Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Geothermal Resources Council Transactions”

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.

530 records · Page 5Linked to original sources
USGS2024

Effective site coefficients for the 2024 International Building Code (IBC)

The U.S. National Seismic Hazard Models (NSHMs), developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), have long been the scientific foundation of seismic design guidelines and have been used to compute design ground motions for construction of new buildings and retrofit of existing buildings in the United States and its territories. The 2018 NSHM is adopted by the 2024 International Building Code (IBC). Prior to the 2018 NSHM update, hazard calculations were required only at one reference site condition defined by V S30 =760 m/s (where V S30 is the time-averaged shear wave velocity from the surface to a depth of 30 m) and three periods (peak ground acceleration, PGA, and pseudo spectral accelerations at periods of 0.2 and 1 s, S s and S 1 ). Site coefficients, F PGA , F a , and F v , were then defined by the Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC) Provisions Update Committee (PUC) in the site-specific procedures of National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) Recommended Seismic Provisions to calculate ground motions for other site classes with different V S30 values at the given periods. The design ground motions at other periods were then estimated using a generic spectral shape that was also defined by the BSSC PUC in NEHRP provisions. In recent years, the engineering community has realized there were deficiencies with the F a and F v site coefficients and the generic spectral shape. To avoid potentially dangerous underestimations of design ground motions for long period structures on soft site conditions in high seismicity regions, the BSSC PUC recommended the use of multi-period response spectra (MPRS) in 2017. As a result, the USGS produced multi-period and multi-V S30 response spectral values in the 2018 NSHM for calculations of design ground motions and the site coefficients F a and F v were eliminated from the 2020 NEHRP Provisions. As these site coefficients were widely used inside and outside of the United States, in this study we back-calculate the “effective” site coefficients F a,eff , and F v,eff by comparing MPRS for various site classes with the MPRS for the reference site condition, and discuss the changes that are observed in the 2024 IBC compared to its previous version in 2021. The effective site coefficients are presented for test site locations and their dependence on various factors including period, ground motion intensity, and regional models are discussed. Ratio maps between the new effective site coefficients and the old ones are then presented for soft site classes and for short and long periods. For soft site classes at short periods, the new effective site coefficients are lower than the old site coefficients for high seismicity regions and higher for low seismicity regions. As it was expected, for soft site classes at long periods and high seismicity regions, the new effective site coefficients are much larger than the old site coefficients without imposing the 50% increase as a penalty that was suggested in the 2021 IBC, whereas they could be much smaller if the 50% increase would have been imposed particularly around New Madrid and Charleston high seismicity regions. For low seismicity regions, the long period effective site coefficients can be smaller or larger by 20% compared to the 2021 IBC coefficients.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2026

Compact seismicity bursts have different characteristics from regional seismicity

Earthquakes tend to cluster, developing into sequences driven by stress perturbations and transient fault-zone processes. Depending on the driving process, earthquake sequences show differing behaviors. This variability challenges our ability to observe or distinguish these driving processes in high resolution. Here we systematically identify seismicity bursts throughout southern California using new statistical methods and examine their causes with other independent geophysical observations. Seismicity bursts are defined as statistically significant seismicity rate anomalies. Our approach has the advantage of being data driven, depending on few earthquake occurrence assumptions. We find abundant seismicity bursts across southern California, most frequently occurring along the San Jacinto Fault and in the Salton Sea and Coso geothermal fields. These seismicity bursts are highly compact in space and time, often encompassed by a 5 km radius and have durations less than 10 hr. Many of the seismicity bursts have their largest earthquake near the beginning of the sequence, but the largest earthquake is usually not an obvious mainshock. We utilize a variety of independent geophysical data sets to analyze the characteristics of the seismicity bursts, finding that the seismicity bursts have low b-values, low spectral stress drops, and varied stress ratios compared to regional seismicity. These differences suggest that seismicity bursts are driven by transient processes acting frequently across fault networks.

