Map of industrial mineral occurrences in the National Forests of Arizona
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Open-File Report↗
SEARCH · Geology Reports
Results for “Industrial Minerals”
Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Fuller's earth and other industrial mineral resources of the Meigs-Attapulgus-Quincy District, Georgia and Florida
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Professional Paper↗
Worldwide Asbestos Supply and Consumption Trends from 1900 through 2003
This Circular updates and supersedes U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Open-File Report 03–083, "Worldwide Asbestos Supply and Consumption Trends from 1900 to 2000," with the addition of supply and consumption estimates and analysis from 2001 through 2003 and revisions to the consumption estimates for 1998 through 2000. The text from Open-File Report 03–083 also has been updated in this Circular to include revisions to and expansion of the time-series coverage. The use of asbestos is one of the most controversial issues surrounding the industrial minerals industry. Its carcinogenic nature, an overall lack of knowledge of minimum safe exposure levels, its widespread use for more than 100 years, and the long latency for the development of lung cancer and mesothelioma are the main contributing factors to these controversies. Another factor is that, despite decades of research, the mechanisms responsible for its carcinogenic properties are still largely unknown. The United States produced about 3.29 million metric tons (Mt) of asbestos and used approximately 31.5 Mt between 1900 and 2003. About half of this amount was used after 1960. In 2002, the last asbestos mine in the United States closed, marking the end of more than 110 years of U.S. asbestos production. Cumulative world production from 1900 through 2003 was about 181 Mt. If one assumes that unusually large stocks were not maintained and that world consumption roughly equaled production, then about half of the world production and consumption occurred between the end of 1976 and the end of 2003. The United States and Western European nations were the largest consumers of asbestos during the first two-thirds of the 20th century. They were surpassed by the collective production and consumption of Kazakhstan and Russia by the 1970s. After the onset of the health issues concerning asbestos in the late 1960s and early 1970s, the decline in world production and consumption began to be evident in the late 1970s and early 1980s. The 1991 breakup of the Soviet Union, a major user of asbestos, resulted in a significant decline in asbestos consumption and production in former Soviet-bloc countries. Consumption and production in Kazakhstan and Russia increased through 2003 from 2001, albeit to a much lower level than in the 1980s. In 2003, world consumption was estimated to be 2.11 Mt, about 45 percent that of 1980. Relatively few countries in Asia, the Middle East, South America, and the former Soviet Union remained as the leading users of asbestos. China was the leading consuming nation, using an estimated 492,000 metric tons (t) in 2003. China was followed, in decreasing order of consumption, by Russia (429,000 t), India (192,000 t), Kazakhstan (174,000 t), Ukraine (156,000 t), Thailand (133,000 t), Brazil (78,400 t), and Iran (75,800 t). These eight countries accounted for 82 percent of the world's apparent consumption in 2003. Following Iran, in decreasing order of consumption by tonnage, were Uzbekistan (42,400 t), Vietnam (39,400 t), Indonesia (32,300 t), the Republic of Korea (23,800 t), Kyrgyzstan (23,700 t), Japan (23,400 t), and Mexico (20,100 t). Consumption in all other countries was estimated to be less than 15,000 t each in 2003. Sizable consumption increases occurred in Azerbaijan, China, India, Iran, Kazakhstan, Thailand, and Ukraine between 2000 and the end of 2003. Consumption patterns in countries using less than 5,000 t per year were too erratic to ascertain any trends in their use of asbestos.
Circular↗
Worldwide asbestos supply and consumption trends from 1900 to 2000
The use of asbestos is one of the most controversial issues surrounding the industrial minerals industry. Its carcinogenic nature, an overall lack of knowledge of minimum safe exposure levels, its widespread use for more than 100 years, and the long latency for the development of lung cancer and mesothelioma are the main contributing factors to these controversies. Another factor is that, despite decades of research, the mechanisms responsible for its carcinogenic properties are still largely unknown. The United States has produced about 3.28 million metric tons of asbestos fiber and used approximately 31.5 million tons between 1900 and 2000. About half of this amount was used since 1960. Cumulative world production during that same time period was about 173 million tons. Assuming that unusually large stocks are not maintained and that world consumption roughly equals production, about half of the world production and consumption occurred since 1976. The United States and western European nations were the largest consumers of asbestos during the first two-thirds of the 20th century. They were surpassed by the collective production and consumption of States within the former Soviet Union by the 1970s. With the onset of the health issues concerning asbestos in the late 1960s and early 1970s, world production and consumption began to decline during the 1980s. In 2000, world consumption, estimated to be 1.48 million tons, was only 31% that of 1980. Countries in Asia, South America, and the former Soviet Union remain the largest users of asbestos. More specifically, Brazil, China, India, Japan, Russia, and Thailand are the only countries that consumed more than 60,000 tons of asbestos in 2000. These six countries accounted for more than 80% of world?s apparent consumption in 2000.
