USGS Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · b1082E

Strategic graphite, a survey

Eugene N. Cameron·Paul L. Weis
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Strategic graphite consists of certain grades of lump and flake graphite for which the United States is largely or entirely dependent on sources abroad. Lump graphite of high purity, necessary in the manufacture of carbon brushes, is imported from Ceylon, where it occurs in vein deposits. Flake graphite, obtained from deposits consisting of graphite disseminated in schists and other metamorphic rocks, is an essential ingredient of crucibles used in the nonferrous metal industries and in the manufacture of lubricants and packings. High-quality flake graphite for these uses has been obtained mostly from Madagascar since World War I. Some flake graphite of strategic grade has been produced, however, from deposits in Texas, Alabama, and Pennsylvania. The development of the carbon-bonded crucible, which does not require coarse flake, should lessen the competitive advantage of the Madagascar producers of crucible flake. Graphite of various grades has been produced intermittently in the United States since 1644. The principal domestic deposits of flake graphite are in Texas, Alabama, Pennsylvania, and New York. Reserves of flake graphite in these four States are very large, but production has been sporadic and on the whole unprofitable since World War I, owing principally to competition from producers in Madagascar. Deposits in Madagascar are large and relatively high in content of flake graphite. Production costs are low and the flake produced is of high quality. Coarseness of flake and uniformity of the graphite products marketed are cited as major advantages of Madagascar flake. In addition, the usability of Madagascar flake for various purposes has been thoroughly demonstrated, whereas the usability of domestic flake for strategic purposes is still in question. Domestic graphite deposits are of five kinds: deposits consisting of graphite disseminated in metamorphosed siliceous sediments, deposits consisting of graphite disseminated in marble, deposits formed by thermal or dynamothermal metamorphism of coal beds or other highly carbonaceous sediments, vein deposits, and contact metasomatic deposits in marble. Only the first kind comprises deposits sufficiently large and rich in flake graphite to be significant potential sources of strategic grades of graphite. Vein deposits in several localities are known, but none is known to contain substantial reserves of graphite of strategic quality. Large resources of flake graphite exist in central Texas, in northeastern Alabama, in eastern Pennsylvania, and in the eastern Adirondack Mountains of New York. Tonnages available, compared with the tonnages of flake graphite consumed annually in the United States, are very large. There have been indications that flake graphite from Texas, Alabama, and Pennsylvania can be used in clay-graphite crucibles as a substitute for Madagascar flake, and one producer has made progress in establishing markets for his flake products as ingredients of lubricants. The tonnages of various commercial grades of graphite recoverable from various domestic deposits, however, have not been established; hence, the adequacy of domestic resources of graphite in a time of emergency is not known. The only vein deposits from which significant quantities of lump graphite have been produced are those of the Crystal Graphite mine, Beaverhead County, Mont. The deposits are fracture fillings in Precambrian gneiss and pegmatite. Known reserves in the deposits are small. In Texas, numerous flake-graphite deposits occur in the Precambrian Packsaddle schist in Llano and Burnet Counties. Graphite disseminated in certain parts of this formation ranges from extremely fine to medium grained. The principal producer has been the mine of the Southwestern Graphite Co., west of the town of Burnet. Substantial reserves of medium-grained graphite are present in the deposit mined by the company. In northeastern Alabama, flake-graphite deposits occur in the Ashland mica schist in two belts that trend northeastward across Clay, Goosa, and Chilton Counties. The northeastern belt has been the most productive. About 40 mines have been operated at one time or another, but only a few have been active during or since World War I. The deposits consist of flake graphite disseminated in certain zones or "leads" consisting of quartz-mica-feldspar schists and mica quartzite. Most of past production has come from the weathered upper parts of the deposits, but unweathered rock has been mined at several localities. Reserves of weathered rock containing 3 to 5 percent graphite are very large, and reserves of unweathered rock are even greater. Flake graphite deposits in Chester County, Pa., have been worked intermittently since about 1890. The deposits consist of medium- to coarse-grained graphite disseminated in certain belts of the Pickering gneiss. The most promising deposit is one worked in the Benjamin Franklin and the Eynon Just mines. Reserves of weathered rock containing 1.5 percent graphite are of moderate size; reserves of unweathered rock are large. In the eastern Adirondack Mountains in New York there are two principal kinds of flake-graphite deposits: contact-metasomatic deposits and those consisting of flake graphite disseminated in quartz schist. The contact-metasomatic deposits are small, irregular, and very erratic in graphite content. The deposits in quartz schist are very large, persistent, and uniform in grade. There are large reserves of schist containing 3 to 5 percent graphite, but the graphite is relatively fine grained.

