Lithium Resources and

Requirements by the Year 2000

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1005
Lithium Resources and 

Requirements by the Year 2000

JAMES D. VINE, Editor

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1005

A collection of papers presented at a symposium held in 

Golden, Colorado, January 22-24, 1976

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1976
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

THOMAS S. KLEPPE, Secretary

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

V. E. McKelvey, Director

First printing 1976 

Second printing 1977

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

Vine, James David, 1921-

Lithium resources and requirements by the year 2000.

(Geological Survey Professional Paper 1005)

1. Lithium ores-United States-Congresses. 2. Lithium-Congresses. I. Vine, James David, 1921- II. Title. HI. Series:

United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 1005. 

TN490.L5L57 553'.499 76-608206

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Washington, D.C. 20402

Stock Number 024-001-02887-5
CONTENTS

Page

1. Introduction, by James D. Vine, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colo ______________-_______-_-- — ------- —— —— ——— ---- 1

2. Battery research sponsored by the U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration, by Albert Landgrebe, Energy Research and Development Administration, Washington, D.C., and Paul A. Nelson, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Ill-__- —— -____.—————— 2

3. Battery systems for load-leveling and electric-vehicle application, near-term and advanced technology (abstract), by N. P. Yao and W. J. Walsh,

Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, 111___.__________________________________-___-_________ — ________ 5

4. Lithium requirements for high-energy lithium-aluminum/iron-sulfide batteries for load-leveling and electric-vehicle applications, by A. A.

Chilenskas; G. J. Bernstein, and R. O. Ivins, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, 111 _________________._______--- ——— _——— 5

5. Lithium requirements for electric vehicles using lithium-water-air batteries, by J. F. Cooper, I. Y. Borg, L. G. O'Connell, E. Behrin, B. Rubin, and

H. J. Wiesner, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, Livermore, Calif________________________________________ ————— ______—— 9

6. Fusion power and the potential lithium requirement, by S. Locke Bogart, U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration, Washington,

D.C ________________________________________________________________________„___-_-_ — -_----—-_-____ 12

7. U.S. lithium supply and demand and the problems involved in compiling statistics, by Hiram B. Wood, U.S. Bureau of Mines, Washington, D.C.__ 22

8. The lithium industry (abstract), by Gerald J. Orazem, Lithium Corporation of America, Gastonia, N. C _____________--___-______-- 25

9. Lithium resources—prospects for the future, by Ihor A. Kunasz, Foote Mineral Company, Exton, Pa ._____________________________ 26

10. Lithium ores, by R. Keith Evans, Gulf Resources & Chemical Corporation, Houston, Tex_______________________________ — ______ 30

11. Lithium production from Searles Valley, by Larry E. Rykken, Kerr-McGee Chemical Corporation, Trona, Calif-__------_--_- —— —— ______ 33

12. The lithium-resource enigma, by James D. Vine, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colo __--_-__-________________---___----_---_ 35

13. Lithium resource estimates—What do they mean?, by James J. Norton, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colo_----__- — ___ — — __________ 38

14. Occurrence, development, and long-range outlook of lithium-pegmatite ore in the Carolinas, by Thomas L. Kesler (retired), Hendersonville,

N. C __ _ __ _ ______________________________________________________________________________________ _ __ _ _ ____ 45

15. A comparison of three major lithium pegmatites: Varutrask, Bikita, and Bernic Lake, by E. Wm. Heinrich, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor,

Mich _________________________________________________________________________________ 50

16. Nonpegmatite lithium resource potential, by James D. Vine, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colo__________-____-__--__ ——— _ — ______ 54

17. Lithium contents of thermal and mineral waters, by Donald E. White, J. M. Thompson, and R. O. Fournier, U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park,

Calif __________________________________________________________________________________ 58

18. Lithium recovery from geothermal fluids, by C. E. Berthold, Hazen Research, Inc., Golden, Colo., and D. H. Baker, Jr., U.S. Bureau of Mines,

Boulder City, Nev ________________________________________________-_-_--______________________________ 61

19. Lithium resources of salars in the central Andes, by George E. Ericksen, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Va., Guillermo Chong D., Universidad

del None, Antofagasta, Chile, and Tomas Vila G., Institute de Investigaciones Geologicas, Santiago, Chile ________ —— —— _ — ________ 66

20. Lithium resources of Utah, by James A. Whelan, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, and Carol A. Petersen, Utah Geological and Mineral

Survey, Salt Lake City, Utah__________________________________________________________________- 75

21. Preliminary design and analysis of a process for the extraction of lithium from seawater, by Meyer Steinberg and V. D. Dang, Brookhaven

National Laboratory, Upton, N.Y _.________________________________________________________________—— 79

22. Lithium brines associated with nonmarine evaporites, by Richard K. Glanzman and A. L. Meier, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colo __ — _ 88

23. Origin of lithium and other components in the Searles Lake evaporites, California, by George I. Smith, U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park,

Calif _ — --____-___-_-______________________.__________________________________________-_---__-- — — ------- — _— 92

24. Use of lithium and chloride concentrations in ground water for lithium exploration, by Cole L. Smith, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colo 103

25. The influence of drainage basin area upon the distribution of lithium in playa sediments, by Joseph R. Davis, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver,

Colo _________________________________________________________________________________ — ___________ 105

26. The tectonic and sedimentologic environment of lithium occurrences in the Muddy Mountains, Clark County, Nevada, by Robert G. Bohannon,

U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colo __________________________________________-________—————————— 109

27. Lithium abundances in oilfield waters, by A. Gene Collins, U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration, Bartlesville, Okla ______ 116

28. Lithium in the Gila Conglomerate, southwestern New Mexico, by Elizabeth B. Tourtelot and Alien L. Meier, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver,

Colo _________________________________________________________________________________-__ — — — _______ 123

29. Lithium in clayey rocks of Pennsylvanian age, western Pennsylvania, by Harry A. Tourtelot and Alien L. Meier, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver,

Colo ___ _ _________________________________________________________________________________---_ — _- 128

30. Lithium mineralization in Arkansas, by Charles G. Stone, Arkansas Geological Commission, Little Rock, Ark., and Charles Milton, George

Washington University, Washington, D.C _-_.___________________________________________________ ——— __ 137

31. The behavior of lithium in experimental rock-water interaction studies, by Walter E. Dibble, Jr., and Frank W. Dickson, U.S. Geological Survey

and Stanford University, Stanford, Calif. ______________________________________________ — _ ————— —— -___——————142

32. An integrated geophysical approach to lithium exploration, by Bruce D. Smith and Don R. Mabey, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colo —— 147

33. Lithium—data bases and resource estimates: problems and potential, by Alien L. Clark, James A. Calkins, Donald Singer, and Mary A. Urick, U.S.

Geological Survey, Reston, Va._--._-___________________________________ — — _____-___----_ — — ______________ — __ — _ — __-__ 154

34. Analytical methods and problems of lithium determination in rocks, sediments, and brines, by Alien L. Meier, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver,

Colo ---„„_______________________________________________________--_____„-----__-— — — -—-—— 161

III
IV CONTENTS

ILLUSTRATIONS

Page 

FIGURE 1. Design of prismatic cell for Argonne National Laboratory lithium/aluminum/iron sulfide battery__ ———— — _________ 6

2. Graph showing electric-vehicle production ______________„________-_____________________ 7

3. Graph showing annual lithium requirements for electric-vehicle batteries _________________——___ —— __ 8

4. Graph showing performance characteristics of vehicle power sources ____________________________ 9

5. Diagram showing a simple lithium-water-air cell_________________________________________ 10

6. Diagram showing the lithium-water-air battery concept for electric vehicles _______________________ 10

7. Diagram showing an automotive system involves recycling of Li2CO3 (O'Connell and others, 1974) ____________ 11

8. Graph showing "break-even" plasma conditions for fusion power _________________________________—— 13

9. Diagrams showing: deuterium-tritium reaction __________________________________________ 14

10. Liquid lithium blanket design for a fusion reactor _________________________________________ 14

11. Blanket design using enriched lithium-6 and neutron multipliers _________________________----_ 15

12. Comparison of four basic designs for fusion power reactors _______________-_____________———— 16

13. Artist's conception of a tokamak fusion power reactor plant ___________________________-_--—— 17

14. Fusion power development plan _________________________________________________ 18

15-18B. Graphs showing:

15. Installed electrical generating capacity as a function of time for Project Independence Base Case and Major

Shift to Electricity scenarios with the FPC 7 percent growth rate projection for comparison __ ——— _____ 19

16. Projected penetration of fusion into electrical generating market _________ — - — ——— _ ——— __ ——— — 19

17. Cumulative lithium demand curve for different reactors _____________-_ —— __ —————— __ ———— -_ 20

18. History of lithium production in the United States ______________________-_____-———__ 27

ISA. Classification of mineral resources ___________________________________________ 39

18B. Schematic graph of how an increase in lithium production may proceed in the years 1975 to 2000 ________ 42

19. Areal features of the Carolina lithium region _____________________________________________ 46

20. Cross sections showing geologic relations of the pegmatites____________________________________ 47

21. Map showing undrained basins in western United States ___________________________________ 56

22. Map showing Imperial Valley geothermal area and location of geothermal wells, highways, and cities _______ — — 62

??A- 26. Graphs showing:

22A. Behavior of lithium and other elements during concentration by evaporation_______ — — — — ————— 64

23. Effect of Al:Li ratios on lithium recovery ______________________________ ————— __ —— -___ 64

24. Effect of pH on precipitation of lithium with aluminum hydroxide ________ —————— - ——— ———— —— 65

25. Settling data for aluminum (lithium) hydroxides ______________________-__-_____-———— 65

26. Settling curve—aluminum (lithium) hydroxide at pH = 7.5 ________________———————————— 65

27. Index map of the central Andean region showing location of salars and saline lakes __—_ ————— ———— ————— 67

28. Map showing salars and basins of interior drainage in the eastern central part of Antofagasta Province, Chile ———— 69

29. Map showing asymmetrical zoning of salars in basins of interior drainage in northern Chile, attributed in part to faulting

and tilting of the basins during late Pleistocene and Holocene time _______________——— ———— ———— 70

30. Graph showing lithium-potassium ratios in saline ground water and brine, Salar de Atacama —— ———— _ ———— —— 71

31. Graph showing lithium-salinity ratios in saline ground water and brine, Salar de Atacama____——— ———— ———— 72

32. Map showing locations of lithium resources and mineral occurrences in Utah _____—— ————————— — —— -- 75

33. Graph showing lithium production rate and demand projections _________________________———— 80

34. Schematic flow diagram for extraction of lithium from seawater ____________________—___——— 83

35. Graph showing lithium production cost versus lithium production rate __________—_ ——— ———————————— 87

36. Map showing the location, areal extent, and major physiographic subdivisions of the Lake Bonneville drainage basin__ 89

37. Maps showing the tectonic setting of the eastern Basin and Range province in Utah _—_———————_—————— 89

38. Maps showing the pre-Bonneville lake and lake-playa distribution in Utah_—____———— ————— ————————— 89

39. Map showing lithium concentration in water and brine in the Lake Bonneville drainage basin _________———— 90

40. Map showing the location of the Sevier Desert, Black Rock Desert, and the gravity-defined grabens in the northern Great

Salt Lake Desert ___________________________________________________________ 91

41. Index map showing relations between present lakes and rivers, and between those features during pluvial maxima of the 

Pleistocene. Locations of the Long Valley caldera (from Bailey and others, 1976), Long Valley Reservoir (Lake 

Crowley), Coso Hot Springs, and Airport Lake also shown _____________________—_ ———— ———— 93

42. Diagram showing relation between Pleistocene lakes in the chain that includes Searles Lake; Mono Lake is omitted __ 93

43. Generalized subsurface stratigraphic section of upper Quaternary units in Searles Lake______————————————— 94

44. Diagram showing the fluctuations in Searles Lake during the last 150,000 years _____—__———— ————— _- ——— - 94

45. Diagram showing the relation between tonnages of selected components carried by the present Owens River in 24,000 

years versus tonnages in the Upper Salt of Searles Lake, and the tonnages carried by the river in 8,000 years versus 

tonnages in the Lower Salt _______________________________________———————————— 97

46. Variation diagram showing the lithium:chloride ratio versus chloride in brines and waters from hot springs-————— 104

47. Frequency histogram of the lithium concentration of 156 playa samples ________________________———__ 106

48. Frequency histogram of the mean values of the lithium samples ____________________________———— 107

49. Graph of lithium values plotted versus drainage basin area_____________________________________ 107
CONTENTS v

Page

FIGURE 50. Graph of lithium plotted versus drainage basin area. Area simulates pluvial spillover _________— ———— ———— 108

51. Graph of lithium plotted versus drainage basin area. Area simulates hydrologic underflow _________—————— 108

52. Index map of the major structural features in the vicin^y of the Muddy Mountains, Nev —— — —————————————— 109

53. Map showing the distribution of three lithium-rich areas in the Muddy Mountains area—————— ———— ———————— 111

54. Geologic map of the area west of Overton, Nev ________ __—- ————— ——————— —— ——— ——————— 113

55. Stratigraphic section of Tertiary rocks in Magnesite Wash, near Overton, Nev. Average lithium values are shown—— 114

56. Correlation chart of Jurassic and Jurassic(P) formations in Mexico and in Gulf Coast areas of the United States ———— 117

57. Map showing the approximate geographic extent of the Smackover Formation— —————————————— ———— ————— 118

58. Generalized Stratigraphic section of Jurassic and Jurassic(P) rocks in northeast Texas showing types of lithologies in each

unit________________________.____________________________________-_________ 118

59. Graph showing comparison of calcium and sodium concentrations of some Smackover brines to those of some altered

relict bitterns __________________________________________————————————————— 120

60. Graph showing comparison of Na' and Br concentrations of some Smackover brines to those of an altered relict bittern,

evaporating seawater, and redissolved salt _________________________— —— ———————— ———— 120

61. Map showing the relation of high lithium concentrations (in mg/1) in Smackover Formation waters in Arkansas and Texas

to the Mexia-Talco fault zone and to an arcuate contour line parallel to the truncated subcrop of the formation __ 122

62. Map showing distribution of the Gila Conglomerate in southwestern New Mexico _____————————————————— 124

63. Graph showing lithium-fluorine correlations in samples of lake-bed sediments in the Gila Conglomerate near Buckhorn,

N. Mex ___________________________________.__________________________ 125

64. Map of distribution of sample localities and rocks of Pennsylvanian and Permian ages in western Pennsylvania ———— 129

65. Frequency distribution of lithium concentrations by geologic formation in Greater Pittsburgh region—————————— 129

66. Frequency distribution of lithium concentrations in underclay, shale and clay, and siderite from Beaver County, Pa __ 132

67. Ellsman mine, Glasgow, and Midland Stratigraphic sections, Beaver County, Pa., showing lithium concentrations by rock

types __________________________________________________________________ 132

68. Diagram showing idealized cyclic sequence of depositional environments for coal-bearing rocks in west-central Pennsylvania. Modified from Edmunds (1968) _________________________________________——— 132

