USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Mineral Commodity Summaries”

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.

234 records · Page 3Linked to original sources
USGS2025

A crosswalk of the 2015 World Terrestrial Ecosystems to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature Global Ecosystem Typology Framework

To support ecosystem mapping and accounting applications, we aligned the 2015 U.S. Geological Survey/Esri/The Nature Conservancy-World Terrestrial Ecosystems (WTEs) with the International Union for Conservation of Nature Global Ecosystem Typology (GET) framework. This process, known as “crosswalking,” enabled the development of a global map of GET level 3 Ecosystem Functional Groups (EFGs) at a 250-meter spatial resolution. Crosswalking involved manually assigning 1,781 biogeographically stratified WTEs to their most probable EFG based on similarities in climate, terrain, vegetation, and geographic distribution. We compared attributes of the WTE dataset with summary characteristics of the EFGs. The resulting crosswalked global map of International Union for Conservation of Nature GET ecosystems is intended to be useful for standardizing ecosystem classification and reporting under frameworks such as the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework and the United Nations System of Environmental-Economic Accounting. We discuss key challenges in reconciling non-identical classifications, such as many-to-one relationships and variation in data quality.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2025

Evaluation of daily stream temperature predictions (1979-2021) across the contiguous United States using a spatiotemporal aware machine learning algorithm

Stream temperature controls a variety of physical and biological processes that affect ecosystems, human health, and economic activities. We used 42 years (1979–2021) of data to predict daily summary statistics of stream temperature across >50,000 stream reaches in the contiguous United States using a recurrent graph convolution network. We comprehensively documented the performance – both across all reaches and by stream type (e.g., reservoir or groundwater influence) – as a baseline for future improvement. The model showed reach-level RMSE of <2 °C with 90 % prediction intervals that contain 90.7 % of observations. We also assessed how the model captured variability in ecologically relevant metrics (e.g., R 2 for annual 7-day maximum = 0.76; R 2 for days exceeding 25 °C = 0.75). This model does not outperform state-of-the-art machine learning efforts (e.g., RMSE ≤1.5 °C) due to a limited input set but does provide the most spatially complete modeling to date to support water availability assessments.

contiguous United States↗
USGS2026

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

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

Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah↗
USGS2025

Pathways for potential exposure to onshore oil and gas wastewater: What we need to know to protect human health

Produced water is a chemically complex waste stream generated during oil and gas development. Roughly four trillion liters were generated onshore in the United States in 2021 (ALL Consulting, 2022, https://www.gwpc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/2021_Produced_Water_Volumes.pdf ). Efforts are underway to expand historic uses of produced water to offset freshwater needs in water-stressed regions, avoid induced seismic activity associated with its disposal, and extract commodities. Understanding the potential exposures from current and proposed produced water uses and management practices can help to inform health-protective practices. This review summarizes what is known about potential human exposure to produced water from onshore oil and gas development in the United States. We synthesize 236 publications to create a conceptual model of potential human exposure that illustrates the current state of scientific inquiry and knowledge. Exposure to produced water can occur following its release to the environment through spills or leaks during its handling and management. Exposure can also arise from authorized releases, including permitted discharges to surface water, crop irrigation, and road treatment. Knowledge gaps include understanding the variable composition and toxicity of produced water released to the environment, the performance of treatment methods, migration pathways through the environment that can result in human exposure, and the significance of the exposures for human and ecosystem health. Reducing these uncertainties may help in realizing the benefits of produced water use while simultaneously protecting human health.