California↗
USGS2024

High resolution identification and quantification of diffuse deep groundwater discharge in mountain rivers using continuous boat-mounted helium measurements

Discharge of deeply sourced groundwater to streams is difficult to locate and quantify, particularly where both discrete and diffuse discharge points exist, but diffuse discharge is one of the primary controls on solute budgets in mountainous watersheds. The noble gas helium is a unique identifier of deep groundwater discharge because groundwater with long residence times is commonly enriched in helium. In this study, a portable mass spectrometer was used to measure longitudinal variation in dissolved helium concentrations in two mountainous rivers at high spatial resolution not feasible with traditional sampling techniques. Helium profiles were then simulated using a mass-balance model to quantify longitudinal variation in groundwater discharge to the receiving rivers. Results indicate helium concentrations were enriched by multiple orders of magnitude above atmospheric equilibrium in both rivers and that this persisted for up to 18 km below observed pulse inputs in the Colorado River. Helium mass-balance models match observed longitudinal patterns with the exception of sharp initial increases in helium observed in the rivers. Increased longitudinal groundwater discharge rates correspond to mapped geologic structures in both watersheds that likely transport deep geothermal water. Models show variable sensitivity to spatial assignment of input variables representing the groundwater source, illustrating the importance of collecting data from discrete groundwater discharges where possible. The methodology shows promise for field experiments designed to assess air–water exchange rates and to quantify total groundwater discharge from a combination of discrete and diffuse sources.

Colorado, Utah↗
USGS2024

U.S. Geological Survey Earthquake Hazards Program decadal science strategy, 2024–33

Executive Summary Earthquakes represent one of our Nation’s most significant and costly natural hazards, with estimated annual loses from earthquakes close to $15 billion in 2023. Over the past two centuries, 37 U.S. States have experienced an earthquake exceeding a magnitude of 5, and 50 percent of States have a significant potential for future damaging shaking; these statistics speak to the need for nationwide interest and investment in earthquake hazard characterization and risk reduction. Authorized under the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Authorization Act, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Earthquake Hazards Program (EHP) provides the scientific information, situational awareness, and knowledge necessary to reduce deaths, injuries, and economic losses from earthquakes and earthquake-induced tsunamis, landslides, and soil liquefaction. The EHP supports activities in three focused topical areas: (1) earthquake monitoring, (2) hazard assessment, and (3) applied research, using the results of each—and the coordination among them—to further support risk translation and communication in regions at risk nationwide. For earthquake monitoring, the Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS), a cooperative effort of USGS networks, university partner regional seismic networks, and real-time geodetic networks, collects and analyzes data on earthquakes; issues timely, reliable notifications of their occurrence and impacts; and provides data for earthquake research, hazard, and risk assessment as a foundation for building an earthquake-resilient Nation. The USGS-operated ShakeAlert Earthquake Early Warning system is a recent addition to EHP’s ANSS infrastructure. In the realm of earthquake hazard assessment, the EHP contributes to earthquake risk mitigation strategies by developing the National Seismic Hazard Model and maps, and other related products, that describe the likelihood and potential effects of earthquakes nationwide, especially in the urban areas of highest risk. The EHP also conducts research on the causes, characteristics, and effects of earthquakes and prioritizes work that directly increases the accuracy and precision of earthquake hazards assessments, earthquake forecasts, and earthquake monitoring and situational-awareness products and that supports the Nation’s earthquake mitigation practices. Bridging the EHP’s efforts across research, hazard assessments, and earthquake monitoring is a broad and comprehensive collection of earthquake information products, including the National Seismic Hazard Model, ShakeAlert, and other products describing impact, such as ShakeMap and PAGER (Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquakes for Response), which have been developed and integrated into EHP’s real-time monitoring systems. EHP funds external partners to carry out many important collaborative activities through an active external grants program—one of the largest in the USGS—and through cooperative agreements with other partners such as the university-operated regional seismic networks, funded as part of the ANSS. To continue its support of earthquake hazard characterization and risk reduction, the EHP aims to strengthen its foundational products and practices while positioning itself to respond to the evolving needs of the Nation and follow best practices of the scientific community. This document describes a strategy for the program to ensure it can meet these demands. The foundational priorities outlined in this strategy represent those activities that remain critical to the core functionality of the program and those that can be supported under current fiscal year 2024-level appropriations. Priorities described as aspirational are important for future growth, and to maintain the program’s position as a leading global resource in earthquake science, but would require increases in appropriated funding to be fully realized. Across the program’s portfolio of activities, several major themes have been identified as the most critical activities to advance EHP science over the coming decade. Together, these activities provide the framework necessary to integrate critical hazard characterization and risk reduction activities across the program. They provide the structure for research to advance the understanding of where, when, and why earthquakes occur and how we can use improved knowledge to drive short-term and actionable forecasts of seismic activity. They expand the usefulness of critical earthquake products and advance the sophistication of those products to keep pace with the rapidly evolving needs of an ever-expanding user base while maintaining the position of the USGS as a global leader in earthquake science. Focus on system-level science. Establish an automated earthquake-processing pipeline. Enhance the accuracy and reliability of the ShakeAlert Earthquake Early Warning system and plan for extension to other regions. Implement time-dependent earthquake forecasting. Develop physically realistic models. Expand computational capacity. This science strategy is organized into three primary sections. The first section provides an overview of the EHP and its budget, governance, and program council. Readers familiar with the program may wish to focus on the second section, which describes the core of the science strategy, including priorities across each of the EHP’s major program activities in monitoring, hazard assessment, and targeted research. The third section outlines science priorities that cut across program activities, including those involving collaborations external to the EHP.