69. Frequency distribution of lithium concentrations in flint clays and one diaspore clay, from Clearfield, Jefferson, and

Somerset Counties, Pa ________________________________________---— — ————— 133

70. Graph showing variations in lithium concentrations within the Mercer clay bed, Galbraith Property, Clearfield County,

Pa _____________________________________.________________________________ 134

71. Map showing major areas of lithium mineralization in Arkansas __________________————————————— 138

72. Map showing spatial distribution of lithium minerals in central Arkansas, showing occurrences of cookeite (C), lithiophorite (L), and taeniolite (T) _________________________________________________________ 138

73. Histogram showing percentage of lithium in Arkansas minerals and fault gouge _______—— —— ————————— 139

74. X-ray powder patterns of cookeite (A), taeniolite (B), and lithiophorite (C) __________——————— ——— ————— 141

75. Graph showing rock powder-water interaction at 275°C and 500 bars ——————————————————————————————— 144

76. Index map showing location of Searles Lake, Clayton Valley, and Willcox P'aya ———————————————————————— 148

77. Profile of gravity data from Searles Lake, Calif _______________________________________—__ 148

78. Regional Bouguer gravity map of Clayton Valley, Nev __—— ———————— —————— ——— ——————— ———— ———— 149

79. Diagrams showing the Wenner and Schlumberger arrays used in d.c. resistivity sounding _______——————————— 150

80. Diagram of the Wenner sounding data and interpretation from Clayton Valley, Nev __________________ 150

81. Interpreted geoelectric cross section across the zone of lithium brine production in Clayton Valley, Nev _______ 150

82. Map showing the location of d.c. resistivity soundings and the interpretation of minimum depth to resistive rocks in

meters ________________________________________________________——— 151

83. Map showing the contoured airborne electromagnetic survey data for the Willcox Playa area, Ariz____________ 152

84. Generalized Bouguer gravity map for the Sulfur Springs Valley, Arizona ___________————————————————— 153

85. General model for estimating resource availability _____________________________________———— 160

TABLES

Page

IABLE 1. United States consumption of energy resources by major sources _______________________________ 2

2. United States energy shortfall ______________________________________________________ 3

3. Energy storage research and development program ________________________________________ 3

4. Projected requirements for lithium in lithium-aluminum/iron-sulfide batteries for utility energy storage ____——— 7

5. Projected requirements for lithium in lithium-aluminum/iron-sulfide batteries for electric-vehicle propulsion ————— 8

6. Projected requirements for lithium in lithium-aluminum/iron-sulfide batteries for utility energy storage and electric

vehicles ____________________________________________________________ 8

7. Performance specifications for dual battery hybrids ________________________________________ 11

8. Projected effect of electric vehicles on the automotive industry _______________________________——_ 11

9. Blanket lithium requirements ______________________________________________ .______ 19

10. Annual natural lithium demand _____________________________________________________ 20

11. Cumulative natural lithium demand ___________________________________________________ 20
VI CONTENTS

	Page

TABLE 12. U.S. salient lithium statistics ______________________________________________________ 23

13. Estimated maximum world production capacity of lithium contained in mineral concentrate or brine solutions ____ 24

14. World trade ____________________________________________________________________ 24

15. Major identified resources of the world______________________________.___________-_____ 29

16. Classification of U.S. lithium resources in millions of tonnes of contained lithium _____________________—— 36

17. Internal structure of the Bikita, Rhodesia, pegmatite from hanging-wall downward to footwall ______________—— 53

18. Comparison of Varutrask, Bernic Lake, and Bikita pegmatites ____-____-__-_____-___________________ 53

19. Lithium contents of various waters________________________________________________ 58

20. Lithium contents of average rocks _____________________________________________________ 58

21. Lithium contents of waters of Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming______________________________________ 59

22. Lithium contents of selected geothermal fluids and hot spring waters ___________-_____________________ 61

23. Analyses of geothermal fluids _________________________________________________________ 63

24. Chemical composition of selected lithium-rich brines from northern Chile ________________________-____ 71

25. Analyses of shallow aquifer brines, Great Salt Lake Desert ________________________________-____ 76

26. Chemical analyses of brine from deep brine aquifer _____________________________________ 76

27. Mean analysis of 10 shallow subsurface brines, southern half of Sevier Lake, Utah ___________________——— 77

28. Estimated recoverable lithium resources of Utah and estimated annual recovery possible by adding lithium-recovery

	plants to existing facilities ____________________________________________________ 78

29. Lithium requirement per megawatt for various kinds of fusion reactors inventory __________-_---—_- — — 80

30. Mineral contents and sources of lithium __________________________________________-____-__ 81

31. Literature on separation and determination of lithium from seawater ___________________________ — __ 82

32. Extraction of lithium from seawater—summary of dimensions and numbers of major pieces of equipment ___———— 85

33. Extraction of lithium from seawater. Solar pond area as a function of lithium production rate____ ———— _,__—,__—— 85

34. Summary of energy requirements for lithium extraction from seawater at various lithium production rates, pipe size for

	liquid transport, and height of ion exchange bed __________________________—— ———— --—— 85

35. Capital investment for a plant for the extraction of lithium from seawater in terms of W grn/hr lithium production

	rate _________________________________________________________________ 86

36. Capital investment for plants for the extraction of lithium from seawater __________________ — —— ———— 87

37. Production cost for extraction of lithium from seawater in terms of W g/hr lithium production rate (1974 dollars)-- 87

38. List of minerals found in the saline layers of Searles Lake and of their compositions _—_______ ——— —— __ — ___ 94

39. Concentrations of selected components in waters from Long Valley area and ratios of selected ions _____ ———— __ 95

40. Monthly boron and chlorine contents of Hot Creek and Owens River _________________-- —— — —— --— 96

41. Dissolved solids in waters of the Owens River or its equivalent _____________________-——-- ———— —— -- 96

42. Comparison of amount of selected components carried by Owens River in 24,000 years with amount now in Owens Lake

	and Upper Salt of Searles Lake _____________________________________________________—— 97

43. Analyses for calcium, fluorine, and other elements in waters from Owens River and Hot Creek, and the ratio of the

	chemical activity product (AP) of Ca++ and F~ in these waters to the equilibrium constant for fluorite (KT) ____ 99

44. Comparison of ratios of selected ions in waters from Long Valley area, Owens River, and Searles Lake ———————— 100

45. Annual discharge and tonnages of boron and chlorine in Owens River, 1929-45 ___________ ———— __ ———— -— 101

46. Lithium distribution in selected basins of internal drainage________________________—————-- —— ———— 106

47. Population statistics of lithium analyses _____________________________-_____ ———— _- —— --—— 107

48. Statistical estimates of a lithium anomaly ________________________________—_ ————————— ———— 107

49. Lithium analyses of West End Wash surface samples in the Muddy Mountains---——— ————— ————— ——— -———— HI

50. Lithium analyses of White Basin surface samples in the Muddy Mountains ——————- ————— ————— ———— ———— 1H

51. Sampling locations, depths, geologic unit specific gravity, concentrations (mg/1) of lithium, sodium, potassium, rubidium,

	cesium, and fluoride of some oilfield waters of the United States __________—__ ————— ———— -- ——— - H7

52. Original composition of seawater changed by mineral formation and sulfate reduction —— ———————— ———————— 119

53. Concentration ratios and excess factor ratios for some constituents in Smackover brines _______——————————— 119

54. Compositions obtained by successively mixing one volume of Clayton Valley, Nev., spring water and one of brine and

	then evaporating to the original brine volume____________________________—-- ———— ———— -- 121

55. Mean content of minor elements in 14 samples of lake beds in the Gila Conglomerate, southwestern New Mexico—_ 124

56. Chemistry of hot springs in southwestern New Mexico_________________—_— ———— ————————— — 127

57. Lithium contents and X-ray mineralogical analyses of clayey rocks of Pennsylvanian age, western Pennsylvania ——— 131

58. Arkansas lithium minerals________________________________________————— ——— -———— 137

59. Arkansas minerals on which lithium determinations have been made _____——— ——————————————— —————— 139

60. X-ray diffraction patterns of taeniolite ________________________________————————————— 140

61. Lithium concentrations in Arkansas manganese ores (by spectroscopic analysis) — ———— ————————————————— _ 140

62. Data from rock powder-distilled water interaction experiments ______ ————— ——— —————— ——— —————————— 144

63. Data from whole rock-water interaction experiments ______________—————— —————— ————————————— - 145

64. An example of a typical record stored in the U.S. Geological Survey's CRIB file ___—__—————————————— 156

65. An example of a printed output for a search for lithium deposits in the United States —_——————————————— 158

66. Precision and accuracy of lithium determinations on brine and water samples _—————_———————————————— 162

67. Comparison of precision and accuracy determinations on rock and sediment samples using a method without boric acid

	and a method with boric acid ———______________________——————————————————————————— 162
INTRODUCTION

By JAMES D. VINE, 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, DENVER, CO

An assessment of the mineral resources within our 

nation's borders is a continuing responsibility of the U.S. 

Geological Survey; it is continuing because there is 

never a final answer. While mineral resources are not 

renewable, neither are they static. An assessment of a 

mineral commodity is a function of the adequacy of the 

data base, economic factors that influence demand, 

technologic changes, and ingenuity applied to the discovery and definition of commercially extractable material, as well as, the accuracy of measurements applied to 

the dimensions and grade of material to be extracted. 

When a recent reassessment of United States lithium 

resources and a comparison with potential demand 

suggested a possible depletion of known resources much 

sooner than previously indicated, the decision was made 

to sponsor a symposium which would bring these facts 

to light. Possible participants were contacted from Foote 

Mineral Company, Gulf Resources and its subsidiary, 

Lithium Corporation of America, Kerr-McGee Chemical Corporation, the U.S. Geological Survey, several 

state geologists, U.S. Bureau of Mines, U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration, Lawrence 

Livermore Laboratory, Argonne National Laboratory, 

and Brookhaven National Laboratory. The participants 

represented the lithium producing industry, government specialists on the reserves, resources, and geologic 

occurrence of lithium, and the sponsors and contractors 

involved in the design and testing of new energy-related 

applications for lithium in batteries and in thermonuclear power. When it became apparent that there were 

enough potential participants to address the problem of 

resources and requirements, a tentative program was 

formulated and a date set for the symposium. It became 

apparent that interest was not limited to those who had 

been asked to participate, and invitations were extended 

to many others who expressed interest in attending the 

symposium. Although not widely advertised because of

the time limitation, the symposium attracted nearly 150 

participants and observers from the United States, 

Canada, Great Britain, and Rhodesia.

A noteworthy difference of opinion between the participants from industry and the government specialists 

regarding the gravity of the impending shortage of 

lithium forecast by representatives from the U.S. 

Geological Survey developed. Representatives from industry were united in their opinion that the potential 

increased demand for lithium suggested by the engineers working on the development of batteries suitable for electric vehicles could be met. This difference of 

opinion is emphasized because only the prepared papers are contained here, and there is no record of the 

ensuing discussions that are an essential part of a symposium. (See Hammond, 1976.)

This symposium was the first of its kind for lithium 

and unique in having brought together specialists from 

such diverse points of view. The benefits far outweighed 

the concern of a few participants who felt that too much 

emphasis and publicity were placed on the forecast of a 

shortage of lithium. The forecast itself can best be 

judged from hindsight, a task for some future symposium.

The arrangement of the papers in this volume is similar to the order of presentation at the symposium, beginning with papers dealing with potential new energyrelated uses for lithium in batteries and fusion power. 

These are followed by papers dealing with the lithium 

industry, lithium resources, and finally the geology and 

geochemistry of lithium, geophysical exploration techniques, computer applications of resource data, and 

chemical analytical technique.

Reference cited

Hammond, A. L., 1976, Lithium, will short supply constrain energy 

technology?: Science, v. 191, no. 4231, 1037-1038.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

BATTERY RESEARCH SPONSORED BY THE 

U.S. ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION1

ALBERT A. LANDGREBE, ENERGY RESEARCH and DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION, 

WASHINGTON, DC, and PAUL A. NELSON, ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY, ARGONNE, IL

ABSTRACT

An important part of the Energy Storage Program of the U.S. 

Energy Research and Development Administration is the development of storage batteries for loadleveling on electric utilities and automotive propulsion, and for application to new energy generating 

systems. The successful development of batteries for these purposes 

will provide significant savings of oil resources and will also have beneficial environmental effects. A very high manufacturing volume 

may be required for these batteries, and the availability of the required 

raw materials is an important consideration. Lithium-aluminum/iron 

sulfide batteries show promise both for utility energy storage batteries 

and electric vehicle batteries, and serious consideration should be 

given by the lithium industry to the availability of lithium resources.

INTRODUCTION

The primary goal of the Energy Storage Program of 

the U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA) is to develop energy storage techniques 

that will have the most favorable impact on U.S. energy 

systems, in terms of resources, environment, and economics. Investigations are being directed toward developing safe and economical storage devices for storing 

heat or electrical energy generated from nuclear fuel, 

coal, or solar energy, which are plentiful sources. Such 

storage devices are needed for electric utilities, advanced automotive systems, and other residential, commercial, and industrial applications. The storage devices 

developed for these applications would replace systems 

that now use petroleum or natural gas, which are in 

short supply. For many of these applications energy is 

stored most conveniently as electric energy in storage 

batteries. This paper describes the programs now in 

progress on developing these batteries and the justification for these programs. Some of these programs are a 

continuation of work started by the Division of Applied 

Technology of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. 

However, most of the programs are new, and a considerable increase has been made in funding over the levels 

of fiscal years 1974 and 1975.

ENERGY CONSUMPTION IN THE 

UNITED STATES

Within the past quarter of a century, significant

'Work performed under the auspices of the Assistant Administrator for Conservation 

Energy Research and Development Administration.

changes have occurred in the mix of fuels in the U.S. 

The fraction of total fuel supplied by coal has decreased 

from 38 percent in 1950 to a level of 18 percent in 1974, 

in spite of the fact that the coal input to the rapidly 

growing electrical sector has tripled during this interval. 

To some extent, coal has been displaced by a cheaper, 

cleaner, and far more convenient-to-use form of energy, 

namely, natural gas, which has experienced a fivefold 

increase in usage during the last 25 years. In this interval, the fraction of the total national fuel mix supplied 

by natural gas has increased from 18 to 33 percent. At 

the same time, reliance on oil in the U.S. has generally 

grown at about the same rate as the total energy demand. Within the past few years, oil consumption has 

grown at an average rate of 6 percent per year. The 

changing pattern of consumption of energy resources in 

the recent past is shown in table 1.

The energy consumption in the U.S. in 1972 was 

72xl015 Btu. The forecast for energy consumption in 

1985 is 105xl015 Btu, and that for longer-term consumption (for the year 2000) is 162 x 10 15 Btu. The values in table 2 show the domestic supply for each major 

energy source in selected years, along with the total 

energy consumption for those same years, and by difference the energy shortfall. The latter values represent 

the amounts that will have to be satisfied by imported 

fuels or by some method of rationing if energy conservation measures are not adopted.