Open-File Report↗
Recent trends in Cuba’s mining and petroleum industries
In response to recent diplomatic developments between Cuba and the United States, the National Minerals Information Center compiled available information on the mineral industries of Cuba. This fact sheet highlights a new map and table that identify mines, mineral processing facilities, and petroleum facilities as well as information on location, operational status, and ownership. It also addresses the current status of known mineral industry projects, historical developments, and trends of the Cuban economy with an emphasis on mineral industries, and the supply and demand for Cuba’s mineral resources. In 2013, Cuba was estimated to be among the world’s top ten producers of cobalt and nickel, which are the country’s leading exports. Cuba’s current crude oil and associated natural gas production from onshore and shallow water coastal reservoirs is approximately 50,000 barrels per day of liquids and about 20,000 barrels per day oil equivalent of natural gas. In 2013, the value of mining and quarrying activities accounted for 0.6 percent of Cuba’s gross domestic product (GDP), compared with 1.4 percent in 2000. The value of production from Cuba’s industrial manufacturing sector increased by 88 percent between 1993 and 2013, whereas the sector’s share in the GDP decreased by about 3 percent during the same time period reflecting economic growth in other sectors of the economy.
Fact Sheet↗
Sociocultural and institutional drivers and constraints to mineral supply; the meaning of scarcity in the 21st century: drivers and constraints to the supply of minerals using regional, national and global perspectives
The sociocultural dimensions of mineral supply at the outset of the 21st century are making the supply process increasingly complex. The dimensions encompass legal, financial, environmental, cultural, and global implications of mining, and are driving unprecedented change in the way minerals supply will be accomplished in the future. Minerals scarcity on a global scale is subordinate to other societal issues about mineral resources and reserves estimated to meet society's demands for decades to centuries in the future. This report reviews historical and present-day sociocultural drivers of change, and reactions of the minerals industry to these drivers. It is reflective primarily of conditions in the United States, but also uses examples from other countries. It expresses viewpoints on sociocultural drivers as seen by constituents of the minerals industry and several other communities of interest including Aboriginal peoples, non-government organizations; labor; mining-dependent communities; mining-affected communities; researchers; and government (federal, state/provincial, and local). It provides overviews of the demand for minerals in the United States, and the status of land available for mining. The report uses a case study of a metals mining project in Wisconsin to illustrate specific sociocultural drivers and constraints to minerals supply, and how these influence the minerals industry. Over the past 150 years, a progression of sociocultural movements under the headings of conservationism, environmentalism, and sustainable development have nurtured societal values that have come to influence the mineral supply process in important ways. These movements reflect a continuing tension between the demand for minerals and other resources, and the simultaneous demand for aesthetic, spiritual, ecological, cultural, and other attributes of the land. The tension is an important element in current international debates about the meaning and future of sustainable development. This report focuses on some of the social challenges to the minerals industry to supply minerals, while at the same time providing environmental protection, economic growth, and sociocultural acceptance. All these issues fall under the rubric of sustainable development. It also describes current industry responses to sustainability, including the Global Mining Initiative (2001a), an attempt to introduce major changes in global industry practices to begin the 21st century. This report complements other documents in the series on physical supply, technological advancement, and economic and policy drivers (Wilburn and others, 2001).
