USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Fuel”

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.

At least 1,063 records · Page 59Linked to original sources
USGS1978

Understanding natural systems; a perspective for land-use planning in Appalachian Kentucky

An eight-county area at the headwaters of the Kentucky River has been designated the Kentucky River Area Development District (KRADD) by the Appalachian Regional Commission. The objective of the project described in this report has been to provide materials to KRADD planners in a format and containing terminology usable by local people untrained in earth science. Experimental maps (not included in this report) have been prepared largely from preexisting data. Time and cost limitations required a regional analysis as well as somewhat more detailed examples of selected localities. Most of the maps produced to meet these needs show the abundance and distribution of naturally occurring materials and the areas affected by various geomorphic processes. Three types of maps, showing current land use, slope, and flood-prone areas, present both basic and derived data directly applicable to specific land-use decisions. Basic map information on quality and quantity of surface and ground water, bedrock and surficial geology, and mineral fuels can be interpreted for a wide variety of current and potential uses. Texts accompanying the maps explain bedrock control of geomorphic processes, distribution and significance of surficial deposits, and hydrologic characteristics of the intricately dissected eastern Kentucky terrain. Within this conceptual framework, geomorphic processes and the landscape may be evaluated in humanly significant terms of low to high potential risk, thereby indicating both opportunities and limitations for land use.

Kentucky↗
USGS1987

Methods for geochemical analysis

The laboratories for analytical chemistry within the Geologic Division of the U.S. Geological Survey are administered by the Office of Mineral Resources. The laboratory analysts provide analytical support to those programs of the Geologic Division that require chemical information and conduct basic research in analytical and geochemical areas vital to the furtherance of Division program goals. Laboratories for research and geochemical analysis are maintained at the three major centers in Reston, Virginia, Denver, Colorado, and Menlo Park, California. The Division has an expertise in a broad spectrum of analytical techniques, and the analytical research is designed to advance the state of the art of existing techniques and to develop new methods of analysis in response to special problems in geochemical analysis. The geochemical research and analytical results are applied to the solution of fundamental geochemical problems relating to the origin of mineral deposits and fossil fuels, as well as to studies relating to the distribution of elements in varied geologic systems, the mechanisms by which they are transported, and their impact on the environment.

Bulletin↗
USGS1994

Airborne remote sensing for geology and the environment; present and future

In 1988, a group of leading experts from government, academia, and industry attended a workshop on airborne remote sensing sponsored by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and hosted by the Branch of Geophysics. The purpose of the workshop was to examine the scientific rationale for airborne remote sensing in support of government earth science in the next decade. This report has arranged the six resulting working-group reports under two main headings: (1) Geologic Remote Sensing, for the reports on geologic mapping, mineral resources, and fossil fuels and geothermal resources; and (2) Environmental Remote Sensing, for the reports on environmental geology, geologic hazards, and water resources. The intent of the workshop was to provide an evaluation of demonstrated capabilities, their direct extensions, and possible future applications, and this was the organizational format used for the geologic remote sensing reports. The working groups in environmental remote sensing chose to present their reports in a somewhat modified version of this format. A final section examines future advances and limitations in the field. There is a large, complex, and often bewildering array of remote sensing data available. Early remote sensing studies were based on data collected from airborne platforms. Much of that technology was later extended to satellites. The original 80-m-resolution Landsat Multispectral Scanner System (MSS) has now been largely superseded by the 30-m-resolution Thematic Mapper (TM) system that has additional spectral channels. The French satellite SPOT provides higher spatial resolution for channels equivalent to MSS. Low-resolution (1 km) data are available from the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration's AVHRR system, which acquires reflectance and day and night thermal data daily. Several experimental satellites have acquired limited data, and there are extensive plans for future satellites including those of Japan (JERS), Europe (ESA), Canada (Radarsat), and the United States (EOS). There are currently two national airborne remote sensing programs (photography, radar) with data archived at the USGS' EROS Data Center. Airborne broadband multispectral data (comparable to Landsat MSS and TM but involving several more channels) for limited geographic areas also are available for digital processing and analysis. Narrow-band imaging spectrometer data are available for some NASA experiment sites and can be acquired for other locations commercially. Remote sensing data and derivative images, because of the uniform spatial coverage, availability at different resolutions, and digital format, are becoming important data sets for geographic information system (GIS) analyses. Examples range from overlaying digitized geologic maps on remote sensing images and draping these over topography, to maps of mineral distribution and inferred abundance. A large variety of remote sensing data sets are available, with costs ranging from a few dollars per square mile for satellite digital data to a few hundred dollars per square mile for airborne imaging spectrometry. Computer processing and analysis costs routinely surpass these expenses because of the equipment and expertise necessary for information extraction and interpretation. Effective use requires both an understanding of the current methodology and an appreciation of the most cost-effective solution.