OIL SAVINGS BY MEANS OF ENERGY STORAGE

At the present time, most utilities use gas turbines as 

the major source of peaking power. These devices are 

low in capital cost, but they are expensive to operate;

TABLE 1.—United States consumption of energy resources by major sources 1

10 15 Btu

I960

Nuclear _

_ _ 13.489

. __ 6.150

_ _ 12.913

__ __ 1.440

20.067

12.699

10.140

1.657

.006

29.614

22.029

12.022

2.650

.229

Total primary energy __ 33.992 44.569 67.444

'Dupree and West, 1972.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

TABLE 2.—United States energy shortfall 1

1985

22.960

23.770

16.140

3.990

6.720

Total

Domestic

consumption. 

Shortfall to be

satisfied by

imports _____ 

(106 bbl oil) .

8.656 

(1,546)

22.640

22.130

13.825

3.570

2.560

64.725

80.265

15.540 16.495 

(2,775) (2,946)

22.850

21.220

31.360

5.950

49.230

21.650 

(3,866)

31.840 

(5,686)

'Dupree and West, 1972; Hoffman, Beller and Doernberg, 1975.

moreover, they produce significant quantities of nitrogen oxides and are noisy. Development of alternative 

electrical-storage technology would reduce the need by 

the utilities for the high-grade fossil fuels and natural 

gas that are required to operate peaking turbines. With 

the increasing introduction of nuclear central electric 

generation, electric energy storage becomes an increasingly important consideration because safety and economics dictate that reactor systems operate at base load.

The transportation sector of the energy economy is 

presently almost totally dependent on the use of 

gasoline and distillate oils. Thus, the development of 

energy storage for transportation systems by means of 

batteries or of the use of hydrogen as an automotive fuel 

is potentially of great value. The energy supplied to 

charge batteries or to produce hydrogen would be offpeak power and thus would serve to level the load, in a 

manner analogous to load leveling at a utility substation 

or central station.

Petroleum and natural gas savings would also result if 

economical systems can be devised to utilize replenishable energy sources such as solar energy and wind 

energy. Because the availability of these sources is intermittent, economical storage devices are needed. For 

heating homes with solar energy, thermal storage appears to be the most appropriate. If solar or wind 

energy are to be used to generate electricity, however, 

the use of storage batteries is appropriate. The requirements for such batteries would be similar to those 

for utility storage batteries except that units of smaller 

capacity would be needed.

A summary of the goals of the energy storage programs, expected oil savings, and the research costs are 

shown in table 3. It is estimated that these programs will 

save 24 percent of the imported oil projected for the 

year 2000; this is approximately 13 percent of the total 

oil demand in the year 2000.

The electric utility industry has estimated that 15 to 

25 percent of the daytime generating capacity of future

TABLE 3.—Energy storage research and development program.

Program Program goals

Projected annual

savings of Total 

imported oil, research,

10" bbl/\r costs, 

1985 2000 $106

1. Energv storage fo: 

electric utilities

2. Ad\anced energy stoi 

age for automotive 

applications.

3 Industiial

applications.

4. Commercial and 

residential.

5. Applications to 

solar energv.

Total

Reduce oil consumption in 

gas tui bines b\ 80 percent in the year 2000, a 

reduce requirements for 

new transmission facilities by 10 percent.

Introduce 22.5 million electric and hyhiid vehicles 

into the transpoitation 

sector bv 2000.

Reduce fossil fuel (oil and 

gas)consumption in industry bv 10 percent in 

the vear 2000.

Reduce fossil fuel (gas and 

oil) consumption in space 

heat applications by 12 

percent in the \ear 2000.

Allow practical implementation ot solar energv to 

save 2 percent of the total 

oil in the vear 2000.

39b 681

a Assumed 6 percent of electricity generated by the utilities was produced bv gas turbine 

ith an efficiency of 40 percent.

be implemented in the near term.

d Approximately 2 percent savings of projected oil imports in year 1985; about 1 percent of 

total oil demand in 1985.

e About 24 percent savings of projected oil imports in \ear 2000; about 13 percent of total 

oil demand in the year 2000.

utility systems could be supplied by batteries that are 

charged during off-peak periods. Unfortunately, a suitable battery does not yet exist for this application. The 

introduction of bulk energy storage batteries on utility 

networks would eliminate the need for gas turbines 

which are presently used to generate power during peak 

periods. If 80 percent of the gas turbine units could be 

replaced by battery units, the oil savings would be approximately 450 million bbl/year by the year 2000. 

Plants employing these batteries are expected to be 

compact, efficient, quiet, and nonpolluting. Consequently, siting problems should be minimal, and battery plants could be located near load centers to achieve 

maximum savings in transmission costs. Also, the batteries could be supplied in modular form, which would 

allow the storage capacity to be easily altered as the electric utility requirements change.

The advanced battery systems currently under development for use in utility networks after 1985 include 

sodium/sulfur, lithium/metal sulfide, and zinc/chlorine, 

as well as several other systems which are presently in an 

earlier stage of development. The sodium/sulfur, 

lithium/metal sulfide, and zinc/chlorine systems are approaching the battery hardware stage, but will require 

additional research and development to improve electrical performance and lifetime and to reduce costs. 

None of these battery systems have advanced to the 

point where successful development has become certain; however, it appears very likely that at least one of 

these advanced batteries will be successfully developed,
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

thereby resulting in the major petroleum savings described above. Present plans call for the sodium/sulfur, 

lithium/metal sulfide, and zinc/chlorine batteries to become operational in 1980, 1981, and 1983, respectively. 

(The other electrochemical systems appear to require 

major technical advances before the hardware stage is 

reached.) The ERDA program provides for research 

and development on the most promising alternative battery systems. If major technical advances are made in 

one or more of these systems, the level of funding will be 

increased, and the more promising systems will be 

brought to the demonstration and commercial development stage, if warranted. The total cost of the 

ERDA program for research and development of advanced batteries is projected at $200 million through the 

year 2000. It is anticipated that industry will participate 

on a cost sharing basis and that some of the demonstration projects may be funded as loans.

A Battery Energy Storage Test (BEST) Facility will be 

constructed for the testing of advanced batteries and 

power-conditioning equipment. The electrical performance and lifetime capabilities of the batteries will be determined under standardized conditions to allow direct 

comparisons to be made among the various systems. 

The test results will be used to determine what improvements are necessary for each system and to aid in 

determining which systems should receive additional 

support. The BEST Facility will become operational in 

1979 and will be used first for testing advanced lead-acid 

batteries. Large-scale testing of lithium-aluminum/metal 

sulfide, sodium/sulfur, and zinc/chlorine batteries 

should be under way in the BEST Facility in the period 

from 1980 to 1985.

BATTERIES FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLES

Existing electric vehicles for highway use are severely 

limited in their range and performance because of the 

low specific energy and low specific power of the batteries that are available. Such vehicles normally have a 

range of 20 to 50 miles and a top speed of 30 to 50 mph, 

depending on the driving conditions. This lack of performance not only discourages consumer acceptance, 

but also creates safety problems. Vehicles of this type 

may be suitable for certain interim, limited applications; 

however for the long range, electric vehicles of acceptable performance will require new types of batteries of 

high specific energy (120 to 150 W-hr/kg) and high peak 

specific power 150 to 200 W/kg). It appears that these 

long-range requirements can be met only by new advanced battery systems—very likely some of the systems 

are currently under development.

For near-term application, the battery systems being 

investigated include lead-acid, nickel/iron, and nickel/

zinc. Improvements in these systems will make it possible to attain interim goals that will aid in assessing the 

long-range viability of electric vehicles. Among the systems that are under consideration for the longer range 

application are sodium/sulfur, lithium-aluminum/FeS2, 

zinc/chlorine, zinc/bromine, zinc/air, iron/air, lithium/ 

air, and aluminum/air. The sodium/sulfur and lithiumaluminum/iron sulfide systems are both well advanced 

into the cell hardware stage and will soon be tested in 

battery configurations. Both systems have achieved cycle 

lives of several hundred charge-discharge cycles and 

lifetimes of several thousand hours. (The minimum requirements for an electric vehicle battery are about 1000 

cycles and 25,000 to 50,000 hr.) Both systems also show 

promise for meeting the long-term specific energy and 

specific power goals. A zinc/chlorine battery has been 

demonstrated in a test vehicle and a rechargeable zinc/ 

chlorine battery has attained about 100 cycles in the laboratory. The zinc/air and iron/air systems are under development by industry and are now capable of about 

150 cycles. However, both these systems have low 

specific powers (20 to 40 W/kg) and low overall energy 

efficiencies of only about 30 percent. The zinc/bromine, 

lithium/air and aluminum/air systems are under consideration for development, but little or no work is currently in progress.

Only a few thousand electric vehicles are on the road 

today in the U.S. However, the development of highperformance batteries is expected to increase their acceptability to the public, and the number of electric vehicles on the road is expected to increase from 10,000 in 

1978 to 18 million by the year 2000. The corresponding 

annual production of electric vehicle batteries would increase from 7,000 in 1978 to 10 million in the year 2000. 

On the basis of a battery capacity of 35 kW-hr per vehicle, the cumulative battery capacity produced over this 

period would be about 2 million MW-hr. The total value 

of all of the batteries produced during this period at a 

price of $30/kW-hr would amount to approximately 60 

billion dollars. On this same basis, the annual value of 

batteries produced would increase from 8.5 million dollars in 1978 to about 12 billion dollars in 2000.

The widespread use of electric vehicles will affect several areas of our society. The overall environmental impact of electric vehicles should be favorable. Although 

the level of pollution will not be decreased, the pollution 

problem will be transferred from the highways to the 

electric generating plant, where it can be coped with 

more easily. The use of electric vehicles will also have a 

significant economic impact on the automotive, petroleum, battery manufacturing, and electric utility industries. However, the changeover from gasoline-powered 

to electric-powered vehicles is expected to be gradual, 

and no major disruptions are anticipated.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

MATERIAL SUPPLIER FOR 

ADVANCED BATTERIES

The manufacture of batteries for storing energy on 

electric utilities and for propulsion of electric vehicles 

will be a multibillion-dollar business by the year 2000, if 

any of several battery programs now under development are successful. The manufacturers of these batteries will require huge quantities of strategic materials. 

Of particular interest here is that one of the most promising systems—the lithium/metal sulfide system—utilizes 

lithium, not only as one of the active materials, but also 

as a constituent of the LiCl-KCl molten salt electrolyte. 

If the performance goals for the lithium/metal sulfide 

battery are achieved, the demand for these batteries will, 

in turn, create a greatly increased demand for lithium. 

Accordingly, serious consideration should be given by

the lithium industry to possible problems related to the 

availability of lithium resources and to greatly increased 

production rates. However, the problem of lithium 

availability may not continue for the long term if other 

molten-salt systems can be developed that have performance capabilities similar to that of the lithium/iron 

sulfide systems. Work on molten-salt systems not containing lithium is in the early development stage at Argonne National Laboratory.

REFERENCES CITED

Dupree, W. G., Jr., and West, J. A., 1972, United States energy

through the year 2000: U.S. Department of the Interior report,

53 p. and 27 tables. 

Hoffman, K. C., Beller, M., and Doernberg, A. B., 1975, Current BNL

reference energy system projections: "Base Case (Sept. 19,

1975)": Brookhaven National Laboratory.

BATTERY SYSTEMS FOR LOAD-LEVELING AND

ELECTRIC-VEHICLE APPLICATION, 

NEAR-TERM AND ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY1

By N. P. YAO and W. J. WALSH, 

ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY, ARGONNE, IL

ABSTRACT

Intensive efforts are underway in the United States and elsewhere to 

develop secondary batteries for utility load-leveling systems and electric vehicles. The lead-acid battery is the only candidate system that 

can meet the performance requirements using presently available 

technology, but it has the drawbacks of higher-than-desired battery 

cost and marginal energy-storage capacity for the vehicle application. 

The Zn/Ni system appears to have a good chance of capturing the

near-term electric-vehicle market, provided that advances can be 

made in reducing costs and increasing battery lifetime. Advanced secondary battery systems that may come into commercial use by 1985 

include Li-Al-FeSx, Na/S, and Zn/Cl2 . These advanced systems are 

expected to possess superior performance characteristics and 

economic prospects compared to lead-acid and Zn/Ni batteries.

'Work supported by the Conservation Division of the Energy Research and Development 

Administration

LITHIUM REQUIREMENTS FOR HIGH-ENERGY

LITHIUM-ALUMINUM/IRON-SULFIDE BATTERIES

FOR LOAD-LEVELING AND ELECTRIC-VEHICLE APPLICATIONS1

By A. A. CHILENSKAS, G. J. BERNSTEIN, and R. O. IVINS, 

ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY, ARGONNE, IL

ABSTRACT

Lithium-aluminum/iron-sulfide batteries are being developed at 

Argonne National Laboratory for use as energy-storage devices on 

electric utilities and as power sources for electric vehicles. These batteries are expected to come into commercial use around 1985 and to 

achieve rapid market penetration thereafter. By the end of the year

'Work performed under the auspices of the Assistant Administrator for Conservation, 

Energy Research and Development Administration.
6 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

2000, as much as 3 percent (3xl08 kW-hr) of the projected total U.S. 

energy consumption could be supplied by lithium-aluminum/ironsulfide off-peak energy-storage batteries. At the same time 18 million 

electric vehicles or more may be powered by lithium-aluminum/ironsulfide batteries.

Projections have been made of the quantity of lithium required for 

lithium-aluminum/iron-sulfide batteries produced from 1985 to 2000. 

The projected lithium requirement in the year 2000 represents a substantial fraction of the present estimate of world lithium resources and 

is nearly equal to the estimated economically recoverable lithium resources in the U.S. In addition, the potential market for primary batteries using lithium will add to these requirements. Expansion of exploration for new sources and increases in production capacity will be 

needed to meet the projected lithium requirements for the introduction of these batteries in sufficient quantities to produce the desired 

impact upon petroleum-conservation goals in the U.S. transportation 

sector and electrical-power generation.

INTRODUCTION

The Chemical Engineering Division of Argonne National Laboratory is engaged in a research and development program on high-performance lithiumaluminum/iron-sulfide batteries suitable for powering 

electric automobiles and for storing off-peak energy to 

level the loads on generating equipment in electric utility systems. At the present time, commercially available 

batteries are limited in their ability to meet the stringent 

performance, cost, and lifetime requirements for these 

applications. The successful development of more 

economic, high-specific-energy batteries for either application would provide a means of using energy produced from nonpetroleum sources (for example, nuclear, coal) and reduce our dependence on foreign oil 

sources.