American Samoa, Guam, Northern Marianas Islands, U↗
USGS2026

New measurements indicate that natural geologic methane emissions from microseepage in the Michigan Basin are likely negligible

The magnitude of natural geologic methane (CH 4 ) emissions to the atmosphere (including emissions of fossil CH 4 from offshore and onshore gas and oil seeps, diffuse microseepage, mud volcanoes, volcanic vents, and geothermal areas) is highly uncertain. The largest component of geologic emissions is thought to be microseepage, which is the diffuse flux of CH 4 from soils across large areas of productive hydrocarbon basins. The accuracy of existing bottom-up estimates of microseepage is limited by low spatial coverage of published microseepage measurements. We present the first soil—atmosphere CH 4 flux measurements from Michigan Basin, USA. Results from 335 measurements taken during summer and winter seasons across a large portion of the basin suggest microseepage is nonexistent in the sampled region. Even areas with predictive features for microseepage (e.g., underlying mature, organically rich source rocks, proven gas accumulations, faults, and lineaments) yield null or negative fluxes, suggesting that CH 4 emissions from microseepage are negligible throughout our study region. A Monte Carlo method was used to place an upper limit on the regional-mean microseepage flux, in which synthetic patchy microseepage distributions were generated and tested against our observations to assess the impact of possible emission hot spots that were missed by our sampling strategy. Our analysis finds it is very unlikely that regional-mean emissions are as high as assumed in a previous global microseepage study. The observed lack of seepage may be explained by groundwater flow, active methanotrophy, glacial sediments, and bedded salt deposits, which could inhibit vertical gas migration and release to atmosphere.

Michigan↗
USGS2024

Dissolved arsenic concentrations in surface waters within the upper portions of the Klamath River Basin, Oregon and California