Bulletin↗
USGS1992

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↗
USGS2001

Historical perspective of the mineral production of Idaho, with comments on the Hailey 1 degree x 2 degrees quadrangle, Idaho

Idaho has a long and diverse history of minerals exploration and production. A comprehensive look at this history, combined with documentation of the distribution and magnitude of past and present mineral production, can lead to a better understanding of the mineral endowment and potential resources. The total mineral production of Idaho (1905?1972), when examined as unit regional values and compared to the rest of the United States, shows that Idaho has produced above the median value of other States for both metals and precious materials, near the median value for nonmetals, and below the median value for construction materials and fuels. An examination of selected commodities within Idaho, by county, for a fifty-year period (1902?1951) shows the dominance of Shoshone County in total production within the State for silver, copper, lead, and zinc.

Bulletin↗
USGS2005

Chapter K: Progress in the Evaluation of Alkali-Aggregate Reaction in Concrete Construction in the Pacific Northwest, United States and Canada

The supply of aggregates suitable for use in construction and maintenance of infrastructure in western North America is a continuing concern to the engineering and resources-management community. Steady population growth throughout the region has fueled demand for high-quality aggregates, in the face of rapid depletion of existing aggregate resources and slow and difficult permitting of new sources of traditional aggregate types. In addition to these challenges, the requirement for aggregates to meet various engineering standards continues to increase. In addition to their physical-mechanical properties, other performance characteristics of construction aggregates specifically depend on their mineralogy and texture. These properties can result in deleterious chemical reactions when aggregate is used in concrete mixes. When this chemical reaction-termed 'alkali-aggregate reaction' (AAR)-occurs, it can pose a major problem for concrete structures, reducing their service life and requiring expensive repair or even replacement of the concrete. AAR is thus to be avoided in order to promote the longevity of concrete structures and to ensure that public moneys invested in infrastructure are well spent. Because the AAR phenomenon is directly related to the mineral composition, texture, and petrogenesis of the rock particles that make up aggregates, an understanding of the relation between the geology and the performance of aggregates in concrete is important. In the Pacific Northwest, some aggregates have a moderate to high AAR potential, but many others have no or only a low AAR potential. Overall, AAR is not as widespread or serious a problem in the Pacific Northwest as in other regions of North America. The identification of reactive aggregates in the Pacific Northwest and the accurate prediction of their behavior in concrete continue to present challenges for the assessment and management of geologic resources to the owners and operators of pits and quarries and to the users of the concrete aggregates mined from these deposits. This situation is complicated by the length of time typically required for AAR to become noticeable in concrete construction in the Pacific Northwest, commonly on such a scale that other deterioration mechanisms may have masked the effects of AAR. Distinguishing between the effects of AAR and those related to other problems in concrete is important for understanding the nature and severity of AAR throughout the Pacific Northwest. Furthermore, developing an understanding of the extent of the problem will assist efforts to maximize the intelligent and stewardly use of aggregate resources in the Pacific Northwest. This chapter illustrates the current 'state of the art' of AAR studies in the Pacific Northwest, a region with a common geologic heritage as well as many distinct geologic elements. The optimal use of aggregates in the construction of concrete structures that will achieve their design life is possible through an understanding of the engineering and geologic properties of these aggregates and of their geologic setting.

Bulletin↗
USGS1994

Mineral-resource assessments in Alaska; background information to accompany maps and reports about the geology and undiscovered-mineral-resource potential of the Mount Katmai Quadrangle and adjacent parts of the Naknek and Afognak quadrangles, Alaska Peninsula