The current effort in the battery program consists of 

about 65 engineers, chemists, metallurgists, and other 

technical personnel, including temporary industrial participants, postdoctoral appointees, students, and faculty 

members, and is funded chiefly through the Division of 

Conservation Research and Technology in the Energy 

Research and Development Administration (ERDA) 

(Nelson and Webster, 1974; Nelson and others, 1974).

The batteries consist of cells containing a lithiumaluminum alloy in the negative electrode and a metal 

sulfide such as FeS or FeS2 in the positive electrode. The 

electrolyte is the LiCl-KCl eutectic, which has a melting 

point of 352°C. For this reason the cells are operated at 

temperatures between 380° and 450°C. A drawing showing a full-scale cell designed for a utility load-leveling 

battery is shown in figure 1.

To provide an opportunity for industry to develop 

manufacturing techniques and expertise in the fabrication of lithium-aluminum/metal-sulfide cells, commercial development contracts have been let with Gould, 

Inc.; Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc.; and Catalyst Research Corp. to develop, fabricate, and deliver cells to 

Argonne for testing and evaluation. Argonne has also

POSITIVE

STEEL HOUSING j( TERMINAL 

(NEGATIVE TERMINAL)

POSITIVE ELECTRODE 

AND CURRENT COLLECTOR

NEGATIVE ELECTRODES

POSITIVE ELECTRODE 

(FERROUS SULFIDE 

PARTICLES)

NEGATIVE ELECTRODES 

(LITHIUM-ALUMINUM 

PARTICLES)

ELECTROLYTE: 

LITHIUM CHLORIDEPOTASSIUM CHLORIDE 

EUTECTIC

IRON CURRENT 

COLLECTOR

BORON NITRIDE CLOTH 

OR PAPER SEPARATOR

FIGURE 1.—Design of prismatic cell for Argonne National Laboratory 

lithium/aluminum/iron sulfide battery.

contracted with Atomics International for a supporting 

development program; at the present time their approach incorporates a lithium-silicon-alloy negative electrode of their own development.

Test cells and electrodes have been fabricated by both 

Gould and Eagle-Picher and are now being tested. During 1976 the industrial-cell-fabrication development will 

be extended to the fabrication of battery systems. Current plans include large-scale battery tests both in the 

laboratory and in a test automobile early in 1978.

The cells currently being tested are square in shape, 

13 cm on a side, and 2 to 3.8 cm thick. Both FeS and 

FeS2 positive electrodes are being evaluated. The 

former appear attractive for electric-utility-storage application owing to potentially lower cost, whereas the 

latter appear more suitable for automobiles owing to 

their higher power capability. Cells containing FeS electrodes have achieved a capacity of about 90 A-hr at 1.2 

V, and cells with FeS2 electrodes have demonstrated a 

capacity of about 120 A-hr at 1.5 V. These values, which 

correspond to specific-energy values of about 100 

W-hr/kg for FeS cells and 150 W-hr/kg for FeS2 cells, are 

about three to five times that obtainable from a lead-acid 

battery. With further improvements in cell design, the 

specific energy is expected to increase by at least 25 percent and possibly as high as 50 percent.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

LITHIUM REQUIREMENTS

Because of the potential demand for large quantities 

of lithium for fabrication of lithium-aluminum/ironsulfide batteries, we have attempted to forecast the need 

for lithium in the time period 1985-2000. In this regard, not only the total amount of lithium contained in 

the batteries, but the production rate necessary for 

meeting annual needs is of importance.

The projected lithium requirement for off-peak 

energy-storage batteries is based upon a total U.S. 

electrical-energy consumption of 4xl09 MW-hr in 

1985, 6X109 in 1990, and lOxlO9 in the year 2000 

(Electric Research Council, 1971). The fraction of this 

energy supplied from lithium-aluminum/iron-sulfide 

batteries was estimated to be minimal in 1985, about 1 

percent in 1990, and about 3 percent in 2000. Based 

upon these assumptions, the projected energy supplied 

from battery storage plants in the year 2000 is 3xl08 

MW-hr. Laboratory test cells have achieved 150 Whr/kg. These cells have a lithium content of 6.5 weight 

percent. About 4 percent of this is in the electrodes, and 

the remaining amount is contained as lithium chloride 

in the molten salt electrolyte. Assuming 250 chargedischarge cycles per year and the above values, the 

lithium content in battery systems on utility networks 

would be about 5x 10 8 kg in the year 2000.

In table 4, we estimate the annual requirement for 

lithium based upon our projected rate of growth of utility storage facilities and assuming 10-yr life-time for the 

batteries. We have also indicated the production rate of 

new lithium if the lithium in used batteries can be recycled with a 90 percent recovery. Recycling of lithium has 

the advantage of reducing the amount of new lithium 

that has to be extracted from available lithium resources. Because of the relatively small use of these batteries prior to 1990, recycling of utility storage batteries 

does not become important until after 1995.

A projection was also made of the number of electric 

vehicles in operation in the U.S. until the year 2000. 

These vehicles are expected to be introduced in significant numbers around 1985, with annual production risTABLE 4.—Projected requirements for lithium in lithium-aluminum/ironsulfide batteries for utility energy storage

1985 1990 2000

Total U.S. electrical-energy

consumption, MW-hr__________

Electrical energy supplied by

batteries, MW-hr ____________ 5xl05 

Lithium in utility batteries, kg ______ 1 x 106 

Annual new lithium production;

no lithium recycle, kg_________ IxlO6 2.8xl07 8xl07 

Annual new lithium production;

90 percent lithium recycle, kg ____ IxlO6 2.8xl07 5.3xl07

4xl09 6xl09 lOxlO9

6xlOr 

IxlO8

3xl08 

5.2X10 8

ing to about 2.7 million in the year 2000. Based upon an 

expected average lifetime of these vehicles of at least 10 

years, about 18 million electric vehicles would be on the 

road in the year 2000. Figure 2 shows the growth rate of 

electric vehicles starting with modest production in 

1982.

A typical vehicle would be equipped with a 42 kW-hr 

lithium-aluminum/iron-sulfide battery weighing about 

350 kg and would be capable of driving the vehicle more 

than 240 km per charge. The electric-vehicle cells would 

contain about 7.2 weight percent elemental lithium as 

metal and salt. Thus, each vehicle battery would hold 

about 15 kg of lithium; this value represents a total of 

2.7x 10 8 kg in vehicle batteries in the year 2000.

During the period between 1985 and 2000, about 

20 X 106 vehicles would have been built and about 2x 106 

would have been scrapped, based upon an average 

lifetime of 10 years. Consideration was also given to the 

effect upon annual demand for new lithium if the vehicle batteries had lifetimes of 5 years instead of 10 years 

and if the lithium in used batteries could be recycled 

with 90 percent recovery, (see fig. 3.) Table 5 shows the 

annual demand for new lithium for 5- and 10-year battery lifetimes and under the conditions noted above.

Table 6 summarizes the total annual requirements for 

lithium and the total lithium in battery use for both

io7

-Electric-vehicle population

u IO6

IO 5

IO4

'Annual scrapping rate -

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 

YEARS

FIGURE 2.—Electric-vehicle production.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

I08 

I07

I06

5-year battery, no recycle -

10-year battery, no recycle 

5-year battery, 90% recycle - 

10-year battery, 90% recycle'

1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 

YEARS

FIGURE 3.—Annual lithium requirements for electric-vehicle batteries.

TABLE 5.—Projected requirements for lithium in lithium-aluminum/ 

iron-sulfide batteries for electric-vehicle propulsion

1990 2000

Annual electric vehicle production ________ 

Total electric vehicles in operation „_-____ 

Lithium in operating electric

Annual newlithium production:

Annual new lithium production: 5-yr 

battery life, 90 percent recycle, kg --____ 

Annual new lithium production: 10-yr

Annual new lithium production: 10-yr 

battery life, 90 percent recycle, kg ______

8.0 xlO4 

1.5X105

2.3X106

1.2X106

1.2X106 

1.2x10"

1.2xl06

7.0X105 

2.1x10"

3.2xl07

1.2x10'

l.lxlO7

l.lxlO7

2.7X106 

1.8X107

4.4X107

3.1x10'

TABLE 6.—Projected requirements fnr lithium in lithium-aluminum/ 

iron-sulfide batteries for utility energy storage and electric vehicles

1990

Lithium in utility facilities, kg _

Total lithium in use, kg __ _________ __

Total annual new lithium production:

10-yr battery life, no recycle, kg _ _ _ _

Total annual new lithium production:

10-yr battery life, 90 percent

recycle, kg _ __ _ ._ _ _ _

Cumulative production of lithium:

no recycle, kg __ _. ____ _ ______

Cumulative production of lithium:

90 percent recycle, kg _ _ _

l.OxlO6

2.3xl06

3.3X106

2.2xl06

2.2xl06

3.3x10"

3.3x10*

1.0x10"

3.2xl07

1.3x10"

3.9X107

3.9X107

l.SxlO8

l.SxlO8

5.2xl08

2.7xl08

7.9x10"

1.2xl08

8.4X107

9.3 xlO8

8. lx 10s

electric vehicles and energy storage under the conditions noted above. The requirements shown in this table 

must be compared with estimated lithium resources and

the required rates of production. In addition, some allowance must be made for lithium requirements for 

other battery applications, such as primary batteries for 

military and civilian use.

Considerable uncertainty surrounds estimates of 

lithium resources. World lithium resources have been 

estimated as high as 2xl010 kg (H. R. Grady, written 

commun. 1974). Other estimates suggest that economically recoverable U.S. resources might be less than 

IxlO9 kg (J. D. Vine, written commun. 1975). Table,6 

shows that the cumulative production of lithium by the 

year 2000 could equal the presently identified, economically recoverable U.S. resources.

Consideration must be given to lithium production 

rates. The U.S. Bureau of Mines (J. D. Vine, written 

commun., 1975) estimates that lithium production was 

about 2.6x 106 kg in 1968. On the basis of an estimated 

annual growth rate of 10 percent, the production in 

1974 would have been about 4.5xl06 kg. If a 10 percent 

annual growth rate is maintained until 1985, annual 

production would be 1.2xl07 kg. This would be about 

10 times the projected requirements for lithiumaluminum/iron-sulfide batteries in that year. If the same 

growth rate continued until 1990, annual production 

would reach 2*107 kg. This is less than the annual 

battery-production requirements under the conditions 

of 10-yr battery life and 90 percent recycle (3.9x 10 7 kg). 

The requirements for the year 2000 (8.4xl07 kg) would 

also exceed projected capacity at 10 percent growth 

(5.2xl07 kg). In addition to expansion of capacity for 

producing new lithium from ores, it will be necessary to 

establish a lithium-recovery technology to permit recycling of the increasing amounts of lithium in used batteries. It should be noted that the chemical form of 

lithium that will be used in commercial cells will very 

likely be L^S, as suggested by recent results of the cellfabrication development effort. The commercial production of Li2S will be based upon the chemical conversion 

of lithium ores to Li2S rather than the current practice 

of producing the sulfide from lithium metal.

The availability of lithium clearly constitutes a major 

supply problem for the period 1985-2000, and accelerated efforts at discovery of new resources and expansion 

of production facilities will be needed if lithiumaluminum/iron-sulfide batteries are to be introduced 

into the economy at rates sufficient to produce the desired impact upon petroleum conservation goals in the 

U.S. transportation sector and in electrical power generation.

REFERENCES

Electric Research Council, 1971, Electric utility industry R & D goals 

through the year 2000: Publication No. 1-71, Appendix F.

Nelson, P.A., and Webster, D.S., 1974, High-energy battery program 

at Argonne National Laboratory: Argonne Natl. Laboratory Rept. 

8064.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

Nelson, P.A., Chilenskas, A. A., and Steunenberg, R. K., 1974, The 

need for development of high energy batteries for electric automobiles: Argonne Nad. Laboratory Rept. 8075, 24 p. available

from Natl. Tech. Inf. Service, U.S. Dept. of Commerce, 5285 Port 

Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161.

LITHIUM REQUIREMENTS FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLES 

USING LITHIUM-WATER-AIR BATTERIES1

ByJ. F. COOPER, I. Y. BORG, L. G. O'CONNELL, E. BEHRIN, B. RUBIN, and H. J. WIESNER, 

LAWRENCE LIVERMORE LABORATORY, UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA,

LIVERMORE, CA

ABSTRACT

The lithium-water-air battery is a new primary battery of such exceptional power and energy that it is a candidate to provide propulsion 

for electric automobiles of the future. In the electrochemical reaction 

involved, lithium, oxygen, and CO2 are combined, leaving Li2CO3 as a 

by-product to be removed from the battery and recycled. A subcompact car weighing 910 kg would transform 7.2 kg of lithium in traveling 320 km at 97 km/hr. At least an equal amount of lithium per car 

would be unavailable because of the need to recycle the by-product 

(Li2COs). Thus, a minimum of 14.4 kg of lithium per car is required to 

support a transportation system based upon this power source. Assuming that in the year 2000, 12 to 16 percent of all vehicles are powered 

by lithium-water-air batteries, we will need 234,000 to 425,000 metric 

tons of lithium. This amount is somewhat less than the total known 

U.S. lithium reserves, but if the current rate of consumption of lithium 

for other purposes continues, the supply of lithium will have to be 

increased.

INTRODUCTION

The 1973 petroleum embargo by major Arab petroleum exporters and the subsequent price increases by 

OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) focused attention on oil-consuming technologies 

and industries. Because the passenger automobile consumes about 4.8 million bbl/day (approximately 28 percent of the nation s total oil consumption), the automotive industry has been pressured to modify existing 

vehicles so that gasoline economy is increased. There is 

an urgent need to develop vehicles that use alternate 

fuels or propulsion systems.

One alternative to the gasoline automobile is an allelectric vehicle. However, the most advanced batteries 

available today have power and energy capacities per 

unit weight that are too low to provide performance and 

range comparable to conventional automobiles. The 

lithium-water-air battery, which is closely related to the 

lithium-water battery developed for marine use by the 

Lockheed Missile & Space Company (Halberstadt, 

1973), offers apparent high-performance potential. 

Further development could provide the basis for an all-

'This work was performed under the auspices of the U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration under contract No. W-7405-Eng-48.

electric vehicle with the range, speed, acceleration, and 

rapid refueling capabilities of current automobiles.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE 

LITHIUM-WATER-AIR BATTERY

The projected performance of the lithium-water and 

lithium-water-air batteries approaches that of the internal combustion engine. We have compared the performance of various power sources on a graph of 

specific power against specific energy in the manner of 

Ragone (1968) (see fig. 4). For fixed battery and vehicle 

weights, top speed and acceleration are determined by 

specific power, whereas the vehicle range for a given 

speed is proportional to specific energy. On the basis of 

demonstrated cell performance data, a lithium-water 

battery weighing 230 kg could be built to deliver an 

energy density of 225 to 300 Wh/kg at a specific power 

of over 100 W/kg. This would suffice to power a vehicle 

weighing about one tonne for 300 to 400 km at about 

100 km/h. Modification of the lithium-water battery to 

include an air cathode has been shown to increase cell

1000

Internal

combustion

engine

Molten 

salts

,. Nonaqueous 

/ . electrolytes

t-7n—a i v

10 100 1000 

Specific energy (Wh/kg)

FIGURE 4.—Performance characteristics of vehicle power sources.
10 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

voltage. A specific energy of 350 to 400 Wh/kg at 110 

W/kg has been projected, based on specific cell data and 

a preliminary battery design.