Arsenic toxicity is an environmental health problem. Levels of arsenic in surface waters at some locations in the Klamath River Basin in southern Oregon and northern California can exceed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standard for drinking water. There are both anthropogenic and natural sources of arsenic. The Klamath River Basin consists primarily of volcanic deposits and contains an underground geothermal system with hot springs and warm water wells, all known natural sources of arsenic. Anthropogenic sources of arsenic are related to the agricultural use of herbicides, fungicides, and insecticides. Surface water arsenic levels can also be affected by fertilizer amendments, evaporative concentration, oxygen-level depletion, and various geochemical transformations that can increase arsenic mobilization. In this study by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Bureau of Reclamation, dissolved concentrations of arsenic, copper, and lead were measured in surface waters at 39 unique sites within the upper portions of the Klamath River Basin between 2018 and 2022. In every year, except 2022, sites were sampled four times between April and November. Surface-water arsenic concentrations varied up to four-orders of magnitude among sites. Median arsenic concentration was lowest at Cherry Creek (0.03 micrograms per liter [μg/L]) and highest at Wood Kimball Spring (36.7 μg/L), two sites located north of Upper Klamath Lake. The highest arsenic concentrations (17.4±4.9 μg/L, n =3) were found in drain sites (defined here as a waterbody returning used irrigation water) while the lowest arsenic concentrations were found in an artesian well (0.8 μg/L, n =1). The elevated arsenic concentrations of the drain sites suggest that arsenic might be concentrated or mobilized by agricultural activities, water re-use practices, and (or) by geochemical processes occurring around water stored in drains (that is, in the water column and across sediment water boundaries). A source of arsenic in drain water in the Klamath Strait Drain area includes water used for irrigation originating from Ady Canal. Other potential sources include groundwater, geothermal water, and local soils and sediments. Seasonal differences in surface-water arsenic concentrations were detected at 13 sites, 10 of which had higher arsenic concentrations in summer than in either spring or fall. The sites sampled around Upper Klamath Lake, the impounded rivers, one of the two canal sites, and 5 of the 14 river sites had higher surface-water arsenic concentrations in the summer than in either spring or fall. Surface-water arsenic concentrations from groundwater sources (that is, springs and in the artesian well) did not vary significantly among seasons (p-values greater than 0.1). Median surface-water concentrations of copper and lead ranged from 0.03 to 3.7 μg/L, and from 0.013 to 0.175 μg/L ( n =2–18), respectively. Dissolved concentrations of both metals were below acute toxicity endpoints reported by the EPA for freshwater animals. Surface-water arsenic concentrations varied independently from corresponding changes in surface-water lead or copper concentrations. However, arsenic concentrations measured in bed-sediment samples collected from a subset of sites located north of Upper Klamath Lake correlated strongly and significantly with the corresponding sedimentary lead concentrations ( p =0.015). Aqueous arsenic speciation measured in a subset of sites in 2019 and 2022 showed that all the arsenic existed as arsenic (V), the most oxidized arsenic species, and presumably, the least toxic. The highest proportions of arsenite (As(III)), the presumably most toxic arsenic species, relative to total arsenic concentrations were found at drain sites. Our assessment of dissolved arsenic concentrations in various surface-water bodies in the Upper Klamath River Basin reveals geographical areas of consistently low (below 2.1 μg/L), moderate (below 10 μg/L) and high (above 10 μg/L) surface-water arsenic concentrations. South of Upper Klamath Lake, surface-water arsenic concentrations were consistently higher than 20 μg/L at two drain sites located in an area of predominant agricultural land use with extensive water re-use practices. North of Upper Klamath Lake, surface-water arsenic concentrations greater than 20 μg/L were consistently measured at sites with limited nearby agricultural activities, suggesting a geogenic source. The consistently high arsenic levels from the Wood River at Jackson F. Kimball State Park, Fort Creek, and Crooked Creek, which are sites located at or near headwater spring sources, suggest a natural background source of arsenic. Water flowing downstream from this area could be a potential source of arsenic to Upper Klamath Lake and the Upper Klamath River.

California, Oregon↗
USGS2025

Land cover change within wetland complexes at Dixie Meadows, Churchill County, Nevada: 2015 – 2023

Dixie Meadows, Nevada, is a system of geothermal springs and seeps that feed a complex of marshes and wetland meadows that are located within lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Department of Defense (DOD). A previous U.S. Geological Survey report documented variability in satellite imagery-based land cover classifications for seven wetland complexes at near monthly time intervals between October 2015 and January 2022. This report presents additional data, extending analysis to November 2023. Land cover classifications between October 2015 and November 2023 demonstrated an association between vegetation cover characteristics and surface moisture, with Class 1 having dry, bare soil or sparse upland vegetation, Class 2 having moist, bare soil or sparse to small vegetation, Class 3 having dense green vegetation with potentially saturated soil conditions, Class 4 having a mix of shallow surface water, saturated soil, and dense green vegetation, and Class 5 having open surface water. Most of the wetland complexes occur close to spring outflows primarily within land managed by the DOD, though portions are also within BLM lands. The intervening and surrounding landscape outside of the wetland complexes assessed in this study are managed by the BLM. As a result, Class 1 land covers had the largest areal coverage for BLM managed lands. Classes 2 and 3 land covers were primarily mapped inside the wetland complexes and thus had the largest area coverage within DOD managed lands. Class 4 was almost exclusively mapped within the wetland complexes and thus was largely contained within DOD managed lands. Class 5 (open water) was exclusively mapped in and adjacent to a single wetland complex with catchment ponds on land managed by the BLM. The distribution of these land cover classes over the study period was seasonally and annually variable. Land cover areas of Classes 1 and 2 were larger during the spring months. Conversely, land cover areas of Classes 3 and 4 tended to be greatest during the summer or fall. These patterns might be influenced by differences in seasonal water sources and phenology.