Geologic and geochemical field studies were carded out from 1983 to 1987 in the Mount Katmai l?x2 ? quadrangle and adjoining region, at the northeast end of the Alaska Peninsula. The region is nearly entirely within Katmai National Park and Preserve and has had almost no mineral production, so prior to this study there were few data by which to assess the mineral potential of the region. This report describes the folio of publications that have resulted from the study: geologic maps, geochemical results, fossil identifications, radiometric rock ages, and an assessment of the undiscovered-mineral-resource potential of the region. The Katmai region is inferred to potentially have three types of undiscovered mineral deposits: porphyry copper (molybdenum), precious-metal vein, and hot-springs gold. These deposit types occur elsewhere on the Alaska Peninsula in similar geologic units. Evidence suggesting their occurrence in the Katmai region is the presence of trace amounts of metals typically associated with these kinds of deposits in bedrock of certain tracts and in sediments of streams draining those tracts. Magma to provide heat, fractures to provide pathways for mineralizing fluids, and altered rock are required by genetic models of these deposit types. Such features do occur in the Katmai tracts. Confirmation of any mineral deposit in the Katmai region requires detailed follow-up sampling and acquisition of subsurface information, which is beyond the scope of this study. However, producing porphyry deposits are unknown elsewhere on the Alaska Peninsula in similar rocks, so if any such deposits occur in the Katmai region, they are likely to be few in number. Conversely, vein deposits are typically small in size so there may be several of such deposits. The properties and thermal history of the sedimentary rocks that could serve as reservoirs for oil or gas are unfavorable in adjacent regions. Thus the potential of the Katmai region for producible quantities of fossil fuels is low. In theory the region has shallow concentrations of geothermal fluids, but specific evidence for their presence is obscured by heavy precipitation and cold young rocks or deposits. Small volumes of coal occur at tidewater sites on the Pacific coast.

Circular↗
USGS1999

Yucca Mountain as a Radioactive-Waste Repository

Yucca Mountain straddles the west boundary of the Nevada Test Site in an arid, remote, and thinly populated region of southwestern Nevada. It is the potential site of a monitored geologic repository for the Nation’s commercial and military spent nuclear fuel, high-level radioactive waste derived from reprocessing of uranium and plutonium, surplus plutonium, and other nuclear-weapons materials. (Collectively, these radioactive materials are known as high-level waste [HLW] and are to be distinguished from the low-level radioactive waste to be stored at the recently opened Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in southeastern New Mexico.) Tens of thousands of metric tons of HLW is presently stored at more than a hundred sites in 40 States (fig. 1). The fundamental rationale for a geologic repository for radioactive materials is to securely isolate them from the environment and its occupants to the greatest extent possible.

Nevada↗
USGS2000

Water quality in the eastern Iowa basins, Iowa and Minnesota, 1996-98

The water quality in rivers and streams and in selected aquifers in eastern Iowa and part of southern Minnesota is described and illustrated. Major ions, nitrogen and other nutrients, and pesticides and some of their breakdown compounds were analyzed in both surface and ground water. Biological communities that included fish, invertebrates, and algae, were described in relation to stream water quality. Volatile organic compounds that originate from fuels, solvent, and industry were analyzed from ground-water samples. Agricultural and urban land-use effects on shallow ground-water compared and contrasted.

Iowa, Minnesota↗
USGS2000

Water quality in the central Arizona basins, Arizona, 1995-98

The water quality in rivers and streams and in selected aquifers in central Arizona basins in Arizona is described and illustrated. Major ions, nitrogen and other nutrients, and pesticides and some of their breakdown compounds were analyzed in both surface and ground water. Biological communities that included fish, invertebrates, and algae, were described in relation to stream water quality. Volatile organic compounds that originate from fuels, solvents, and industry were analyzed from ground-water samples. Agricultural and urban land-use effects on shallow ground water are compared and contrasted.

Circular↗
USGS2010

Western Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center--providing comprehensive earth science for complex societal issues