PRINCIPLES OF OPERATION OF BATTERIES 

OF THE LITHIUM-WATER TYPE

The lithium-water battery utilizes the electrochemical 

reaction of lithium and water:

(anode) = -3.05V;

Li+H2O=LiOH(aq) + 1/2 H

(cathode) Eg=-0.83V; 

(net) AJL.QE2=2.22V.

In a simple version of the cell, an iron wire mesh 

cathode current collector is pressed against the lithium 

anode and the leads are connected through a load. 

When this electrode assembly is immersed in an aqueous 

solution of lithium hydroxide, a thin film of reaction 

products forms on the lithium surface and separates the 

two electrodes. The film inhibits corrosion of the lithium 

metal and prevents internal shorting of the cell. Practical cell voltages of 1.6 V are obtainable at current densities of 103 A/m2.

The lithium-water-air battery is considered to be the 

most energetic of the batteries of the lithium-water type, 

although other cathodes and electrolytes are under investigation (O'Connell and others, 1974). In the 

lithium-water-air battery, the iron mesh is placed in contact with a catalyzed, porous graphite electrode doped 

with an appropriate catalyst such as platinum (fig. 5). 

The battery utilizes atmospheric oxygen with the net cell 

reaction,

H2O = LiOH(aq)AEg=3.45 V.

Porous,

catalyzed

graphite

air electrode

Iron-wire-mesh 

cathode current 

collector

Load

Case 

Oxidic film

•Lithium metal

FIGURE 5.—A simple lithium-water-air cell.

Protective properties of the anode surface film are retained, and cell voltages of 2.6 to 2.7 V at 103 A/m2 are 

practical, depending on the choice of air cathode.

Stable cell discharge requires maintenance of electrolyte temperature and concentration within certain 

bounds. Precipitation of lithium as LiOFTF^O upon 

electrolyte cooling is one means of concentration control. Concentration might also be controlled by precipitation of lithium hydroxide with carbon dioxide. The 

overall reaction for the lithium-water-air battery would 

then become

Li+ 1/4O2 + 1/2CO2 (g) =

The energy losses and hazards associated with hydrogen evolution in the lithium-water-air battery are thus 

avoided, and a 50 percent increase in cell power is obtained.

ANODE REPLACEMENT AND 

LITHIUM RECYCLING

The lithium-water-air battery is a primary battery. 

Recharging is accomplished by removing the reaction 

product (a slurry of lithium carbonate) and replacing 

the battery's supply of lithium and carbon dioxide. For a 

910 kg vehicle, 7.2 kg of lithium and 23 kg of carbon 

dioxide suffice for a 320-km range at 97 km/h. For this 

range, the present distribution of gasoline service stations is adequate. One attractive option, depicted in 

figure 6, is to remove the lithium carbonate and replace 

the carbon dioxide every 320 km, while replenishing the 

supply of lithium only at intervals of 1,600 km. This 

would raise the necessary initial inventory of lithium 

from 7 to 36 kg, making the average amount carried 2 1 

kg. Such an option would reduce the frequency of the 

most difficult phase of refueling and reduce the number

FIGURE 6.—The lithium-water-air battery concept for electric vehicles.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 11

anodes \ 

1

1 . co2

Local 

auto 

service 

center

J Lr

Regional reprocessing plant

2LiCl + 2Li - 

2LiCl + C02 Hh 1/2 02

Li ? CO. +2Li + CO, + 1/2 0,

£. 3 c. c.

Electricity

Oxygen

of service stations required for handling lithium metal. /-LithiumThe mechanics of refueling the battery pose no serious 

problems, and details will be determined by consideration of economics and convenience.

The lithium carbonate reaction product would be 

transported to a recycling plant for reduction to lithium 

metal and carbon dioxide, as shown schematically in 

figure 7. Such a distribution system involving reprocessing and service centers does not currently exist. 

The cost of reprocessing lithium carbonate to lithium 

metal in large quantities is largely conjectural, but Foote 

Mineral Company (written commun., March 1975) 

stated that it may be in the range of $3.30/kg. If the cost 

of recycling lithium could be reduced to $1.30/kg, the 

fuel costs for the vehicle would be roughly $0.05/mile. 

This rate corresponds to a gasoline cost of $1.50/gal for 

an internal combustion engine vehicle achieving 30 

miles/gal.

HYBRID BATTERY SYSTEMS

The lithium-water-air battery can be employed in several different configurations. Thus far, it has only been 

considered as a primary battery system. However, dual 

battery hybrid systems could allow more economical operation without a sacrifice of performance. A secondary 

battery (for example, Ni-Zn) would provide propulsion 

energy for all short trips (that is, under 32 km), which 

constitutes 55 percent of total vehicle travel (Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association, 1973-74, p. 37). The 

primary battery would be activated when needed for 

greater range or rapid refueling. Hybrid systems would 

thus serve to reduce operating costs and make the vehicle competitive with internal combustion engines. A 

dual-battery hybrid system is an attractive means of 

combining the high performance of the lithium-waterair primary battery with the economical operation of the 

secondary (table 7).

ELECTRICAL CARS IN THE FUTURE

We do not know with certainty what percentage of

TABLE 7.—Performance specifications for dual battery hybrids

[Assumptions: Propulsion energy and power requirements for 97 km/h cruise:'169 Wh/km and 40 kW for 0—97 km/h acceleration in 25 sec. Propulsion requirements based on the representative vehicle: curb weight, 91,0 kg; battery weight, one-quarter of vehicle weight; aerodynamic drag coefficient, 0.4; rolling resistance (constant), 137 nt; frontal area, 1.86m! ; 

drive train efficiency, 75 percent]

-Li 2 C0 3 -

FIGURE 7.—An automotive system involves recycling of Li2CO3 

(O'Connell and others, 1974).

automobiles used in the U.S. will have electrical propulsion systems. Table 8 includes estimates from several 

sources (Kalhammer, 1974; Nelson and others, 1974; 

Harvey and Menchen, 1974). These suggest that the 

penetration of the conventional automobile market by 

such vehicles will be gradual. By the year 2000, electric 

vehicles are expected to comprise 12 to 16 percent of all 

automobiles.

Electric vehicles require considerable design study in 

addition to development of an adequate battery. Lower 

cost electric motors are necessary, lighter weight vehicles 

are desirable, and reliable and inexpensive electronic 

controls must be devised. Much new servicing equipment must be introduced also. These problems are not 

major ones, however. Vehicle design will vary in detail 

and complexity depending on the type of battery.

TABLE 8.—Projected effect of electric vehicles on the automotive industry

Auto population

Estimated electric vehicle

Percent of electric

1975

92

_______ 0

1985

126 

0.2-1 

0.1-.8

1990

134 

1.8-5 

1.3-3.7

2000

151 

18-25

Vehicle power

Hybrid (secondary with 

32-km ranee): 

Primary battery1 _

Secondary battery1 _

Effective total

Hybrid (secondary with 

80-km range) 

Primary battery1 __

Secondary battery1 _

Effective total

Battery 

weight 

(kg)

. __ ._ 146

. _ 81

227

146

. _ _ 81

227

Specific 

energy

(Wh/kg)

370

67

262

370

167

297

Specific 

power 

(average)

(W/kg)

110

200

70

110

200

70

Power 

(peak) 

fkW)

16

24

40

16

24

40

Range — 

at 97 km/h 

(km)

320

32

350

320

80

400

Mileage us< 

(percent)

45

55

100

25

75

100

'Alone.
12 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

LITHIUM REQUIREMENTS OF ELECTRICAL

VEHICLES POWERED WITH 

LITHIUM-WATER-AIR BATTERIES

A total of 7.2 kg of lithium is required for a subcompact vehicle with a range of 320 km. For every battery in 

use, an equivalent amount of lithium will be in process. 

Thus, for each vehicle in use, about 14.4 kg of lithium 

are needed. A better estimate of the requiremet would 

be 13 to 17 kg per vehicle, because the actual designs 

may cause the requirements to change. Taking all vehicles into account and using the projections from table 8, 

we can arrive at the following estimate:

1985

2000

Number of

electric vehicles

(million)

. 0.2-1 

. 18 -25

Lithium required 

(tonnes)

2,600- 17,000 

234,000-425,000

It is estimated that by the year 2000, 36,000 tonnes of 

lithium will be produced annually. Estimates of anticipated cumulative production of lithium in the U.S. to 

the year 2000 are on the order of 400,000 tonnes (Vine, 

written commun. Feb. 1975; Borg and O'Connell, 

1976). This supply is adequate to meet the demand for 

lithium in glass, ceramics, aluminum, fluxes, greases, 

etc., but clearly, any additional demand, such as extensive use of lithium in automotive batteries or in a fledgling controlled thermonuclear reactor industry, will tax 

existing reserves and resources which are on the order 

of 320,000 and 830,000 tonnes respectively (Vine, written commun., July 1, 1975). The supply of lithium 

would have to be increased to accommodate these newly 

emerging technologies.

FEASIBILITY OF THE 

LITHIUM-WATER-AIR BATTERY

At this point, the lithium-water-air battery, as part of 

an automobile propulsion system, is in a developmental 

stage. The exact nature of the air cathode is still open, 

and the required utilization of lithium might be reduced 

to about 5 kg per 320 km. Alternate electrolytes may 

prove more advantageous. Alternative ways of controlling lithium hydroxide concentration may be feasible. 

The behavior of lithium anodes in the aqueous electrolyte batteries must be explored. In addition, vehicle design options must be investigated so as best to accommodate the specific features of the battery, and the 

required servicing and fuel distribution system must be 

investigated. The economical reprocessing of the 

lithium carbonate is also crucial to successful employment of the battery. The total cost per vehicular 

kilometre must be assessed carefully and compared to 

the systems involving other battery types or types of 

fuel. Lastly, the availability of lithium must be critically 

examined. We do not want to create in the year 2000 an 

analogue to the present oil crisis. Much remains to be 

done, but it is clear that the lithium-water-air battery 

shows great promise as part of the transportation system 

of the future.

FUSION POWER AND THE 

POTENTIAL LITHIUM REQUIREMENT

By S. LOCKE BOGART, 

U.S. ENERGY RESEARCH and DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION, WASHINGTON, DC

INTRODUCTION

Thermonuclear fusion is regarded by most people as 

one of the attractive long-range solutions for the Nation's and the world's energy supply problem because of 

its major advantages:

1. Effectively infinite fuel supply at low cost («1 mill/ 

kwhr)

2. Inherent safety, no runaway

3. No chemical combustion products

4. Relatively low radioactivity and attendant hazards

5. No emergency core-cooling problem

6. No use of weapons grade materials so no diversion 

possibility

7. Flexibility to site plants near load centers, possibly

even in urban areas

Fusion is the process by which the nuclei of light elements are forced to combine and form new light elements with a net yield of significant quantities of energy 

per reaction. Fusion compares with fission in the sense 

that the fission process is the conversion of heavy nuclei 

to nuclei of intermediate weights with comparable releases of energy. Thus, the fundamental distinctions between fusion and fission are the nature of the fuels, the 

nature of the reaction products, and the mechanisms by 

which the two processes are made to occur. In this 

paper, I will restrict the scope to the fusion process and 

one of the basic fuels for first generation reactors.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 13

The first generation fusion reactors will be based on 

the deuterium-tritium (D-T) reaction, within the 

deuterium-lithium fuel cycle. This choice results simply 

from the fact that the D-T reaction will be easiest to 

achieve given what is felt as achievable physics and engineering in the next three to four decades. The 

deuterium resource is affectively infinite, being found in 

one part in 6,500 in water. Commercial lithium is obtained from pegmatite ore and specific brines in large 

but not unlimited quantities. Lithium also is found in 

seawater, but present availability of this element has not 

required utilization of this source.

The lithium requirement for different fusion reactor 

concepts is strongly design dependent. When lithium is 

used both as a breeder and a coolant in either the metallic or the salt form, the inventories are very high. In 

alternative solid breeder concepts the lithium requirements is much smaller, but this lithium must be enriched 

in the isotope lithium-6, and a neutron multiplying element also must be used. Because of the high burnup 

rate in solid breeder concepts, periodic refueling must 

be performed which will affect the annual net lithium 

requirement. This is not the case in liquid lithium 

breeder/coolant concepts which have such a high initial 

inventory of lithium-6 that the small fractional burnup 

per year does not mandate periodic refueling.

In the balance of this paper, these concepts will be 

developed more fully. The basic properties of the fusion 

process will be described, and the requirements for this 

process will be related to the potential lithium demand. 

An energy supply scenario will be developed which includes fusion as part of the mix. The lithium requirement for a developing fusion reactor economy will be 

presented.

THE CONTROLLED THERMONUCLEAR 

FUSION PROCESS

The fusion of light nuclei (deuterium and tritium) 

with the subsequent release of energy results from forcing the nuclei together, thus overcoming the coulombic 

barrier, to form a compound nucleus which spontaneously decays to stable products. The energy released is 

simply the energy equivalence of the difference between 

the mass of the fuels and the mass of the products, a 

fundamental result of the expression E —me 2-. To achieve 

significant reaction rates, the temperature of the reactants must be very high (about 100 million degrees Kelvin) and they must be confined away from surfaces 

which would cool them. The last, restriction basically defines the two types of confinement methods presently 

being investigated.

The Division of Controlled Thermonuclear Research 

focuses on magnetic confinement. In this method, the 

reactants which are highly ionized are confined by

magnetic fields which are kept away from the walls of 

the reactor vessel. This satisfies two conditions: reducing 

the energy flow from the fuels to the wall and confining 

the fuels for a sufficiently long time to allow a significant 

number of energy releasing reactions to occur. The 

technical definition of this condition is called the Lawson 

criterion, which prescribes the plasma requirements for 

net energy release from the reaction. Figure 8 illustrates 

the Lawson operating regime. An alternative to fusion 

by magnetic confinement is fusion by inertial confinement, which is a process being sponsored by the Division 

of Military Applications in the U.S. Energy and Research Development Administration. In this concept, a 

small particle of fusionable fuel is imploded by the irradiation of either laser light or relativistic electron or 

proton beams. The Lawson criterion also must be 

obeyed in this concept, but energy loss to the reactor 

vessel is not as important.