Environmental Health Perspectives↗
USGS2025

System characterization report on the Environmental Mapping and Analysis Program (EnMAP)

This report addresses system characterization of the Environmental Mapping and Analysis Program hyperspectral sensor by the DLR (German Aerospace Center, ground segment project management), GFZ (Deutsches Geoforschungszentrum, science lead) and is part of a series of system characterization reports produced and delivered by the U.S. Geological Survey Earth Resources Observation and Science Cal/Val Center of Excellence. These reports present and detail the methodology and procedures for characterization; present technical and operational information about the EnMAP hyperspectral sensor; and provide a summary of test measurements, data retention practices, data analysis results, and conclusions. The Earth Resources Observation and Science Cal/Val Center of Excellence system characterization team completed data analyses to characterize the geometric (interior and exterior), and radiometric performances of the EnMAP hyperspectral sensor. Results of these analyses indicate that the Environmental Mapping and Analysis Program has a band-to-band geometric performance in the range of −0.135 to 0.15 pixel, geometric performance relative to the Operational Land Imager in the range of −27.716 meters (−0.92 pixel) to 32.892 meters (1.09 pixels) offset in comparison to Landsat 8 Operational Land Imager, offset of a radiometric comparison in the range of −0.012 to 0.020, slope of a radiometric comparison in the range of 0.947 to 1.031.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2025

Did they feel it? Legacy maroseismic data illuminates an engimatic 20th century earthquake

The challenges and the importance of preserving legacy instrumental records of earthquakes are now well-recognized (e.g., Richards & Hellweg, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1785/0220200053 ). Seismologists may not be aware of parallel challenges and opportunities with legacy macroseismic data for earthquakes in the United States. For much of the 20th century, macroseismic data were collected by a series of U.S. government agencies using a standard questionnaire distributed on postcards. Published summaries of postcards provide macroseismic data akin to modern Did You Feel It? questionnaire responses. In this paper we focus on the M 6.5 Fickle Hill, California earthquake, on 21 December 1954 (Hellweg et al., 2025) as a proof-of-concept, illustrating the potential of what we dub Did They Feel It? (DTFI) data to improve our understanding of significant 20th century U.S. earthquakes for which instrumental data are sparse. Legacy macroseismic data interpreted following modern conventions can potentially constrain traditional ShakeMaps at a level of detail and accuracy that in some respects rival maps for modern earthquakes. The updated ShakeMap for the 1954 Fickle Hill earthquake, also drawing from recently published media and first-person accounts, supports the location, depth, and stress drop value estimated from available instrumental data (Hellweg et al., 2025).

California↗
USGS2026

USGS Geochron—A database of geochronological and thermochronological dates and data—Technical documentation

Geochronological and thermochronological data are essential for constraining the timing and rates of geological processes, supporting geologic mapping, natural hazard assessment, and resource exploration. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Geochron Database is a centralized, relational database that integrates USGS and State geological survey data in accordance with the National Geologic Mapping Act of 1992 and its reauthorizations. This report documents the structure and development of the database, including its standardized schema, controlled vocabularies, and protocols for compiling legacy and newly published data. The database is designed to adhere to FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) data principles and currently (2026) includes data from a wide range of geochronological and thermochronological methods. Public access is provided through the USGS Geochron Database Explorer, a browser-based geographic information system (GIS) interface, and through versioned data releases available on ScienceBase, which provide sample-level summary data and detailed analytical information. The USGS Geochron Database is structured to be extensible, supporting the inclusion of additional methods and data types as they are compiled. This format ensures long-term utility and aligns with the Mapping Act’s directive to create a national archive of geochronological information that adds interpretive value to geologic map data. Its design reflects a commitment to data transparency, scientific reproducibility, and national geoscience priorities.