Minerals in the environment and products manufactured from mineral materials are all around us and we use and come into contact with them every day. They impact our way of life and the health of all that lives. Minerals are critical to the Nation's economy and knowing where future mineral resources will come from is important for sustaining the Nation's economy and national security. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Mineral Resources Program (MRP) provides scientific information for objective resource assessments and unbiased research results on mineral resource potential, production and consumption statistics, as well as environmental consequences of mining. The MRP conducts this research to provide information needed for land planners and decisionmakers about where mineral commodities are known and suspected in the earth's crust and about the environmental consequences of extracting those commodities. As part of the MRP scientists of the Western Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center (WMERSC or 'Center' herein) coordinate the development of national, geologic, geochemical, geophysical, and mineral-resource databases and the migration of existing databases to standard models and formats that are available to both internal and external users. The unique expertise developed by Center scientists over many decades in response to mineral-resource-related issues is now in great demand to support applications such as public health research and remediation of environmental hazards that result from mining and mining-related activities. Western Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center Results of WMERSC research provide timely and unbiased analyses of minerals and inorganic materials to (1) improve stewardship of public lands and resources; (2) support national and international economic and security policies; (3) sustain prosperity and improve our quality of life; and (4) protect and improve public health, safety, and environmental quality. The MRP supports approximately 40 USGS research specialists who utilize cooperative agreements with universities, industry, and other governmental agencies to support their collaborative research and information exchange. Scientists of the WMERSC study how and where non-fuel mineral resources form and are concentrated in the earth's crust, where mineral resources might be found in the future, and how mineral materials interact with the environment to affect human and ecosystem health. Natural systems (ecosystems) are complex - our understanding of how ecosystems operate requires collecting and synthesizing large amounts of geologic, geochemical, biologic, hydrologic, and meteorological information. Scientists in the Center strive to understand the interplay of various processes and how they affect the structure, composition, and health of ecosystems. Such understanding, which is then summarized in publicly available reports, is used to address and solve a wide variety of issues that are important to society and the economy. WMERSC scientists have extensive national and international experience in these scientific specialties and capabilities - they have collaborated with many Federal, State, and local agencies; with various private sector organizations; as well as with foreign countries and organizations. Nearly every scientific and societal challenge requires a different combination of scientific skills and capabilities. With their breadth of scientific specialties and capabilities, the scientists of the WMERSC can provide scientifically sound approaches to a wide range of societal challenges and issues. The following sections describe examples of important issues that have been addressed by scientists in the Center, the methods employed, and the relevant conclusions. New directions are inevitable as societal needs change over time. Scientists of the WMERSC have a diverse set of skills and capabilities and are proficient in the collection and integration of

Circular↗
USGS2010

Byproduct mineral commodities used for the production of photovoltaic cells

Rising fossil fuel costs, environmental concerns relating to global climate change, and Government policy to signifcantly increase our Nation's energy independence have placed greater emphasis on the generation of electricity from renewable sources, such as the Sun (light and heat), water, and wind, which for all intents and purposes are inexhaustible resources. Although the total amount of electricity generated from the direct conversion of sunlight through photovoltaic cells is relatively small compared with that from other forms of renewable energy, the rate of growth in the sector is signifcant. The total value of energy of photovoltaic cells produced worldwide increased to nearly 7 gigawatts (GW) in 2008 from 45 megawatts (MW) in 1990, a compound annual growth rate of about 30 percent. In the United States, manufacturing of photovoltaic cells has grown exponentially to about 480 MW in 2008, accounting for 6 percent of world production, from less than 10 MW of photovoltaic capacity in 1990 (Benner, 2007; U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, 2010), a compound annual growth rate of approxi-mately 23 percent. A production capacity of 1 GW of electricity [or 8,760 gigawatthours1 (GWh)] is equivalent to the annual electricity requirements for roughly 800,000 average households in the United States (U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, 2010). This estimate does not include losses of electricity, such as during transmission through power lines.

Circular↗
USGS2013

U.S. Geological Survey core science systems strategy: Characterizing, synthesizing, and understanding the critical zone through a modular science framework