Fundamental to either approach using deuterium and 

tritium as the basic fuel is the necessity to breed the 

tritium in a lithium blanket surrounding the reactor vessel. First, however, some background information of the 

basic fuel cycle must be presented. The fusion of a 

deuterium and tritium atom results in a helium nucleus 

and a neutron as the products (see fig. 9). The energy 

release from this reaction is 17.6 MeV with 3.5 MeV 

being carried away by the helium nucleus and 14.1 MeV 

being carried away by the neutron. The helium nucleus, 

being charged, is confined by the magnetic field and 

subsequently heats incoming fuel to keep the reaction 

going. The neutron, however, is not charged, and it 

rapidly escapes the magnetic field and enters the blanket 

region. Inelastic scattering with blanket material converts the kinetic energy of the neutron to thermal

1000

I 100

10

85

.01

.001

TWO COMPONENT 

TORUS BREAK EVEN

2 X II B (1975)

Tj =100 MILLION DEGREE^

2X MIRROR'

SCYLLA IV 

THETA PINCH

>O'PLT I197GH PDX (19781

T

ALCATOR (19751 ,

T3

ST TOKAMAKS 

ORMAK'

nr.101

10 9 10' 10 1 10' 10' 10 1 10 1 10 1B

DENSITY CONFINEMENT TIME PRODUCT 

FIGURE 8.—"Break even" plasma conditions for fusion power.
14

DEUTERIUM LITHIUM

FROM +

WATER NEUTRON

J___L

LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

D + T + ENERGY 

(10-200 keV) 0 n0 + He +

ENERGY

(17.6 MeV)

HELIUM ------

STABLE HELIUM 

BY PRODUCT

ENERGY GAIN-2000-100

FIGURE 9.—Deuterium-tritium reaction.

energy which is removed by the coolant for the conversion to electricity.

Now comes the part critical to the deuterium-tritium 

fusion reaction concept. To regenerate sufficient 

amounts of tritium to maintain the fuel cycle, the neutron must be absorbed by either a lithium-6 or a 

lithium-7 atom. By proper blanket design, the sum of 

these reactions will result in the net production of more 

than one tritium atom per fusion event. As it turns out, 

the lithium-6 reaction predominates in all concepts, and 

it is this reaction that provides the bulk of the tritium 

fuel. However, the lithium-7 reaction is required to 

achieve a breeding ratio of greater than 1 providing 

other neutron multipliers such as beryllium are not 

used. To avoid this increase in blanket design complexity, very thick liquid lithium blankets have been proposed (fig. 10). Unfortunately, large quantities of natural lithium must be provided for this concept. If one is 

willing to accept the complexities introduced by neutron 

multipliers in the blanket, then lithium in the enriched 

form of lithium-6 can be used which significantly reduces the quantity of lithium required (fig. 11). The 

choice of either of these two concepts cannot be made at 

this time simply because the basis for such a decision is

SEAWATER

DEUTERIUM INJECTOR

FIGURE 10.—Liquid lithium blanket design for a fusion reactor.

not yet developed. However as we shall see, the choice of 

either blanket concept strongly effects the quantities of 

lithium required in given fusion reactor design.

FUSION POWER DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Let us look at the four basic approaches to fusion 

power reactors. The Division of Controlled Thermonuclear Research presently studies the theta-pinch, the 

mirror, and the tokamak concepts (fig. 12). Both the 

theta-pinch and the mirror approaches are regarded as 

backup to the tokamak approach, so I will focus on the 

latter as being typical of what might be a commercial 

fusion power reactor after the turn of the century. Figure 13 is an artist's rendering of such a plant. Since the 

inertial confinement concept is not part of my program 

I will not discuss it at all, but mention that the laser 

fusion reactor is equally as probable as a tokamak fusion 

reactor.

The development of tokamak fusion reactors is 

planned such that a demonstration commercial fusion 

power plant will be built before the turn of the century. 

Figure 14 presents the current plan to achieve this goal. 

The first major fusion facility designed to burn deuterium 

and tritium will be the Tokamak Fusion Test Reactor 

presently planned to operate in the 1980-1981 time 

frame. This is a plasma physics experiment which will 

release significant quantities of thermonuclear power 

but will be incapable of producing any net electrical 

power. The subsequent experiment is called the first 

Experimental Power Reactor. This machine will operate 

in the 1986-1988 interval and probably will be capable 

of producing net electric power from the fusion process. 

It probably will not be a complete fusion power reactor 

in the sense that it is not likely that tritium will be bred in 

sufficient quantities to maintain the fuel cycle equilibrium. The provision for fuel-cycle equilibrium may add 

unnecessary complexity which could compromise the 

design goal for the machine. However, the second experimental power reactor, presently planned for operation in the 1990-1991 time frame, would be a miniature 

fusion power electric plant. This machine would demonstrate the technologies of all future fusion power 

reactors but would not provide the basis from which 

vendors and utilities could assess the economic viability 

of the concept. The last experimental power reactor, the 

Demonstration Fusion Power Plant (DEMO), would operate before the end of the century and would provide 

the basis for an economic assessment of the viability of 

fusion power as an alternative to other energy supply 

options that may exist at that time. The DEMO will be a 

small scale commercial fusion power plant.

Of course the development schedule presented above 

depends upon the solution to a number of significant 

technical problems that have been identified at this time.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 15

HELIUM SUPPLY 

HEADERS

HELIUM RETURN 

HEADERS

t "

lion

L „

3cm /j%

4Bern

HEADERS

89cm

COOLANT 

CHANNELS

PLASMA

FIGURE 11.—Blanket design using enriched lithium-6 and neutron multipliers.

Perhaps foremost among these is the development of 

materials which are highly resistant to the energetic 

reaction products that result from the fusion process. 

These materials will be exposed to neutron and charged 

particle flux and will experience the potential for damage not yet observed in reactor engineering. This problem was early recognized and an intensive program is 

underway to test selected materials in a simulated fusion 

radiation environment and to develop new materials 

which are resistant to fusion radiation. The prognosis is 

optimistic because of the experience in fission technology and the lead time intrinsic to the program. However, the effect of materials problems on economics has 

yet to be demonstrated.

The second major problem (characteristic) of the fusion process is recirculating power and the need for 

energy storage and transfer. With all known controlled 

fusion concepts, a significant amount of power will be 

required to bring the fuels to reaction conditions and 

temperatures. For example, although the tokamak 

seems least demanding in this respect, calculations indicate that perhaps 500 MW(e) over 10 seconds may be 

required for reactor start-up. In principal, the energy 

produced by the fusion reactions will be significantly 

larger than the invested energy providing that the burn 

time is reasonably long. However, for shorter burn 

times or lower duty cycles, there may be strong 

economic incentives to recover the invested energy at a 

high efficiency at the end of the burn. Answers to this 

problem are now significantly inconclusive because it is 

not yet clear what the duty cycle of a tokamak reactor 

may be.

A third problem facing fusion by magnetic confinement is the development and construction of superconducting magnets which are more than several times 

larger than the present state-of-the-art of this technology. Superconducting magnets are necessary because 

the energy balance of the facility cannot tolerate the use 

of normal conducting copper or aluminum magnets. 

Large superconducting magnets have been built for 

physics facilities such as the Brookhaven National Laboratory and the Argonne National Laboratory bubble
16 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

MIRROR 

MACHINE

TOKAMAK

MAGNETS

LASER-PELLET

FIGURE 12.—Comparison of four basic designs for fusion power reactors.

chambers, but these are of a very simple solenoidal design. Further, these are by a factor of two or more smaller than those which will be required in a tokamak fusion 

power reactor. But size is not the most important criterion; for toroidal systems, the superconducting magnet 

set must be built in the shape of a doughnut, is is not 

clear how the complex magnetic field and force structure will affect the stability of such magnet sets and 

especially how these forces may prescribe the structural 

material necessary to make the device rigid. A major 

part of the Development and Technology Program of 

the Division of Controlled Thermonuclear Research is 

the design and construction of large toroidal superconducting magnet sets.

Another potential problem area arises from the fundamental properties of one of the basic fuels, tritium.

Since tritium is mildly radioactive, there are prescribed 

certain maximum allowable releases either in normal 

operation or in accident situations. Tritium is an isotope 

of hydrogen and, consequently, has similar diffusive 

properties of that element through hot metallic surfaces. The diffusivity of tritium affects the normal release characteristics of a fusion power plant whereas the 

inventory of tritium in a state which possibly could become volatile affects the accidental release characteristics. In either case it is felt that adequate tritium confinement will be achieved, but with a nontrivial effect on 

the economic parameters of the fusion power plant.

It is evident that the fusion power development 

schedule can be affected strongly by the degree of difficulty of these and other problems. Also becoming evident as inhibiting the development of pure fusion
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 17

Vacuum Chamber

Flibe Blanket

Shield Blanket

Divertors

Vacuum Pumps

OH Magnet Coils

Toroidal Magnet Coils

Liquid Helium Tank

Magnet Support Cylinder

Helium, Flibe & Water Lines

Fuel Injector

Biological Shield

Hot Helium Line

Helium Return Line

Steam Generators

Steam Headers

Feedwater Header

Reheat Steam Return Headers

Helium Circulators

Cryogenic System

21. Flibe Sparging Units

22. Flibe Storage Tanks

23. Reactor Maintenance Hot Cell

24. Polar Crane

Turbine Hall

Very High Pressure Turbine 

High Pressure Turbine 

Intermediate Pressure Turbine 

Low Pressure Turbines

29.

30.

31.

32.

1800 RPM Generator 

3600 RPM Generator 

Feedwater Heaters 

Feedwater Treatment Equipment

FIGURE 13.—Artist's conception of a tokamak fusion power reactor plant.

power is the inadequate commitment of both public and 

private sector funds necessary for the prerequisite research to enable commercial fusion to be demonstrated 

in this century. This is an institutional problem arising 

from the reluctance to commit near term funds for long 

term benefits and seems to be endemic to all long term 

energy supply options. For the sake of argument, the 

balance of the analysis presented in this paper will assume that adequate funding is provided for the fusion 

power research and development program.

ASSUMPTIONS AND ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUE

Fundamental to this analysis as well as any other resource demand projection is how the ultimate demand is 

expected to grow in future years. For pure fusion reactors, the basic product will be electric power for which 

there now exist a number of projections, many of which 

have electric power growing at the near historical or 

historical rate. However, recent estimates are not as 

generous with electric power production growth, and I

will use these as they represent a fairly realistic scenario. 

Two cases are extrapolated from data in the Project Independence Report which was published little more 

than one year ago (fig. 15). The first scenario is defined 

as the Base Case which is the continuation of present 

electric energy growth trends with a smaller growth rate 

after the year 1990 as a result of conservation. The Base 

Case assumes no significant change in energy use patterns with the growth of electrical energy demand principally based upon population expansion. The second 

case is called the Massive Shift which assumes essentially 

the same total energy use as the base case but that many 

energy uses now satisfied by conventional fuels will be 

satisfied by electricity. This projection could come about 

if nuclear energy thrives and is competitive in historical 

nonelectric final use categories or if coal cannot be converted competitively to nonelectric energy products.

The selected implementation schedule for fusion 

power reactors as presented in figure 16 follows trends 

exhibited by other high technology programs (for
18 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 

FUSION POWER DEVELOPMENT

1970 1975

DEVELOPMENT

AND

TECHNOLOGY

CONFINEMENT 

SYSTEMS

RESEARCH

SUPERCONDUCTING MAGNETS. 

NEUTRAL BEAMS. ENERGY 

STORAGE, ETC

xx SMALL SCALE STUDIES ^EXPERIMENTAL::

xx OF EQUILIBRIUM, 

^ STABILITY, AND 

xx HEATING

EXPERIMENTAL 

POWER 

REACTOR No. 2

NEAR-REACTOR .;

LEVEL

CONDITIONS

IN HYDROGEN ;

PLASMAS :

FUSION

TEST

REACTORS

j:POWER ::

SREACTOR NO. 1 ;i

CONFINEMENT THEORY

FIGURE 14.—Fusion power development plan.

example, nuclear fission, space exploration, and so 

forth). The point in time at which implementation begins is chosen by the following arguments.

Commercial fusion power reactors will be built after 

utilities and vendors are satisfied that fusion power is an 

energy source competitive with alternative technologies. 

Purchasing decisions will depend on the total cost of 

fusion power as compared with that of competing 

technologies. Disadvantageous characteristics of all 

energy sources are assumed to be included in costs. This 

accounting procedure is not uniformly practiced today 

but certainly will be before the end of the century.

If the DEMO is operating in 1998, then it is expected 

that the first order for a commercial reactor will be 

placed several years later, say in the year 2000. Subsequent orders would be placed in a fashion typical of 

most new technologies. Assuming that the time from 

order to operation is seven years, achievable for nuclear 

plants today, then the operation of the first commercial 

reactor would not take place until the year 2007. We will 

take this point in time as the implementation date of 

commercial fusion power with the implementation rate 

following the order rate but lagging by seven years. 

Consequently, we assume for the sake of this assessment

that lithium will not be required for fusion power reactors in commercial quantities until the year 2007.

Note that fusion electric power does not take over the 

market completely. This occurs because there usually 

will be cases where unique circumstances make an alternative more attractive (economically, environmentally, 

socially). The saturation level here is taken to be about 

80 percent of new orders, but there is no quantitative 

basis for this choice. The effect, however, is not too 

important.

This reactor type we will consider is the tokamak as 

this concept seems the most promising at this time. Since 

the breeding characteristics of fusion reactors are relatively design independent, this choice will not bias the 

analysis. Two types of blankets will be considered which 

represent the extreme of the lithium demand range. 

Table 9 presents the inventory and annual replacement 

lithium requirement for both concepts. The first type is 

the liquid lithium blanket which performs the simultaneous functions of tritium breeding and reactor cooling. This blanket type has a large lithium inventory but 

has such a small fractional burnup rate of lithium-6 that 

periodic refueling is normally not required. The second 

blanket type is the gas cooled solid lithium breeder
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 19

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 

YEAR

FIGURE 15.—Installed electrical generating capacity as a function of 

time for Project Independence Base Case and Major Shift to Electricity scenarios with the FPC 7 percent growth rate for comparison. 

BC, Base Case, MS, Massive Shift, and FPC, Federal Power Commission.

so

20

ASYMPTOTE 

.82

V??*S#^^^ 

^£fe£fc£&£^^

6 8 10 12 14 

YEARS SINCE COMMERCIALIZATION

18 20

FIGURE 16.—Projected penetration of fusion into electrical generating

market.

TABLE 9.—Blanket lithium requirements

Liquid1 

breeder/coolant

(MT/MWe)3

Natural

. __ _ __ .. 1.15

0

Solid2 

breeder

(MT/MWe)

High tails Low tails 

(2.5 percent) (0.3 percent)

.0553 .03918

.00338 .00239

*At a thermal conversion efficiency of 40 percent and a plant factor of 80 percent. 

'UWMAK-1 University of Wisconsin Blanket. 

2 UWMAK-I Brookhaven National Laboratory Blanket. 

3MT, Megatonnes. 

MWe, Megawatts electric power.

which is enriched 90 percent in the isotope lithium-6. 

Very small lithium inventories are required but there is 

need for a neutron multiplier such as beryllium to 

achieve a tritium breeding ratio of greater than unity. 