Explore related subjects

BulletinReport

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Eugene N. Cameron, Paul L. Weis. 1960. Strategic graphite, a survey. https://doi.org/10.3133/b1082e

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2017

Groundwater flow model for the Little Plover River basin in Wisconsin’s Central Sands

The Little Plover River is a groundwater-fed stream in the sand plains region of central Wisconsin. In this region, sandy sediment deposited during or soon after the last glaciation forms an important unconfined sand and gravel aquifer. This aquifer supplies water for numerous high-capacity irrigation, municipal, and industrial wells that support a thriving agricultural industry. In recent years the addition of many new wells, combined with observed diminished flows in the Little Plover and other nearby rivers, has raised concerns about the impacts of the wells on groundwater levels and on water levels and flows in nearby lakes, streams, and wetlands. Diverse stakeholder groups, including well operators, Growers, environmentalists, local land owners, and regulatory and government officials have sought a better understanding of the local groundwater-surface water system and have a shared desire to balance the water needs of the he liagricultural, industrial, and urban users with the maintenance and protection of groundwater-dependent natural resources. To help address these issues, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources requested that the Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey and U.S. Geological Survey cooperatively develop a groundwater flow model that could be used to demonstrate the relationships among groundwater, surface water, and well withdrawals and also be a tool for testing and evaluating alternative water management strategies for the central sands region. Because of an abundance of previous studies, data availability, local interest, and existing regulatory constraints the model focuses on the Little Plover River watershed, but the modeling methodology developed during this study can apply to much of the larger central sands of Wisconsin. The Little Plover River groundwater flow model simulates three-dimensional groundwater movement in and around the Little Plover River basin under steady-state and transient conditions. This model explicitly includes all high-capacity wells in the model domain and simulates seasonal variations in recharge and well pumping. The model represents the Little Plover River, and other significant streams and drainage ditches in the model domain, as fully connected to the groundwater system, computes stream base flow resulting from groundwater discharge, and routes the flow along the stream channel. A separate soil-water-balance (SWB) model was used to develop groundwater recharge arrays as input for the groundwater flow model. The SWB model uses topography, soils, land use, and climatic data to estimate recharge as deep drainage from the soil zone. The SWB model explicitly includes recharge originating as irrigation water, and computes irrigation using techniques similar to those used by local irrigation operators. The groundwater flow model uses the U.S. Geological Survey’s MODFLOW modeling code which is freely available, widely accepted, and commonly used by the groundwater community. The groundwater flow model and the SWB model use identical high-resolution numerical grids having model cells 100 feet on a side, with physical properties assigned to each grid cell. This grid allows accurate geographic placement of wells, streams, and other model features. The 3-dimensional grid has three layers; layers 1 and 2 represent the sand and gravel aquifer and layer 3 represents the underlying sandstone. The distribution of material properties in the model (hydraulic conductivity, aquifer thickness, etc.) comes from previous published geologic studies of the region, updated by calibration to recent streamflow and groundwater level data. The SWB model operates on a daily time step. The groundwater flow model was calibrated to monthly stress periods with time steps ranging from 1 to 16 days. More detailed time discretization is possible. The groundwater model was calibrated to water-level and streamflow data collected during 2013 and 2014 by adjusting model parameters (primarily hydraulic conductivity, storage, and recharge) until the model produced a conditionally optimal fit between field observations and model output, subject to consistency with previously published geologic studies. Calibration was performed under both steady and transient conditions, and used a sophisticated parameter-estimation procedure (PEST) for the calibration process and to identify important model parameters. For the Little Plover River, the two most important parameters are the global recharge multiplier and the hydraulic conductivity of the stream bed. The calibrated model produces water-level and mass-balance results that are consistent with field observations and previous studies of the area. The completed model is a powerful tool for testing and demonstrating alternative water-management scenarios. Example model applications described in this report include simulating how the cumulative impacts of pumping and land-use change have affected average baseflow in the Little Plover River. Depletion-potential mapping represents a method for predicting which wells and well locations have the greatest impact on nearby surface-water resources. The completed model is publicly available, along with a companion user’s guide to assist with its operation, at http://wgnhs.org/littleplover- river-groundwater-model.