Open-File Report↗
Bedrock geology and mineral resources of the Knoxville 1° x 2° quadrangle, Tennessee, North Carolina, and South Carolina
The Knoxville 1°x 2° quadrangle spans the Southern Blue Ridge physiographic province at its widest point from eastern Tennessee across western North Carolina to the northwest corner of South Carolina. The quadrangle also contains small parts of the Valley and Ridge province in Tennessee and the Piedmont province in North and South Carolina. Bedrock in the Valley and Ridge consists of unmetamorphosed, folded and thrust-faulted Paleozoic miogeoclinal sedimentary rocks ranging in age from Cambrian to Mississippian. The Blue Ridge is a complex of stacked thrust sheets divided into three parts: (1) a west flank underlain by rocks of the Late Proterozoic and Early Cambrian Chilhowee Group and slightly metamorphosed Late Proterozoic Ocoee Supergroup west of the Greenbrier fault; (2) a central part containing crystalline basement of Middle Proterozoic age (Grenville), Ocoee Supergroup rocks east of the Greenbrier fault, and rocks of the Murphy belt; and (3) an east flank containing the Helen, Tallulah Falls, and Richard Russell thrust sheets and the amphibolitic basement complex. All of the east flank thrust sheets contain polydeformed and metamorphosed sedimentary and igneous rocks of mostly Proterozoic age. The Blue Ridge is separated by the Brevard fault zone from a large area of rocks of the Inner Piedmont to the east, which contains the Six Mile thrust sheet and the ChaugaWalhalla thrust complex. All of these rocks are also polydeformed and metamorphosed sedimentary and igneous rocks. The Inner Piedmont rocks in this area occupy both the Piedmont and part of the Blue Ridge physiographic provinces. The intensity of deformation and metamorphism increases from west to east in the Blue Ridge. The west flank is mostly chlorite grade or relatively unmetamorphosed, and the central part of the Blue Ridge is mostly staurolite, garnet, or biotite grade, although sillimanite grade rocks occur along the eastern part of the central Blue Ridge in the vicinity of the leading edge of the Hayesvil Ie fault. The east flank of the Blue Ridge and much of the Inner Piedmont are at kyanite or silli manite grade of Manuscript approved for publication February 22, 1991. regional metamorphism except for a zone of retrograde rocks in the Brevard fault zone and a small area of biotite-grade rocks in the extreme southwest part of the Grandfather Mountain window in the northeast corner of the quadrangle. The major mineral resources in the Knoxville 1°x2° quadrangle are construction materials and a variety of industrial minerals mostly related to either granite and pegmatite or ultramafic rocks. Past production in the quadrangle of metals, which are of secondary importance relative to construction materials and industrial minerals, include copper in massive sulfides of the Besshi type, gold-bearing quartz veins, and residual iron and manganese deposits. Resources are discussed in relation to the Valley and Ridge, Blue Ridge, and Piedmont provinces. The following resources are the most important: A. Construction materials: Dimension stone of the Tennessee marble district in the Valley and Ridge. Limestone and dolomite of the Valley and Ridge. Sand and gravel and crushed stone, widespread throughout the quadrangle. B. Industrial minerals: Feldspar, flake mica, and quartz produced by flotation methods from the Spruce Pine Alaskite (muscovite granodiorite) in the east flank of the Blue Ridge. The district produces about half of the U.S. feldspar and significant amounts of the U.S. flake mica. Olivine produced from alpine-type dunite bodies in the east flank of the Blue Ridge. Talc and marble from the Murphy belt in the central part of the Blue Ridge, Vermiculite produced from a large deposit near Tigerville, S.C-, in the Inner Piedmont. Deposit worked out and mine backfilled. Smaller deposits associated with ultramafic rocks in the east flank of the Blue Ridge are now uneconomic and have not been worked in the past 20 years. C. Metals: Copper in three deposits, the Fontana and Hazel Creek mines in the Great Smoky Mountains Abstract Figure 1. Location of the Knoxville 1ºx2º quadrangle, with state and county boundaries National Park in the Central Blue Ridge, and the Cullowhee mine in the east flank of the Blue Ridge. D. Organic fuels: The rocks of the quadrangle contain no coal and probably lie outside the maximum range in thermal maturity permitting the survival of oil. The rocks in the Valley and Ridge and for a short distance eastward below the west flank of the Blue Ridge probably lie within a zone of thermal maturity permitting the survival of natural gas. Consequently the western part of the quadrangle is an area of high risk for hydrocarbon exploration. No exploration drilling has been done in this belt.