Data Report↗
USGS2026

Continental-scale prediction of hydrologic signatures and processes

Understanding how dominant hydrologic processes and their drivers vary across diverse continental-scale landscapes is critical for hydrologic modeling and water management applications. Our research addresses this question by synthesizing large-sample watershed datasets, Caravan and GAGES-II, and developing random forest models to identify patterns in hydrologic function. We assessed dominant processes by examining hydrologic signatures – summary indicators of watershed function derived from hydroclimatic time series and random forest models across 14 146 gauged United States watersheds. The results reveal clear continental-scale gradients in hydrologic processes, including baseflow, overland flow, storage, and water balance losses. Our map of dominant processes highlights, for example, the transition from baseflow to fast responses and back to baseflow along the elevation gradient from the Appalachian spine, through the Piedmont, to the Eastern Coastal Plain; a distinct outer ring around the Great Lakes region; and sharp contrasts between coastal and inland processes in the West. Variable importance analysis from random forest models show that processes in the western U.S. are primarily controlled by climate, whereas in the eastern U.S., soil, geology, and topography play larger roles, with distinct human influences apparent in urban areas. Our approach of estimating dominant processes and their drivers facilitates extending process knowledge from research watersheds to the continental scale, assessing current hydrological understanding, and evaluating hydrological model structures.

conterminous United States↗
USGS2025

U.S. Geological Survey Integrated Water Availability Assessment—2010–20

This professional paper is a multichapter report that assesses water availability in the United States for water years 2010–20. This work was conducted as part of the fulfillment of the mandates of Subtitle F of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-11), also known as the SECURE Water Act. As such, this work examines the spatial and temporal distribution of water quantity and quality in surface water and groundwater, as related to human and ecosystem needs and as affected by human and natural influences. Chapter A introduces the National Integrated Water Availability Assessment and provides important background and definitions for how the report characterizes water availability and its components. Chapter A also presents the key findings of Chapters B–F and thus acts as a summary of the entire report. Chapter B is a national assessment of water supply, which is the quantity of water supplied through climatic inputs. Chapter C is a national assessment of water quality, which is the chemical and physical characteristics of water. Chapter D assesses water use including withdrawals and consumptive use in the conterminous United States. Chapter E presents an analysis of factors affecting future water availability under changing climate conditions. The National Integrated Water Availability Assessment culminates with Chapter F, which is an integrated assessment of water availability that considers the amount and quality of water coupled with the suitability of that water for specific uses. Together, these six chapters constitute the National Integrated Water Availability Assessment for water years 2010–20.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2025

Critical minerals in orogenic (gold) and Coeur d’Alene-type mineral systems of the United States

Orogenic and Coeur d’Alene-type mineral systems are produced by metamorphic devolatilization of thick volcanic or siliciclastic sedimentary rock sequences and the focused flow of hydrothermal fluids upwards along crustal-scale faults. Most orogenic systems are found along the Cordilleran orogen, stretching from California northwards into Alaska, whereas most Coeur d’Alene-type systems occur in the Proterozoic Belt Basin in Idaho and Montana. Although the deposit types in these systems are exploited for precious and base metals, potential exists for the production of critical minerals necessary for current (2025) societal needs in the United States. Publicly available geochemical data compiled for these mineral systems, coupled with mineralogical characteristics, indicate that several critical minerals could potentially be recovered from unmined resources and processed mine waste: arsenic, antimony, tellurium, cobalt, and tungsten from orogenic gold deposits and zinc, antimony, arsenic, and manganese from Coeur d’Alene-type systems. These critical minerals reside primarily in arsenopyrite (arsenic), scheelite (tungsten), siderite (manganese), sphalerite (zinc), tetrahedrite (antimony and arsenic), stibnite (antimony), and telluride (tellurium) minerals.

continental United States↗
USGS2026

Critical minerals memory match game

An educational information packet about the 2025 List of Critical Minerals, which includes a memory match game about select critical minerals and how they are used.

General Information Product↗
USGS2026

Key minerals in energy transmission

The electrical grid relies on minerals with unique properties to transform, transmit, and convert electricity. Transmission needs are growing—to support the expansion of data centers and link diverse energy resources into the grid. This expansion will require greater quantities of minerals. Although some minerals are produced in the United States, the United States relies on imports for others. This infographic shows the key minerals that support energy transmission, and how reliant the United States is on imports for these minerals.