Nevada↗
USGS2025

Pre-eruptive characteristics of “suspect” silicic magmas in Carlin-type Au-forming systems

World-class Carlin-type Au deposits hosted in sedimentary rock were formed when profuse Eocene silicic magmatism swept across northern Nevada in response to arc migration. Carlin-type Au deposits formed along with porphyry/skarn Cu-Mo-W-Au deposits, epithermal Ag-Au deposits, and distal disseminated Ag-Au deposits. But unlike these other Au-bearing deposits that have clear associations with igneous intrusions, Carlin-type ore deposits appear to have formed distant from concealed plutons, and their origin remains controversial. Despite decades of abundant geophysical, geochronological, and geochemical studies suggesting the involvement of magmas, concrete evidence for magmatic involvement is still lacking. Consequently, the involvement of contemporaneous igneous systems remains inferred based on age, proximity, and variable isotopic, geochemical, and geophysical clues. A recent synthesis of deposit models postulates that Carlin-type Au deposits are intrusion-related, but that the causative magmas reside deeper (∼6–12 km) than in typical porphyry and peripheral systems (∼3–5 km), meaning that Carlin-type deposits are perhaps more distal expressions of igneous intrusions. We investigate a collection of “suspect” magmatic systems over a ∼7 m.y. timespan (∼41–34 Ma) that are contemporaneous with and near known Carlin-type ore deposits. We report results of a multifaceted array of in situ geochemical analyses (FTIR, EMP, SHRIMP-RG, LA-ICP-MS) of quartz-hosted melt inclusions, biotite, and quartz to better characterize the pre-eruptive characteristics of these magmas. We also report results of thermobarometry and thermodynamic phase equilibria modeling to help place constraints on magmatic reservoir depths and processes. Rather than a single “flavor” of silicic magma, we observe a surprisingly broad compositional spectrum of rhyolites, with one end of the spectrum exhibiting more arc-like (I-type) characteristics and the other end displaying more post-subduction, thick-crust extensional (A-type) characteristics. This broad compositional spectrum suggests a more complex picture of silicic crustal magmatism operating over a narrow span of time during slab rollback. Despite this spectrum, magmatic systems in this study are consistently ferroan and generally peraluminous, which we interpret as an expression of the relatively elevated geotherm at the time and incorporation of variable amounts of highly peraluminous metasedimentary crustal components. The silicic magma spectrum encompasses a range of mineralization associations, including subduction-related Cu-Mo-W-Au-Ag and post-subduction, thick-crust extensional rare-metal Mo-Sn-W-F-Be-Ag-Au, consistent with the prolific and diverse array of ore deposits that formed during this time. Carlin-type Au deposition appears to be associated with nearly the entire magmatic spectrum. This apparent indifference to silicic magma “flavor” would seem to imply that if magmas are involved in Carlin-type Au deposit genesis, they perhaps do not need to be compositionally specialized and/or possibly are only relevant as heat sources driving circulation to remobilize and redistribute metals.