North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee↗
Bedrock geology and mineral resources of the Knoxville 1° x 2° quadrangle, Tennessee, North Carolina, and South Carolina
The Knoxville 1° x 2° quadrangle spans the Southern Blue Ridge physiographic province at its widest point from eastern Tennessee across western North Carolina to the northwest corner of South Carolina. The quadrangle also contains small parts of the Valley and Ridge province in Tennessee and the Piedmont province in North and South Carolina. Bedrock in the Valley and Ridge consists of unmetamorphosed, folded and thrust-faulted Paleozoic miogeoclinal sedimentary rocks ranging in age from Cambrian to Mississippian. The Blue Ridge is a complex of stacked thrust sheets divided into three parts: (1) a west flank underlain by rocks of the Late Proterozoic and Early Cambrian Chilhowee Group and slightly metamorphosed Late Proterozoic Ocoee Supergroup west of the Greenbrier fault; (2) a central part containing crystalline basement of Middle Proterozoic age (Grenville), Ocoee Supergroup rocks east of the Greenbrier fault, and rocks of the Murphy belt; and (3) an east flank containing the Helen, Tallulah Falls, and Richard Russell thrust sheets and the amphibolitic basement complex. All of the east flank thrust sheets contain polydeformed and metamorphosed sedimentary and igneous rocks of mostly Proterozoic age. The Blue Ridge is separated by the Brevard fault zone from a large area of rocks of the Inner Piedmont to the east, which contains the Six Mile thrust sheet and the ChaugaWalhalla thrust complex. All of these rocks are also polydeformed and metamorphosed sedimentary and igneous rocks. The Inner Piedmont rocks in this area occupy both the Piedmont and part of the Blue Ridge physiographic provinces. The intensity of deformation and metamorphism increases from west to east in the Blue Ridge. The west flank is mostly chlorite grade or relatively unmetamorphosed, and the central part of the Blue Ridge is mostly staurolite, garnet, or biotite grade, although sillimanite grade rocks occur along the eastern part of the central Blue Ridge in the vicinity of the leading edge of the Hayesville fault. The east flank of the Blue Ridge and much of the Inner Piedmont are at kyanite or sillimanite grade of regional metamorphism except for a zone of retrograde rocks in the Brevard fault zone and a small area of biotite-grade rocks in the extreme southwest part of the Grandfather Mountain window in the northeast corner of the quadrangle. The major mineral resources in the Knoxville 1° x 2° quadrangle are construction materials and a variety of industrial minerals mostly related to either granite and pegmatite or ultramafic rocks. Past production in the quadrangle of metals, which are of secondary importance relative to construction materials and industrial minerals, include copper in massive sulfides of the Besshi type, gold-bearing quartz veins, and residual iron and manganese deposits. Resources are discussed in relation to the Valley and Ridge, Blue Ridge, and Piedmont provinces. The following resources are the most important: A. Construction materials: Dimension stone of the Tennessee marble district in the Valley and Ridge. Limestone and dolomite of the Valley and Ridge. Sand and gravel and crushed stone, widespread throughout the quadrangle. B. Industrial minerals: Feldspar, flake mica, and quartz produced by flotation methods from the Spruce Pine Alaskite (muscovite granodiorite) in the east flank of the Blue Ridge. The district produces about half of the U.S. feldspar and significant amounts of the U.S. flake mica. Olivine produced from alpine-type dunite bodies in the east flank of the Blue Ridge. Talc and marble from the Murphy belt in the central part of the Blue Ridge. Vermiculite produced from a large deposit near Tigerville, S.C., in the Inner Piedmont. Deposit worked out and mine backfilled. Smaller deposits associated with ultramafic rocks in the east flank of the Blue Ridge are now uneconomic and have not been worked in the past 20 years. C. Metals: Copper in three deposits, the Fontana and Hazel Creek mines in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park in the Central Blue Ridge, and the Cullowhee mine in the east flank of the Blue Ridge. D. Organic fuels: The rocks of the quadrangle contain no coal and probably lie outside the maximum range in thermal maturity permitting the survival of oil. The rocks in the Valley and Ridge and for a short distance eastward below the west flank of the Blue Ridge probably lie within a zone of thermal maturity permitting the survival of natural gas. Consequently the western part of the quadrangle is an area of high risk for hydrocarbon exploration. No exploration drilling has been done in this belt.
North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee↗
Summary of the mineral- and energy-resource endowment, BLM roswell resource area, east-central New Mexico
In this summary of two comprehensive resource reports produced by the U.S. Bureau of Mines and the U.S. Geological Survey for the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, we discuss the mineral- and energyresource endowment of the 14-millon-acre Roswell Resource Area, New Mexico, managed by the Bureau of Land Management. The Bureau and Survey reports result from separate studies that are compilations of published and unpublished data and integrate new findings on the geology, geochemistry, geophysics, mineral, industrial, and energy commodities, and resources for the seven-county area. The reports have been used by the Bureau of Land Management in preparation of the Roswell Resource Area Resource Management Plan, and will have future use in nationwide mineral- and energy-resource inventories and assessments, as reference and training documents, and as public-information tools. In the Roswell Resource Area, many metals, industrial mineral commodities, and energy resources are being, or have been, produced or prospected. These include metals and high-technology materials, such as copper, gold, silver, thorium, uranium and/or vanadium, rare-earth element minerals, iron, manganese, tungsten, lead, zinc, and molybdenum; industrial mineral resources, including barite, limestone/dolomite, caliche, clay, fluorspar, gypsum, scoria, aggregate, and sand and gravel; and fuels and associated resources, such as oil, gas, tar sand and heavy oil, coal, and gases associated with hydrocarbons. Other commodities that have yet to be identified in economic concentrations include potash, halite, polyhalite, anhydrite, sulfur, feldspar, building stone and decorative rock, brines, various gases associated with oil and gas exploration, and carbon dioxide. ?? 1993 Oxford University Press.
