to comprehensive databases that inform PFAS point (wastewater treatment plants and landfills) and nonpoint (runoff from land, atmospheric deposition, food packaging) sources, environmental transport mechanisms, environmental detection and concentrations, potential exposure routes, and health effects on different biota, including humans. A specific request was made to develop a map demarking the depth of modern (1953 or later) groundwater, which is susceptible to surface-derived anthropogenic (that is, human-made) contamination, based on tritium-age dating. Emphasis was placed on incorporation of hydrology, groundwater flow paths, groundwater–surface water interactions, and landscape factors in predictive statistical models as a step to improve contaminant source identification and tracking. Molecular fingerprinting approaches garnered attention as techniques to link specific PFAS mixtures detected in a sample to environmental sources and levels in biota (Dávila-Santiago and others, 2022). Integrating data from abiotic (that is, water, soil, and air) and biotic (that is, living organisms) systems identified as a research opportunity. For example, understanding the composition of soils and sediments, which include a mixture of mineral, plant, and animal components, could advance understanding of exposure pathways. The discussions highlighted opportunities to explore and understand the potential redistribution and biotic exposures of PFAS from biosolid and wastewater treatment plant effluent land application practices, in addition to atmospheric releases and discharges from landfill and wastewater treatment plants. Participants identified research gaps surrounding how these sources may contribute to contamination and may affect surrounding ecosystems, including a better definition of anthropogenic background concentrations. Moving forward, the collection of co-occurrence data was noted as a means to improve understanding of complex mixtures and to leverage companion modeling efforts focused on areas with high and low contamination levels to identify areas of concern and unaffected resources. Participants emphasized how centralized USGS databases and the establishment of sample-metadata archives can help to ensure that samples are preserved and accessible for future research. In conclusion, the workshop participants identified opportunities to bridge data gaps and improve measurement techniques, modeling frameworks, databases, and communication, to enhance the understanding of PFAS and their effects on environmental and human health. Upon completion of the workshop, participants indicated an interest in developing strategic data collection, modeling, and analytical approaches to address these challenges.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2024

Status and understanding of groundwater quality in the Mojave Basin Domestic-Supply Aquifer study unit, 2018—California GAMA Priority Basin Project

Groundwater quality in the western part of the Mojave Desert in San Bernardino County, California, was investigated in 2018 as part of the California State Water Resources Control Board Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment Program Priority Basin Project. The Mojave Basin Domestic-Supply Aquifer study unit (MOBS) region was divided into two study areas—floodplain and regional—to assess differences between the two major aquifers used for drinking water supply in the area. This assessment characterized the quality of ambient groundwater and not the quality of treated drinking water. The study included three components: (1) a status assessment, which characterized the quality of groundwater resources used for domestic drinking-water supply in the floodplain and regional study areas; (2) a brief understanding assessment, which evaluated factors that could potentially affect the quality of groundwater used by domestic wells in the region; and (3) a comparative assessment between the groundwater resources used by domestic wells and public-supply wells in the two study areas. The domestic-well assessment was based on data collected by the U.S. Geological Survey from 48 domestic wells in January–May 2018. The public-supply assessment was based on data for samples from 322 public-supply wells in 2008–18, either collected by the U.S. Geological Survey or compiled from the California State Water Resources Control Boards Division of Drinking Water publicly available database. Concentrations of water-quality constituents in ambient groundwater were compared to regulatory and non-regulatory benchmarks typically used by the State of California and Federal agencies as health-based or aesthetic standards for public drinking water. Relative concentrations, defined as the measured concentration divided by the benchmark concentration, were classified as high (greater than 1.0), moderate (greater than 0.5 for inorganic constituents or 0.1 for organic and special-interest constituents, and not high), or low (concentrations lower than moderate). The floodplain and regional study areas were divided into 15 and 35 grid cells, respectively, and grid-based methods were used to compute the areal proportions of the two study areas with high, moderate, or low relative concentrations of individual constituents and classes of constituents. For the domestic-supply assessment, one or more inorganic constituents with health-based benchmarks were detected at high relative concentrations in 58 percent of the regional study area and 13 percent of the floodplain study area. The inorganic constituents with health-based benchmarks detected at high relative concentrations in the regional study area were arsenic, chromium and hexavalent chromium, fluoride, adjusted gross alpha particle activity, uranium, molybdenum, strontium, and nitrate; only arsenic was detected at high relative concentrations in the floodplain study area. One or more inorganic constituents with secondary maximum contaminant level benchmarks were detected at high concentrations in 15 and 6.7 percent of the regional and floodplain study areas, respectively. The constituents detected at high relative concentrations in the regional study area were total dissolved solids, chloride, sulfate, and iron; only total dissolved solids and sulfate were detected at high relative concentrations in the floodplain study area. Organic constituents were not detected at moderate or high relative concentrations in either the regional or floodplain study areas. Volatile organic compounds were detected at low relative concentrations in 21 and 27 percent of the regional and floodplain study areas, respectively, and pesticides were detected at low relative concentrations in 9.1 and 20 percent of the regional and floodplain study areas, respectively. The only individual organic constituent detected in more than 10 percent of either study area was the trihalomethane trichloromethane. Total coliform bacteria were detected in 15 and 27 percent of the grid wells in the regional and floodplain study areas, respectively. The greater prevalence of high relative concentrations of many inorganic constituents in the regional study area compared to the floodplain area likely indicates the greater diversity of geologic material at depth in aquifer material and generally finer-grained alluvium compared to the floodplain study area combined with generally older groundwater that has had more contact time with aquifer materials. In general, trace element concentrations (1) increased with increasing groundwater age, (2) increased with distance from recharge sources in the mountains, and (3) increased with closer proximity to some types of geological units. In general, groundwater from domestic wells in the floodplain study area is young, with most samples containing a component of modern groundwater based on tritium and unadjusted carbon-14 activities, whereas groundwater from domestic wells in the regional study area generally is old, with most samples having unadjusted carbon-14 ages of 5,000–40,000 years. Public-supply wells in MOBS generally were deeper than domestic wells and presumably are in contact with older, more weathered alluvium that may have more mobile trace elements, such as arsenic or uranium. However, only 26 percent of the public-supply regional study area had high relative concentrations of inorganic constituents, compared to 58 percent for the domestic regional study area. The percentages of the public-supply and domestic floodplain study areas with high relative concentrations of inorganic constituents were 11 and 13 percent, respectively. The ages of groundwater used by public-supply and domestic wells in each study area were similar, which was not expected given the greater depth of the public-supply wells. Three potential factors may contribute to these results: (1) greater spatial footprint of domestic well network, which may result in domestic wells pumping groundwater from fractured bedrock or mineralized areas not used by public-supply wells; (2) greater pumping rates in public-supply wells, resulting in more water being withdrawn from coarse-grained, heterogeneous alluvium than finer-grained layers, which may have higher concentrations of (or more mobile) inorganic constituents; and (3) a greater degree of well management with public-supply wells, which may include pausing use of or decommissioning wells if treating or blending water is not feasible to lower constituent concentrations.

California↗