Nevada↗
USGS1976

Helium detection as a guide for uranium exploration

Helium, a byproduct of radioactive decay, may prove to be a valuable indicator of the presence and distribution of uranium deposits. Recent technological advances permit the development of instrumentation not previously adapted for this purpose. Commercially available equipment can provide high sensitivity at low cost and allow reasonable mobility for field use. A truck-mounted mass-spectrometer, tuned for helium-4, permits immediate adjustment or modification of sampling patterns in response to accumulating data. The inlet system of the spectrometer has been designed to allow flexibility in gas analyses from various sample types--soil gas, atmosphere, or gases in water. Sensitivity of the instrument is better than 50 parts of helium per 10 9 parts of gas. Replicate samples and standards can be analyzed in only 3 minutes. Helium in soil gas is being used for the initial evaluation of the technique. A hollow probe, as much as 2 m long, is driven into the ground; and a 10-cc syringe is used to purge the probe and extract the gas. This sample is then injected into the inlet system and introduced into the spectrometer at constant pressure. The output signal is displayed on a chart recorder. Investigations can be performed on a qualitative, relative basis, or on a quantitative basis by comparison to calibrated helium standards. Preliminary field testing includes studies of the responses to variations in wind speed, temperature, barometric pressure, moisture, and sampling depth over extended time periods, as well as studies of geologic controls on the helium content in soil gas. Surveys over known uranium occurrences reveal some anomalous helium distributions. This report describes an updated technological approach to an old idea: that of using helium, a byproduct of uranium radioactive decay, as an exploration tool for uranium. Helium is the sixth most abundant gas found in the earth's atmosphere (Table 1). It is an inert gas and very mobile, mixing rapidly. When the alpha particles from the radioactive decay of uranium and thorium pick up two electrons, atoms of the isotope helium-4 are formed. Several helium-4 atoms are produced from each decay series of U-238, U-235, and Th-232 (fig. 1). The half-lives of the parent isotopes are5also shown in figure 1. One gram of uranium will produce ~10 5 atoms of helium-4 per second, and one gram of thorium produces ~2.5 x 10 4 atoms of helium-4 per second (fig. 2). Calculations of the helium produced from the crust and mantle reveal that 1,125 x 10 30 atoms per year are produced, but only 7 x 10 30 atoms per year escape from the earth (Damon and Kulp, 1958). More is being produced than is being lost; in fact, the total atmospheric content of helium could be produced in only 2 million years (MacDonald, 1963)! However, all the crustal and mantle helium-4 does not degas into the atmosphere as it is formed. It is trapped in crystal lattices and in pore spaces within the earth. What this means is that there is excess helium-4 in the earth--excess, that is, compared to the atmospheric concentration in equilibrium with the helium-4 escape rate into space and the helium-4 flux from the crust and mantle (Nicolet, 1957). Near-surface pockets of high helium-4 concentrations are known, and some natural gas fields are so enriched that they are the source for commercial production of helium. Work by Roberts and others (1975) has shown high helium concentration in the soil gas associated with geothermal areas; and work by Clark and Kugler (1973), Dyck (1975), and Goldak (1974), for example, has noted high helium concentrations in soils and waters in the vicinity of uranium deposits. These latter studies certainly indicate the potential of helium detection for use as an exploration tool for uranium.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2026

Coastal and Marine Hazards and Resources Program decadal science strategy 2020–2030

Overview The decadal science strategy of the Coastal and Marine Hazards and Resources Program (CMHRP) of the U.S. Geological Survey for 2020 to 2030 describes the CMHRP's vision and mission and the strategic framework needed to support key program goals: Conduct research and develop science-based tools that lead to safer, more productive coastal communities and improved stewardship of natural resources.

Circular↗
USGS2025

Water resources related to breccia pipe uranium mining in the Grand Canyon region

Introduction In the arid Grand Canyon region, water resources are limited to primarily the Colorado River and associated tributaries and to groundwater in the form of seeps and springs. Groundwater resources in the region supply water for human use and support diverse and rich ecosystems in the locations immediately surrounding the seeps and springs. Throughout the region, uranium resources occur and may interact with water resources in both mined and unmined uranium deposits. There is a need to better understand groundwater in the region and the effects from uranium mining in order to better manage the limited water resources in the area. This Fact Sheet summarizes results from U.S. Geological Survey studies that were conducted on this topic from 2012 to 2023.

Arizona↗
USGS2025

U.S. Geological Survey global seabed mineral resources

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) provides science and data on seabed mineral resources and ecosystems, as well as on the potential hazards associated with extraction. The Nation relies on minerals for infrastructure, technology, manufacturing, and energy production. Critical minerals are essential to the economic and national security of the United States and have a supply chain vulnerable to disruption. For decades, USGS scientific innovation has contributed to the delineation of seabed mineral resources, the mechanisms of seabed mineral formation, and the environmental impacts of resource extraction. Since 1962, the USGS has also led scientific inquiries into the potential for deep sea mining. By providing impartial science on seabed minerals and their environmental setting in the deep oceans, the USGS enables decision-makers to evaluate the best practices for mineral resource development.

Fact Sheet↗