Wisconsin↗
USGS2016

The 2016 groundwater flow model for Dane County, Wisconsin

A new groundwater flow model for Dane County, Wisconsin, replaces an earlier model developed in the 1990s by the Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey (WGNHS) and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This modeling study was conducted cooperatively by the WGNHS and the USGS with funding from the Capital Area Regional Planning Commission (CARPC). Although the overall conceptual model of the groundwater system remains largely unchanged, the incorporation of newly acquired high-quality datasets, recent research findings, and improved modeling and calibration techniques have led to the development of a more detailed and sophisticated model representation of the groundwater system. The new model is three-dimensional and transient, and conceptualizes the county’s hydrogeology as a 12-layer system including all major unlithified and bedrock hydrostratigraphic units and two high-conductivity horizontal fracture zones. Beginning from the surface down, the model represents the unlithified deposits as two distinct model layers (1 and 2). A single layer (3) simulates the Ordovician sandstone and dolomite of the Sinnipee, Ancell, and Prairie du Chien Groups. Sandstone of the Jordan Formation (layer 4) and silty dolostone of the St. Lawrence Formation (layer 5) each comprise separate model layers. The underlying glauconitic sandstone of the Tunnel City Group makes up three distinct layers: an upper aquifer (layer 6), a fracture feature (layer 7), and a lower aquifer (layer 8). The fracture layer represents a network of horizontal bedding-plane fractures that serve as a preferential pathway for groundwater flow. The model simulates the sandstone of the Wonewoc Formation as an upper aquifer (layer 9) with a bedding-plane fracture feature (layer 10) at its base. The Eau Claire aquitard (layer 11) includes shale beds within the upper portion of the Eau Claire Formation. This layer, along with overlying bedrock units, is mostly absent in the preglacially eroded valleys along the Yahara River valley and in northeastern Dane County. Layer 12 represents the Mount Simon sandstone as the lowermost model layer. It directly overlies the Precambrian crystalline basement rock, whose top surface forms the lower boundary of the model. The model uses the USGS MODFLOW-NWT finite-difference code, a standalone version of MODFLOW-2005 that incorporates the Newton (NWT) solver. MODFLOW-NWT improves the handling of unconfined conditions by smoothing the transition from wet to dry cells. The model explicitly simulates groundwater–surface-water interaction with streamflow routing and lake-level fluctuation. Model input included published and unpublished hydrogeologic data from recent estimates of aquifer hydraulic conductivities. A spatial groundwater recharge distribution was obtained from a recent GIS-based, soil-water-balance model for Dane County. Groundwater withdrawals from pumping were simulated for 572 wells across the entire model domain, which includes Dane County and portions of seven neighboring counties—Columbia, Dodge, Green, Iowa, Jefferson, Lafayette, and Rock. These wells withdrew an average of 60 million gallons per day (mgd) over the 5-year period from 2006 through 2010. Within Dane County, 385 wells were simulated with an average withdrawal rate of 52 mgd. Model calibration used the parameter estimation code PEST, and calibration targets included heads, stream and spring flows, lake levels, and borehole flows. Steady-state calibration focused on the period 2006 through 2010; the transient calibration focused on the 7-week drought period from late May through July 2012. This model represents a significant step forward from previous work because of its finer grid resolution, improved hydrostratigraphic discretization, transient capabilities, and more sophisticated representation of surface-water features and multi-aquifer wells. Potential applications of the model include evaluation of potential sites for and impacts of new high-capacity wells, development of wellhead protection plans, evaluating the effects of changing land use and climate on groundwater, and quantifying the relationships between groundwater and surface water.