Nonrenewable Resources↗
Nonfuel mineral resources in the United States-Mexico border region: A progress report on information available from the Center for Inter-American Mineral Resource Investigations (CIMRI)
The exploitation of minerals has played a significant role in population growth and development of the U.S.Mexico border region. Recent proposed changes in regulations related to mining in the United States and changes in mining and investment regulations in Mexico have led to increased mineral exploration and development in Mexico, especially in the border region. As a preliminary step in the study of the mineral industry of this area, the Center for Inter-American Mineral Resource Investigations (CIMRI) of the U.S. Geological Survey has compiled mine and occurrence data for nonfuel minerals in the border region. Analysis of this information indicates that a wide variety of metallic and industrial mineral commodities are present which can be used in agriculture, infrastructure, environmental improvement, and other industries. Therefore, mining will continue to play a significant role in the economy of this region.
Circular↗
State summaries: Oklahoma
In 2005, Oklahoma mines produced both industrial minerals and coal. No metals were mined in the state. Based on value, leading industrial minerals include crushed stone followed by cement, construction sand and gravel, industrial sand and gravel, iodine and gypsum. The Oklahoma Department of Mines (ODOM) reported that more than 343 mine operators produced nonfuel minerals from 405 mines in the state. However, 530 mining permitted sites were on file. The Oklahoma Miner Training Institute (OMTI) held 239 classes for 33,768 classroom hours of instruction, in which 84 coal miners and 4,587 metal/nonmetal miners were trained.
Mining Engineering↗
Metal prices in the United States through 2010
This report, which updates and revises the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (1999) publication, “Metal Prices in the United States Through 1998,” presents an extended price history for a wide range of metals available in a single document. Such information can be useful for the analysis of mineral commodity issues, as well as for other purposes. The chapter for each mineral commodity includes a graph of annual current and constant dollar prices for 1970 through 2010, where available; a list of significant events that affected prices; a brief discussion of the metal and its history; and one or more tables that list current dollar prices. In some cases, the metal prices presented herein are for some alternative form of an element or, instead of a price, a value, such as the value for an import as appraised by the U.S. Customs Service. Also included are the prices for steel, steel scrap, and iron ore—steel because of its importance to the elements used to alloy with it, and steel scrap and iron ore because of their use in steelmaking. A few minor metals, such as calcium, potassium, sodium, strontium, and thorium, for which price histories were insufficient, were excluded. The annual prices given may be averages for the year, yearend prices, or some other price as appropriate for a particular commodity. Certain trade journals have been the source of much of this price information—American Metal Market, ICIS Chemical Business, Engineering and Mining Journal, Industrial Minerals, Metal Bulletin, Mining Journal, Platts Metals Week, Roskill Information Services Ltd. commodity reports, and Ryan’s Notes. Price information also is available in minerals information publications of the USGS (1880–1925, 1996–present) and the U.S. Bureau of Mines (1926–95), such as Mineral Commodity Summaries, Mineral Facts and Problems, Mineral Industry Surveys, and Minerals Yearbook. In addition to prices themselves, these journals and publications contain information relevant to prices, which has been helpful in the preparation of this publication. Prices in this report have been graphed in 1992 constant dollars to show the effects of inflation as measured by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers, a widely used measure of overall inflation in the United States. These prices are not tabulated, but a table of the deflators used is given in an appendix. Constant dollar prices can be used to show how prices that producers receive would have less purchasing power.
Scientific Investigations Report↗
Design of exploration and minerals-data-collection programs in developing areas
This paper considers the practical problem of applying economic analysis to designing minerals exploration and data collection strategies for developing countries. Formal decision rules for the design of government exploration and minerals-data-collection programs are derived by using a minerals-industry planning model that has been extended to include an exploration function. Rules derived are applicable to centrally planned minerals industries as well as market-oriented minerals sectors. They pertain to the spatial allocation of exploration effort and to the allocation of activities between government and private concerns for market-oriented economies. Programs characterized by uniform expenditures, uniform information coverage across regions, or uniform-density grid drilling progrmas are shown to be inferior to the strategy derived. Moreover, for market-oriented economies, the economically optimal mix in exploration activities between private and government data collection would require that only private firms assess local sites and that government agencies carry out regional surveys.
Socio-Economic Planning Sciences↗