Executive Summary Core Science Systems is a new mission of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) that resulted from the 2007 Science Strategy, “Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges: U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017.” This report describes the Core Science Systems vision and outlines a strategy to facilitate integrated characterization and understanding of the complex Earth system. The vision and suggested actions are bold and far-reaching, describing a conceptual model and framework to enhance the ability of the USGS to bring its core strengths to bear on pressing societal problems through data integration and scientific synthesis across the breadth of science. The context of this report is inspired by a direction set forth in the 2007 Science Strategy. Specifically, ecosystem-based approaches provide the underpinnings for essentially all science themes that define the USGS. Every point on Earth falls within a specific ecosystem where data, other information assets, and the expertise of USGS and its many partners can be employed to quantitatively understand how that ecosystem functions and how it responds to natural and anthropogenic disturbances. Every benefit society obtains from the planet— food, water, raw materials to build infrastructure, homes and automobiles, fuel to heat homes and cities, and many others— are derived from or affect ecosystems. The vision for Core Science Systems builds on core strengths of the USGS in characterizing and understanding complex Earth and biological systems through research, modeling, mapping, and the production of high quality data on the Nation’s natural resource infrastructure. Together, these research activities provide a foundation for ecosystem-based approaches through geologic mapping, topographic mapping, and biodiversity mapping. The vision describes a framework founded on these core mapping strengths that makes it easier for USGS scientists to discover critical information, share and publish results, and identify potential collaborations that transcend all USGS missions. The framework is designed to improve the efficiency of scientific work within USGS by establishing a means to preserve and recall data for future applications, organizing existing scientific knowledge and data to facilitate new use of older information, and establishing a future workflow that naturally integrates new data, applications, and other science products to make interdisciplinary research easier and more efficient. Given the increasing need for integrated data and interdisciplinary approaches to solve modern problems, leadership by the Core Science Systems mission will facilitate problem solving by all USGS missions in ways not formerly possible. The report lays out a strategy to achieve this vision through three goals with accompanying objectives and actions. The first goal builds on and enhances the strengths of the Core Science Systems mission in characterizing and understanding the Earth system from the geologic framework to the topographic characteristics of the land surface and biodiversity across the Nation. The second goal enhances and develops new strengths in computer and information science to make it easier for USGS scientists to discover data and models, share and publish results, and discover connections between scientific information and knowledge. The third goal brings additional focus to research and development methods to address complex issues affecting society that require integration of knowledge and new methods for synthesizing scientific information. Collectively, the report lays out a strategy to create a seamless connection between all USGS activities to accelerate and make USGS science more efficient by fully integrating disciplinary expertise within a new and evolving science paradigm for a changing world in the 21st century.

Circular↗
USGS2015

The water-energy nexus: An earth science perspective

Water availability and use are closely connected with energy development and use. Water cannot be delivered to homes, businesses, and industries without energy, and most forms of energy development require large amounts of water. The United States faces two significant and sometimes competing challenges: to provide sustainable supplies of freshwater for humans and ecosystems and to ensure adequate sources of energy for future generations. This report reviews the complex ways in which water and energy are interconnected and describes the earth science data collection and research that can help the Nation address these important challenges. The earth sciences have been a cornerstone in developing our current understanding of the water-energy nexus. A full understanding of the nexus, however, is limited by uncertainty in our knowledge of fundamental issues, such as the quantity of freshwater that is available, the amount of water that is used in energy development, the effects that emerging energy development technologies have on water quality and quantity, and the amount of energy required to treat and deliver freshwater. Enhanced data collection and research can improve our understanding of these important issues and thereby lay the groundwork for informed resource management. Relevant earth science issues analyzed and discussed herein include freshwater availability; water use; ecosystems health; assessment of saline water resources; assessment of fossil-fuel, uranium, and geothermal resources; subsurface injection of wastewater and carbon dioxide and related induced seismicity; climate change and its effect on water availability and energy production; byproducts and waste streams of energy development; emerging energy-development technologies; and energy for water treatment and delivery.

Circular↗
USGS2017

USGS integrated drought science

Project Need and Overview Drought poses a serious threat to the resilience of human communities and ecosystems in the United States (Easterling and others, 2000). Over the past several years, many regions have experienced extreme drought conditions, fueled by prolonged periods of reduced precipitation and exceptionally warm temperatures. Extreme drought has far-reaching impacts on water supplies, ecosystems, agricultural production, critical infrastructure, energy costs, human health, and local economies (Milly and others, 2005; Wihlite, 2005; Vörösmarty and others, 2010; Choat and others, 2012; Ledger and others, 2013). As global temperatures continue to increase, the frequency, severity, extent, and duration of droughts are expected to increase across North America, affecting both humans and natural ecosystems (Parry and others, 2007). The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has a long, proven history of delivering science and tools to help decision-makers manage and mitigate effects of drought. That said, there is substantial capacity for improved integration and coordination in the ways that the USGS provides drought science. A USGS Drought Team was formed in August 2016 to work across USGS Mission Areas to identify current USGS drought-related research and core capabilities. This information has been used to initiate the development of an integrated science effort that will bring the full USGS capacity to bear on this national crisis.