General Information Product↗
USGS2026

The mineral chemistry networks of tin and tungsten reflect metallogenic eras of the Mesozoic

Continental remobilization is a crucial driver of metallogenesis and the formation of ore deposits. Some of the world’s largest mineral deposits of the economically valuable elements tin (Sn), tungsten (W), gold (Au), copper (Cu), lead (Pb), and zinc (Zn) formed during the Mesozoic Era. Additionally, the chemistry and distribution of the elements Sn and W have been investigated in previous studies to understand planetary formation and differentiation processes. These two elements are largely co-located during certain South China Mesozoic metallogenic events but are not co-located during other time periods in the same regions. Here, we investigated the mineral chemistry network similarities and dissimilarities of Sn and W to understand their mineral formation and distribution during the Mesozoic Era and throughout Earth history. Mineral chemistry network community detection analysis and electronegativity associations among mineral constituent elements of Sn minerals and W minerals indicate that the elements have similar chemistry among their oxide minerals. However, Sn forms a much wider range of minerals that also contain S compared to W, which occurs in a limited number of S-containing minerals. The divergent constituent element interactions among S-containing Sn minerals and W minerals reflect the redox sensitivity and importance of oxygen (O) fugacity in Sn mineral formation. Conversely, extensive W mineral deposits are known to form at both high and low O fugacities. The similarities and differences between the mineral chemistry networks of Sn and W reflect the mineral distribution of the two elements in the Sn-W mineralization event from 160 to 139 Ma vs. the Sn–uranium (U) mineralization event from 125 to 98 million years ago (Ma). The mineral chemistry and distribution of Mesozoic Sn and W deposits illustrate the contrasting importance of redox and O fugacity on the mineral formation of different elements, and the dynamic crustal evolution that took place during this period of Earth history.

Geosciences↗
USGS2025

Analysis of the potential effects of Uzbekistan’s mineral endowment on the critical mineral supply of tungsten

Tungsten appears on the 2018 and 2022 U.S. Geological Survey critical mineral lists in part because of a very high global production concentration in China, which produces almost 83 percent of the world’s mined tungsten. Using known parameters and values from other tungsten mining operations, we created hypothetical scenarios in which three tungsten deposits in Uzbekistan are considered for development. Our results show that all three deposits are likely to be economically viable to develop under 2024 market conditions. If the three studied tungsten deposits were put into production, Uzbekistan could become the third-leading tungsten-producing country in the world and increase world output of tungsten by 2.7 percent. Putting these tungsten deposits in Uzbekistan into production could slightly reduce the tungsten global market concentration, therefore reducing the supply disruption potential for tungsten.

Open-File Report↗
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↗
USGS2026

The digital archivist: Automating legacy macroseismic data processing using large language models

Macroseismic data are a key resource to investigate shaking and damage from preinstrumental and early instrumental eras. However, data are often stored as inconsistently formatted reports describing observed shaking and damage, making manually parsing and interpreting accounts labor‐intensive. We introduce a novel workflow using Google’s Gemini 2.5 Pro large language model (LLM) to automate the extraction and structuring of macroseismic observations from summary reports. We apply this workflow to the 22 March 1957 M 5.3 Daly City, California, earthquake as a case study. We used Gemini to extract addresses, originally assigned modified Mercalli intensity values, and descriptions from each report. To address coordinate precision limits, addresses were geocoded via Google’s Geocoding application programming interface. This workflow yielded over 2300 geocoded intensity reports for the Daly City earthquake. We use the geocoded accounts, with the original report intensity assignments, to develop a shaking intensity map that in some respects rivals modern Did You Feel It? Maps. We also extract and present data for the 9 February 1971 M L 6.7 Sylmar, California, earthquake. Our results demonstrate the potential of LLMs for reliably extracting and analyzing large, unstructured macroseismic datasets. LLMs offer a scalable solution for rapidly digitizing macroseismic archives, enabling their broader use to constrain ground‐motion models in modern seismic hazard analysis and to improve our understanding of site effects in urban areas. The concepts explored here may also be applied to the handling of other legacy seismological and earth science data.

Seismological Research Letters↗