Furthermore, the fractional burnup rate of lithium-6 is 

relatively high and frequent refueling is required 

(perhaps as often as two years).

A notable feature of the gas cooled solid breeder concept is that the lithium material "tails" resulting from the 

enrichment process (depleted in lithium-6) become 

available for non-nuclear applications. Consequently, 

the lithium demands computed for this particular blanket concept are not absolute in the sense that all the 

lithium is removed from the marketplace.

The natural lithium demand in the ith year for fusion 

power reactors, being commercially implemented in the 

year 2007, is denned to obey the following expression:

X

1,

= Natural lithium inventory demand in 

Kg/MW(e) of installed fusion reactor 

capacity,

= Incremental fusion reactor capacity in 

MW(e) installed in the z'th year,

= Natural lithium required to replace 

burn-up in Kg/MW(e) of installed fusion reactor capacity with an 80 percent duty factor and a conversion efficiency of 40 percent,

= Cumulative installed fusion reactor 

capacity in MW(e) at the end of the 

(i — I )th year.

The accumulated natural lithium demand at the end of 

the year j simply is

A.

J

D =

For the case of the solid breeder enriched in the isotope 

lithium-6, the natural lithium demand as a function of 

enrichment is calculated from the following expression
20 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

where

X or Y = Natural lithium feed per MW(e) of installed fusion reactor capacity,

Z = Enriched lithium feed per MW(e) of installed fusion reactor capacity,

a = The percentage of the Li-6 in the fusion 

reactor fuel,

b = The percentage of the Li-6 in the lithium 

enrichment plant tails,

.0742 = The Li-6 fraction of natural lithium. 

The natural lithium demand associated with the solid 

breeder concept will be calculated for two tails fractions. 

The first case is 2.5 percent lithium-6 remaining in the 

tails which possibly could represent the most economical 

process. The second tails fraction is selected to be 0.3 

percent which presently is characteristic of the U-235 

fraction remaining in depleted uranium. One may wish 

to have such low tails fraction if lithium were indeed to 

become a very dear commodity after the turn of the 

century. In this case, one would attempt to extract as 

much lithium-6 as possible out of the natural lithium.

RESULTS

Tables 10 and 11 present the annual and cumulative 

natural lithium demand posed by a growing fusion reactor energy economy for both the Massive Shift and the 

Base Case. Table 10 suggests what might be required of 

the lithium industry while table 11 presents the potential 

impact on the resource base itself. It is clear that the 

choice of the basic breeder concept strongly affects both 

the annual and the cumulative demand and is more

1000

900

800

700

600

100

90

80

70

MASSIVE SHIFT 

BASE CASE

SOLID LINE 

DASHED LINE

2015 

YEAR

FIGURE 17.—Cumulative lithium demand curve for different reactors.

Table 1U.—-Annual natural lithium demand

Massive Shift Base Case

Year

2000

2010

2015

2020

2025 _ _ _.

2030 _ .__ ......

Electric 

capacity 

(GWe)

__ _ — . _ 2070

__ . 2280

2525

. . . _ _ 2770

Fusion 

capacity 

(GWe)

19.8

92.6

239 6

425.8

Liquid 

breeder/ 

coolant 

(MT)

~0

8,700

24,800

42,800

Solid 

breeder, 

high tails 

(MT)

~0

1,470

Solid 

breeder, 

low tails 

(MT)

~0

335

1.040

1,860

2,430

Electric 

capacity 

(GWe)

1400

1600

1700

1800

1900

2010

Fusion 

capacity 

(GWe)

DEMO

DEMO

8.6

41.8

101.8

180.4

270.6

Liquid 

breeder/ 

coolant

(MT)

~0

~0

4,140

10,120

15,870

20,490

20,750

Solid 

breeder, 

low tails 

(MT)

~0

~0

220

615

1,085

1,565

1,880

Solid 

breeder, 

high tails 

(MT)

~0

~0

160

435

765

1,110

1,330

TABLE 11.—Cumulative natural lithium demand

Massive Shift

Year

2000 . _ .

2005

2010

2015

2020 . . .

2025 __ ___ ...

2030 - .

Electric 

capacity 

(GWe)

. - - _ _ 1600

._ ____ - _ 2280

— - ___ - 2770

. _ - 3000

Fusion 

capacity 

(GWe)

92.6

239 6

425.8

614.4

Liquid 

breeder/ 

coolant

(MT)

~0

~0

22,780

106,500

275,600

489,700

706.600

Solid 

breeder, 

high tails 

(MT)

~0

6,080

16,940

32,830

52.050

Solid 

breeder, 

low tails 

(MT)

~0

~0

850

4,300

11,990

23,250

36.860

Electric 

capacity 

(GWe)

1400

1500

1600

1700

1800

1900

2010

Fusion 

capacity 

(GWe)

DEMO

DEMO

8.6

41.8

101.8

180.4

270.6

Liquid 

breeder/ 

coolant 

(MT)

~0

~0

9,890

48,070

117,070

20T,48f

311,210

Solid 

breeder, 

low tails 

(MT)

~0

~0

520

2,745

7,245

13,950

22,750

Sol.d 

breeder, 

high tails 

(MT)

~0

~0

365

1,945

5,130

9,880

16,110
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 21

than a factor of 10 larger for the liquid lithium 

breeder/coolant concept (fig. 17).

For the liquid breeder/coolant concept, the cumulative inventory lithium requirement reaches 7x 108 kg by 

the year 2030 in the Massive Shift case. This quantity 

corresponds to currently reported estimates of between 

5xl08 and 109 kg of economically recoverable domestic 

reserves. For the more conservative Base Case, the demand could exceed the reported reserves by the year 

2040, even before the first plant, operating in 2007, was 

retired. In both cases, the potential cumulative natural 

lithium requirement for a fusion reactor economy is 

compared against what presently is regarded as the economically recoverable reserves. Experience shows that 

as one is willing to spend more for feedstock, more 

feedstock becomes available. Consequently, the demand 

posed by liquid lithium coolant/blanket concepts may 

only serve to increase the lithium supply at a higher, but 

yet to be quantified, cost.

The solid breeder concepts for both the high and low 

tails cases are far less demanding on the lithium supply. 

Furthermore, there does not seem to be a significant 

advantage to operate at the very low tails fraction of 0.3 

percent. This result is placed in even greater perspective 

by the fact that most of the lithium is returned to the 

marketplace after the lithium-6 has been removed. For 

example, with a tails fraction of 2.5 percent Li-6, 94.38 

percent of the calculated lithium demand is returned to 

the marketplace. This compares with only a modest decrease to 92.06 percent if the tails fraction was reduced 

by a factor more than eight to 0.3 percent. It is evident 

that only if lithium separative work were to be very 

cheap or if lithium were to be very expensive would 

there be an incentive to maintaining a low tails fraction.

CONCLUSIONS

Fusion power reactors may place a significant demand 

on what presently is thought to be the economically recoverable reserves of lithium if lithium is used for reactor cooling in addition to tritium breeding. The enriched solid breeder concept is far less demanding on 

the domestic lithium resource since much less feed is 

required and most of the feed is returned to the marketplace after the Li-6 isotope is removed. However, the 

solid breeder concept has a neutron deficit which must 

be made up by using neutron multipliers such as beryllium. Other multipliers exist but all, including beryllium, have potential technological or resource limitations. It is premature to select either the breeder/coolant 

or solid breeder concept as the most likely candidate for 

fusion reactors. Furthermore, there may exist attractive

alternatives which lie within the lithium demand extremes represented by those two concepts.

The lithium supply should be more than adequate to 

meet the long term needs of fusion power. Even if the 

cost of lithium rises to many times its present level, utilization of lower grades of lithium bearing materials, including seawater, appears economic. A paper to be presented later in this symposium will indicate that the cost 

of lithium extracted from the oceans is only three to 

four times the present market price. This mild rise in 

cost is well within allowable limits for fusion power reactors.

Since the question of fuel resources is so fundamental 

to all energy supply options, we will continue to study 

the implications of blanket choices on lithium demand. 

However, with respect to fusion, it is premature to embark on programs to increase the supply or to stockpile 

material. Fusion power reactors are too far in the future 

to warrant the expenditure of present funds for these 

purposes given the current domestic lithium resource 

estimates.

Our real needs at this time lie in two areas. First, is an 

assessment of the total domestic and world supply of 

lithium as a function of both its cost and availability. 

Second, and perhaps more important, is a coordinated 

study of the different potential demands for lithium and 

how they will be met.

REFERENCES

Borg, I. Y., and O'Connell, L. G., 1976, Lithium's role in supply 

energy in the future energy sources: Energy Sources, v. 2, no. 4 

(in press).

Halberstadt, H. J., 1973, The Lockheed Power Cell: Proceedings of 

Intersociety Engineering and Energy Conference, Detroit, Michigan, Soc. Automotive Engineers, Paper No. 739008, p. 63-66.

Harvey, D. E., and Menchen, W. R., 1974, The Automobile—Energy 

and the Environment: Columbia, Md., Hittman Associates Inc., 

159 p.

Kalhammer, F., 1974, Energy Storage—Incentives and prospect for its 

development: Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, Calif., 

Report presented to Am. Chem. Soc. (Atlantic City, Sept. 12, 

1974), 19 p.

Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association, 1973-74, Automotive Facts 

and Figures: Detroit, Michigan, p. 37.

Nelson, P. A., Chilenskas, A. A., and Steunenberg, R. K., 1974, The 

need for development of high energy batteries for electric automobiles: Argonne National Laboratory, Report ANL-8075, 

24 p.

O'Connell, L. G., Rubin, B., Behrin, E., Borg, I. Y., Cooper, J. F., and 

Wiesner, H. J., 1974, The lithium-water-air battery—A new concept for automotive propulsion: Lawrence Livermore Laboratory 

Report UCRL-51811, 36 p.

Ragone, D. V., 1968, Review of battery systems for electrically powered vehicles: Detroit, Michigan, Soc. Automotive Engineers, 

Paper No. 680453, 8 p.
22 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

U.S. LITHIUM SUPPLY AND DEMAND AND THE PROBLEMS 

INVOLVED IN COMPILING STATISTICS

By HIRAM B. WOOD, U.S. BUREAU OF MINES, WASHINGTON, DC

ABSTRACT

The United States has the reserves and the capability to more than 

satisfy all current domestic demands for lithium products. For the 

1970-75 period, U.S. exports of lithium averaged about 21 percent of 

U.S. production. The U.S. is the largest exporter of lithium chemicals, 

exceeding Russia for the past 3 years. Currently, only three U.S. companies are producers of primary lithium products. The total 1974 U.S. 

published annual production capacity was about 4,500 metric tonnes 

(5,000 tons) of contained lithium. For the 1970-74 period, U.S. production ranged from 65-70 percent of world estimated production. 

Predicting the future demand for lithium products requires predicting the future growth of the many industries that use lithium products. For the 1970-74 period, the industry grew at the rate of 6 percent per year. Because of the current worldwide industrial slump, the 

1975 growth was much lower, and a conservative growth rate of 5 

percent annually is predicted through 1980. But a breakthrough, such 

as in nuclear fusion or lithium batteries, could by 1980 double the 

1975 demand. The compilation of dependable statistics has been 

hampered by the lack of standard terminology, by difficulties with 

surveys, and by some reluctance on the part of private companies to 

reveal their production.

The United States and the world in general have the 

lithium reserves and the capabilities to supply demands 

at the current growth rate at least through this century. 

The 1975 world production and/or demand was about 

6,300 tonnes (6,900 tons) of contained lithium. During 

the 1970-74 period, the United States exported about 

20 percent of its production, and U.S. exports equaled 

about 14 percent of world production. For the same 

period, the U.S. accounted for 65 to 70 percent of world 

production.

Throughout the world, in the 1972-74 period, demand for lithium carbonate by the aluminum and 

ceramic industries increased notably. Demand for 

lithium hydroxide also continued strong. Demand decreased during the last quarter of 1975 making 1975 

production about the same as 1974. Details on world 

trade of lithium compounds are available from trade 

tables published by the major industrial countries. Most 

of these countries, including West Germany, Italy, and 

France, import both raw mineral concentrate and 

lithium compounds and then export a variety of lithium 

chemicals and lithium metal. Only the United States and 

Russia are known to produce lithium mineral concentrate and to support significant quantities of lithium 

compounds and lithium metal.

Until 1965, the largest producer and exporter of mineral concentrate, mostly petalite, was Rhodesia. At that 

time the United Nations applied trade restrictions to 

that country, and since then export figures for Rhodesia

have been obscured. On the Bureau of Mines world 

production tables, it was assumed that Rhodesia had 

continued to mine at the same rate of about 860 metric 

tonnes (950 tons) of contained lithium in mineral concentrates as in 1965. Based on verbal information, however, their production decreased greatly in 1974 and 

1975.

There are only three U.S. producers of lithium, and 

two of these have been responsible for 98 percent of 

domestic output; consequently, the U.S. Bureau of 

Mines cannot publish domestic production figures received from these companies. However, the Bureau can 

use production capacity data which have been published 

either in company reports or in trade magazines, and it 

can publish U.S. Census Bureau export and import 

figures. From these data, we have prepared table 12.

All figures in table 12 are shown as tons of contained 

lithium. Three classes of marketable material are presented. As previously explained, lithium mineral 

production figures for the United States, which were 

reported to the U.S. Bureau of Mines as spodumene 

flotation concentrate containing 5 to 6.8 percent lithium 

oxide, are not shown. They have been small and erratic. 

Imports, which are mostly lepidolite, have been small.

The production of lithium compounds and metal 

represent published figures. These figures of estimated 

production capacity, consumption, and exports were 

compiled from different sources. The United States 

production estimates published by Lithium Corporation 

of America (LCA) and by the Canadian Department of 

Energy indicate an 8 percent annual growth rate. The 

estimate by Roskill Information Service for only a 3-year 

period indicates only a 4 percent growth rate. These 

estimates appear to be realistic, considering U.S. industry demands and exports, but the production tonnage 

estimates for 1972 through 1974 are notably different. 

From these figures, it is apparent that the United States 

production for 1974 and 1975 was between 4,200 and 

4,600 tonnes (4,600 and 5,100 tons) of lithium.

The sale by the U.S. General Services Administration 

(GSA) of lithium hydroxide monohydrate from excess 

stocks is listed to show how much of this material has 

been made available to industry. These were published 

sales with the material going to the highest bidder 

whether a U.S. or a foreign country. All of this lithium 

hydroxide monohydrate came from USAEC (now U.S. 

Energy Research and Development Administration,
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 

TABLE 12.—U.S. salient lithium statistics

[Lithium content in short tons (tonnes in parentheses)]

23

1970 1972 1973 1974

Lithium mineral concentrate:

Shipments:

Chemical and ceramic grade __ .. ._ _-.. _ _ _

Exports . ... ... __ ... ._ __ _ -._. ....

Imports' . --.. -..- . -.. ------ __ ---.

Lithium compounds and metal marketed: 

Production est. Lithcoa2 _ ... - -- -.-_.