Circular↗
USGS2017

U.S. Geological Survey—Energy and wildlife research annual report for 2017

Introduction Terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems provide valuable services to humans and are a source of clean water, energy, raw materials, and productive soils. The Nation’s food supply is more secure because of wildlife. For example, native pollinators enhance agricultural crops, and insect-eating bats provide pest control services worth billions of dollars to farmers annually. Fish and wildlife are also vital to a vibrant outdoor recreation and tourism industry. Recreational activities, such as hunting, shooting, boating, and angling, generated \$1.1 billion in excise taxes paid to State wildlife agencies in 2017. National parks, wildlife refuges, and monuments accounted for $35 billion in economic output and 318,000 jobs nationwide in 2016. Additional economic benefits are generated from the use and enjoyment of wildlife in State-owned lands and waters. Although the United States is rich in natural resources, human activity continues to place new pressures on fish and wildlife and the habitats they rely on. The United States became the world’s top producer of petroleum and natural gas products in 2012, surpassing Russia’s natural gas production levels in 2009 and Saudi Arabia’s petroleum production in 2013. The U.S. Energy Information Administration projects that the demand for liquid fuel, natural gas, and renewable energy will show strong growth in the next 20 years. Wind energy has demonstrated consistent growth since 2007 with now more than 53,000 wind turbines contributing to power grids in 41 States, Guam, and Puerto Rico. Solar energy has seen rapid growth since 2013 and made up nearly one-third of the total electricity generation additions in 2016. Yet as our Nation works to advance energy security and sustain wildlife, some conflicts have surfaced. Impacts of an expanding energy infrastructure include fragmentation and loss of habitat as well as mortality of birds, bats, fish, and other animals from interactions with energy generation facilities. Because energy development can often occur in wildlife habitats, ecological science can help guide project siting and operational decisions to areas that present the lowest risk to wildlife and energy developers. To address these challenges and make the most of new opportunities, the U.S. Geological Survey is producing innovative science to develop workable solutions that can help sustain wildlife and the habitat they rely upon, while allowing informed development.

Circular↗
USGS1974

Water demands for expanding energy development

Water is used in producing energy for mining and reclamation of mined lands, onsite processing, transportation, refining, and conversion of fuels to other forms of energy. In the East, South, Midwest, and along the seacoasts, most water problems are related to pollution rather than to water supply. West of about the 100th meridian, however, runoff is generally less than potential diversions, and energy industries must compete with other water users. Water demands for extraction of coal, oil shale, uranium, and oil and gas are modest, although large quantities of water are used in secondary recovery operations for oil. The only significant use of water for energy transportation, aside from in-stream navigation use, is for slurry lines. Substantial quantities of water are required in the retorting and the disposal of spent oil shale. The conversion of coal to synthetic gas or oil or to electric power and the generation of electric power with nuclear energy require large quantities of water, mostly for cooling. Withdrawals for cooling of thermal-electric plants is by far the largest category of water use in energy industry, totaling about 170 billion gallons (644 million m3) per day in 1970. Water availability will dictate the location and design of energy-conversion facilities, especially in water deficient areas of the West.

Circular↗
USGS1987

Preliminary Metallogenic Map of North America: A listing of deposits by commodity

The 4,215 ore deposits shown on the Preliminary Metallogenic Map of North America and contained in the Metallogenic Map file have been sorted by their principal (first-listed) commodities and grouped into metallic and nonmetallic categories. Deposit listings for 56 individual metals and minerals have been assembled using the data base and are arranged alphabetically by country, political subdivision (for the larger countries), and deposit name. Map numbers, major and minor constituents, geographic coordinates, and a geologic code are given for each deposit; additionally, the relative size and deposit class have been derived from the code and are listed separately. The frequencies of individual commodities and commodity groups by type, geographic distribution, and geologic occurrence are summarized in tables, and the relationships of associated commodities to principal commodities in the data base are emphasized in both tables and brief texts. In all, 49 metals and minerals are listed as principal (first or only) commodities and 7 more are shown as 'major' but not principal commodities. (Commodities listed as 'minor' in the data base were not sorted or tabulated separately.) Metals, divided into six subgroups, predominate over nonmetallic minerals by a ratio of about 7 to 1, although in terms of quantities and value the disparity is not so great. Within the metals group, the ranking according to frequency is as follows: base, precious, iron and alloying, other (antimony, beryllium, and others), nuclear-fuel, and light metals. The most frequently occurring commodity in the Metallogenic Map file is gold. Copper is ranked second, both in number of occurrences and as the principal commodity in deposits. Silver is ranked third in frequency of occurrence; lead and zinc are ranked fourth and fifth, respectively. Iron, ranked sixth in frequency of occurrence as a major commodity, is the third most reported principal commodity in the data base, ahead of silver (ranked fourth), lead (ranked fifth), and zinc (ranked sixth).

Circular↗