Wisconsin↗
USGS2015

Geologic framework of the Alaska Peninsula, southwest Alaska, and the Alaska Peninsula terrane

The Alaska Peninsula is composed of the late Paleozoic to Quaternary sedimentary, igneous, and minor metamorphic rocks that record the history of a number of magmatic arcs. These magmatic arcs include an unnamed Late Triassic(?) and Early Jurassic island arc, the early Cenozoic Meshik arc, and the late Cenozoic Aleutian arc. Also found on the Alaska Peninsula is one of the most complete nonmetamorphosed, fossiliferous, marine Jurassic sedimentary sections known. As much as 8,500 m of section of Mesozoic sedimentary rocks record the growth and erosion of the Early Jurassic island arc. A thinner, but still thick (as much as 5,400 m), sequence of Tertiary sedimentary rocks that are predominantly continental overlies the Mesozoic section. A brief regression in early Tertiary time on the Alaska Peninsula and granodiorite plutonism in the Shumagin, Semidi, and Sanak Islands was followed by deposition of fluvial and minor marine clastic strata. This was followed by deposition of transgressive marine clastic strata and initiation of the Meshik arc, shown by an areally extensive outpouring of volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks and debris between late Eocene and earliest Miocene time. Late Miocene time was marked by another brief transgression and northwest- to southeast-directed compression, followed by renewed volcanism and plutonism which initiated the modern Aleutian magmatic arc. Extensive glacial and glaciomarine deposits of late Pleistocene age create an extensive lowland physiographic province on the northwest side of the Alaska Peninsula and join isolated mountain masses to the Alaska Peninsula on the southwest. Multiple active volcanoes and volcanic peaks dominate the skyline of the Alaska Peninsula and represent the continuation of magmatic activity that has formed the Aleutian arc since late Miocene time. The Alaska Peninsula has had a long and involved history since Paleozoic time. We propose that the Paleozoic and Mesozoic rocks that constitute much of the Alaska Peninsula be called the Alaska Peninsula terrane. Using the concept of subterranes, we divide the terrane into two distinct but tectonically related subterranes: the Chignik and Iliamna subterranes, which share a limited common geologic history. The Iliamna subterrane has served at most times as a source area for the Chignik subterrane; however, some rock units are in common across the subterranes. The Iliamna and Chignik subterranes are in part separated by the Bruin Bay fault system. The Iliamna subterrane is composed of moderately deformed early Mesozoic marine sedimentary and volcanic rocks and schist, gneiss, and marble of Paleozoic(?) and Mesozoic age, and plutonic rocks of the Alaska-Aleutian Range batholith. Characteristic of the Chignik subterrane are little-deformed, shallow-marine to continental clastic sedimentary rocks ranging in age from Permian to latest Cretaceous. However, deep-marine, volcaniclastic, and calcareous rocks form important components of the older rocks in the subterrane. The two subterranes of the Alaska Peninsula terrane are characterized by radically different structural and metamorphic styles. The nonplutonic rocks of the Iliamna subterrane are characterized by metamorphism up to amphibolite-facies grade and intense folding. In the Chignik subterrane, the structural style is dominated by large, open, en echelon anticlinal structures, normal faulting, and thrust and high-angle reverse faults that have minor displacement in a northwest to southeast direction. In the Outer Shumagin and Sanak Islands, rocks assigned to the Chugach terrane are characterized structurally by tight, generally northeast-trending folds. Dips in these rocks tend to be steep, rarely less than 35°, and overturned beds are locally common. The boundaries separating the Alaska Peninsula terrane from other terranes are commonly indistinct or poorly defined. A few boundaries have been defined at major faults, although the extensions of these faults are speculative through some areas. The west side of the Alaska Peninsula terrane is overlapped by Tertiary sedimentary and volcanic rocks and Quaternary deposits.

Alaska↗