Production est. Canadian3 ... _. ... _ _

Production est. Roskill3 .. ... .. --.._.

Exports of metal and compounds3 __ .,-. .-_----.

Lithium hydroxide (LiOH-H.O):

Exports'- ------------ __ _ ._-_ ------

General Services Admin.

Excess sales __ __ .... .... _ .... .

Price per pound ... ..... . _______

Inventory, Dec. 31 ...

Yearend prices:

Spodumene mineral concentrate, per ton.....--- _ _____ 

Lithium carbonate, per pound...... _. _ . __

Lithium metal, per pound . -_.. ._ _ ___

W

63

(57)

2,444

(2,217)

3,200

(2,903)

NA

747

(678)

113

(103)

None

1,071

(972)

NA 

$0.52

$8.17

W

128

(116)

2,820

(2,558)

3,200

(2,903)

NA

516

(468)

39

(35)

None

1,071

(972)

NA 

$0.54

$8.17

W

36

(33)

3,008

(2,729)

3,600

(3,266)

5,120

(4,645)

503

(456)

91

(83)

None

1,071

(972)

$80 

$0.55

$8.43

W

66

(60)

170

(154)

3,290

(2,985)

4,280

(3,883)

5,450

(4,944)

805

(730)

86

(78)

157

(142)

$0.65

914

(829)

$88 

$0.58

$8.53

W

81

(73)

88

(80)

NA

f4,700

(4,264)

5,820

(5,280)

894

(811)

99

(90)

433

(393)

$0.87

482

(437)

$107 

$0.78

$9.38

W

38

(34)

NA

NA

5,170

(4,690)

NA

e 850

(771)

NA

61

(55)

$0.95

420

(3811)

$130 

$0.80

$11.30

fEstimate; W, withheld; NA, not applicable. 

'U.S. Census Bureau and Roskill Information Service. 

"Source: Roskill Information Service, p. 30

'Source: Roskill Information Service. Production by Canadian Department of Energy and Resources, p. 30, 1974-75 projections by USBM; Exports of Metal and Compounds,p.9: 

Production estimate by Roskill, p. 32.

ERDA) stockpiles and was devoid of the isotope, 

lithium-6. A recent published report stated that ERDA 

has in stock about 36 million kg (80 million pounds) of 

lithium hydroxide monohydrate.

For those who are not familiar with the prices of the 

major lithium products, table 12 lists the approximate 

yearend price for spodumene mineral concentrate, 

lithium carbonate, and lithium metal from the Chemical 

Marketing Reporter. The price of lithium mineral concentrate increased more than 60 percent in the past 4 

years, and lithium carbonate increased more than 45 

percent.

The estimated world capacity, by country, and total 

estimated world production from 1970 through 1975 

are shown on table 13. The tonnage estimates compiled 

by the U.S. Bureau of Mines may disagree notably from 

the world consumption estimates by Luckenback and 

from the production estimates by the Canadian Department of Energy and Mines as shown on the bottom 

two lines. The totals do not include GSA stockpile sales, 

but they do include tonnages of similar lithium hydroxide monohydrate, also devoid of isotope lithium-6, 

which were exported from the USSR. The U.S. Bureau 

of Mines world production figures indicate, for the 

1970-74 period, a 6 percent annual growth. The estimated world production capacity figures for the same 

period indicate a 9.4 percent annual growth, and Luckenbach's figures for the same period indicate a 10.5 

percent annual growth.

Table 13 shows that the United States, Russia, 

Rhodesia, Brazil, and South Africa have been and still 

are the major mineral producing countries. Although

lucre does not appear to be much difference between 

the estimated production and the estimated production 

capacity, the important implication shown is that, if 

necessary, world production can in 1 or 2 years be increased 25 to 30 percent. Beyond that, new mines would 

have to be opened and new beneficiation and chemical 

plants built. The most significant production increases 

can most readily come from the United States, Canada, 

Rhodesia, Russia, Southern Africa, and Brazil. In time 

and with proper demand, new production may be 

realized in Chile and Zaire. The Zairetain mining company recently announced plans to build a $4 million 

spodumene concentrator at Manono.

Table 14 is included to show world trade for lithium. 

The exports from the United States, Russia, West Germany, and some other countries were derived from published trade statistics and show shipments mostly to 

western European countries and to Japan. This table 

shows West Germany as both a major importer and exporter, but they are not a primary ore producer. Trade 

data on the United Kingdom and Canada should be 

included in this table, but 1974 trade books from these 

countries had not arrived. This table does not show all 

world trade shipments, but it is probably 85 to 90 percent complete.

In general, current market conditions and future 

predictions are favorable.

Although the 1970-74 growth rate averaged 6 percent per year, it dropped to about 2 percent in 1975, 

and unless industry rebounds notably in 1976, the 

growth this year will not be much better. However, any 

good growth in any one of the major consuming indus-
24 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

TABLE 13.— Estimated maximum world production capacity of lithium contained in mineral concentrate or brine solutions

[Short tons (tonnes in parentheses)]

1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 .1975

United States ___________________________. 3,600

(3,266) 

Argentina _________________________________________ 5

(4.5) 

Australia ________________________________________ 20

(18) 

Brazil _________._______________________ 60

(54) 

Canada ____________________________________ 40

(36) 

Mozambique _.,___„__________________________________ 10

(9) 

Portugal---____---___-____-___--__________________________ 10

(9) 

South Rhodesia ______ _____________ ___ ___ 950

(862) 

South Africa, Republic of, and Southwest Africa ____________ 100

(91) 

U.S.S.R. _______________________________________________ 700

(635)

Total world capacity 5,495

(4,985)

Total world production1 ____________________________ 5,100

(4,627)

Total world consumption W. F. Luckenbach2 __________ 3,055

(2,771)

World lithium production3 __________________________ 5,060

(4,590)

4,000

(3,629)

5

<4.5)

40

(36)

120

(109)

40

(36)

10

(9)

20

(18)

950

(862)

250

(227)

1,500

(1,361)

4,500

(4,082)

5

(4.5)

40

(36)

150

(136)

40

(36)

20

(18)

25

(23)

950

(862)

250

(227)

1,500

(1,361)

5,000

(4,536)

10

(9)

40

(36)

150

(136)

90

(82)

20

(18)

40

(36)

950

(862)

250

(227)

1,800

(1,633)

5,200

(4,717)

10

(9)

30

(27)

150

(136)

90

(82)

20

(18)

40

(36)

950

(862)

300

(272)

1,800

(1,633)

5,500

(4,990)

10

(9)

30

(27)

150

(136)

100

(91)

10

(9)

10

(9)

950

(862)

300

(272)

2,000

(1,814)

5,935

(5,384) 

5,300 

(4,808)

7,480 

(6,786)

5,900 

(5,352)

8,350 

(7,575)

6,500 

(5,897)

8,590 

(7,793)

6,800 

(6,169)

9,060 

(8,219)

6,900 

(6,260)

2,886 

(2,618)

5,290 

(4,799)

3,478 

(3,155)

5,842 

(5,300)

4,653 

(4,221)

6,532 

(5,926)

5,020 

(4,554)

NA

NA

.-Estimated; NA, not applicable.

'U.S. Bureau of Mines.

2Source: Mining Journal, Mining Annual Review (1975, p. 112).

3Canadian Department of Energy Mines and Resources.

TABLE 14.—World trade

[Imports of lithium compounds and lithium metal as short tons of contained lithium (tonnes in parentheses)]

Exporting countries

Importing 

countries 1973

U.S.S.R

1973 1974

West Germany

1973 1974

Other 

countries

1973 1974

Total

1973 1974

Belgium and LuxemborgFrance _______--_--__.-

Italy ___________-__---.-

Japan ____—___-_____-

Netherlands ___________

West Germany _________

Other countries3 __-__.-

2

(1.8)

75

(68)

11

(10)

301

(273)

3

(2.7) 

322 

(292) 

111 

(101)

77

(69)

3

(2.7)

375

(340)

11

(10) 

327 

(297) 

115 

(104)

13

(11.8) 

59 

(54)

305

(277)

264 

(239) 

NA

36

(33)

302

(274)

4

(3.6) 

104 

(94) 

NA

33 

(30)

91 (83^

68 

(62)

24 

(22)

119

(108)

(51) 

70

(64) 

55

(50)

26 

(24)

78 

(71)

12 

(10.8)

47 

(43)

72 

(65)

NA

29

(26)

19

(17)

7

(6.4) 

1

(0.9) 

41 

(37) 

NA

60 

(54) 

225

(204) 

126

(114) 

606

(550)

27

(24)

658

(597) 

230

(209)

56

(511)

212

(192)

77

(70)

684

(621)

42

(38)

472

(428)

193

(175)

Total- 825 

(748)

908

(824)

641

(582) 

f750 

(680)

446 

(405) 

c550 

(499)

335 

(304)

285 

(259)

131 

(119)

97 1,932 

(1,753)

1,736 

(1,575)

^estimated; NA, not applicable.

'Data from trade tables of respective importing countries, exclusive of United Kingdom.

'Data from West German export tables.

3 U.S. exports of lithium hydroxide to other countries were estimated, based on partial data.

tries will certainly reflect a proportional increase in 

lithium demand. When one tries to predict the future 

demand for lithium and its seemingly unlimited number 

of compounds, one also has to predict the future growth 

for such industries as the aluminum, ceramic, glass, 

rubber, refrigeration, nonferrous alloys, industrial

machinery, and organic chemicals, and also the unpredictable potential demand for automobile batteries, for 

nuclear fusion reactors, and the switching to absorption 

refrigeration to avoid use of fluorocarbons. A 5 percent 

per annum growth over the next 5 years is a conservative but practical estimate. Increased use of lithium car-
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 25

bonate by aluminum companies who currently do not 

use lithium carbonate to improve the thermal stability 

and electrical conductivity of their potlines will account 

for most of this growth. Undoubtedly, this is why Foote 

Mineral Company is building a new carbonate plant at 

Kings Mountain and why LCA, in their 1974 annual 

report, discussed plans to increase their output 50 percent. Without a scientific breakthrough, the conservative 

5 percent annual growth would easily require by 1980 at 

least an additional 1,180 tonnes (1,300 tons) of lithium 

or 6.3.5 million kg (14 million pounds) of lithium carbonate. A higher growth rate for the European nations 

and Japan is anticipated because more severe energy 

shortages could force them to use more lithium carbonate in their aluminum smelting potlines.

In view of the present embryo state of the lithium 

industry, I think a U.S. demand of about 5,700 tonnes 

(6,300 tons) and a world demand of 9,070 tonnes 

(10,000 tons) of lithium by 1980 is reasonable. However, 

a breakthrough in any of the potential fields just mentioned could triple the growth rate to 15 percent annually. If the growth should increase 15 percent annually 

by 1980, U.S. and world production would have to double to 9,100 and 12,700 tonnes (10,000 and 14,000 tons) 

annually.

A warning on overenthusiasm in predicting future 

growth should be given because even if there is a breakthrough in 1976 or 1977, the consuming industry could 

not tool up and make the changes necessary to demand 

this much more lithium by 1980.

Terminology is one of the worst problems involved in

compiling U.S. and world lithium statistics because 

production may be reported as lithium ore, lithium 

mineral concentrate, or lithium compounds. Often the 

lithium or lithium oxide content of the ore or concentrate is not given. If the kind of lithium mineral concentrate, such as spodumene, petalite, lepidolite, or 

amblygonite is listed, a fair estimate of the lithium content may be made. But in the international trade books, 

which list foreign shipments, lithium assays are seldom 

recorded. For years, the U.S. Bureau of Mines, in the 

producers canvass survey, has asked for shipments of 

lithium minerals, but seldom did the producers list the 

lithium oxide assays. In 1975, a new survey form was 

designed to be more specific. Also, in the U.S. Census 

tabulations, only the lithium hydroxide monohydrate is 

listed separately. All of the other lithium compounds are 

grouped under a blanket category which may include 

lithium amide, borate, bromide, chloride, carbonate, 

fluoride, and so forth. Also, the producing companies, 

in their annual reports or in trade magazines, report 

capacity and sometimes U.S. production as lithium carbonate equivalent. Usually, the lithium carbonate equivalent includes only the lithium compounds, some 30 or 

more that are produced commercially, and lithium 

metal. These estimates may or may not include the 

lithium mineral concentrate produced. Only the lithium 

companies can standardize their terminology and permit their output figures to be published; however, with 

only two significant, competitive companies in the industry, there are understandable reasons for their 

reluctance.

THE LITHIUM INDUSTRY

By GERALD J. ORAZEM, 

LITHIUM CORPORATION OF AMERICA, GASTONIA, NC

ABSTRACT

The image of the lithium industry in the past has been clouded by 

lack of information available to the industrial world. The industry 

consists of several ore producers and marketers, but only three major 

basic producers of lithium chemicals; Lithium Corporation of 

America, Foote Mineral Company, and the USSR. The USSR exports 

to the Free World, but their supply is unpredictable in any one year. 

Their exports consist mostly of chemicals depleted in the lithium-6 

isotope, a byproduct of their atomic energy program. Foote Mineral 

extracts lithium from brines at Silver Peak, Nev., and Lithium Corp. 

from spodumene concentrates in North Carolina. A minor producer is 

Kerr-McGee Chemical Company at Trona, Calif. Besides the basic 

producers, there are several converters, the most important of which

are Metallgesellschaft in West Germany and Honjo Chemical in Japan. 

The major lithium chemicals are carbonate for use in ceramics and the 

aluminum industry, hydroxide in the grease industry, bromide and 

chloride in air conditioning, hypochlorite in sanitation, metal in 

pharmaceuticals, and butyllithium in synthetic rubber.

The Free World demand for lithium chemicals, based on carbonate 

equivalents, was about 21 million kg in 1974 and 17 million kg in 1975. 

The United States capacity for lithium chemicals was 20 million kg in 

1975.

The largest potential in the next 5 years for lithium demand is the 

aluminum industry. The lithium battery is not expected to have a 

major impact on the lithium industry until the early 1980's.
26 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

LITHIUM RESOURCES—PROSPECTS FOR THE FUTURE

By IHOR A. KUNASZ, FOOTE MINERAL COMPANY, EXTON, PA

ABSTRACT

The future of the lithium industry will be controlled by the demands 

for lithium ores, chemicals, and metal. The ability of the lithium industry to meet any large future commitment must be appraised not only 

in terms of reserves, which are based on economic and legal extractability at the present time, but also in terms of identified resources, 

which represent sources economically and legally extractable at some 

time in the future. The point in time at which they will become reserves will be determined by the rate of lithium demand.

Consequently, all important identified resources must be considered 

if an accurate representation of the potential of the lithium industry is 

to be made. These resources are:

Tin-Spodumene Belt, North Carolina, U.S.A.

Clayton Valley, Nevada, U.S.A.

Bikita Tinfields, Rhodesia

Preissac-Lacorne District, Quebec, Canada

Bernic Lake District, Manitoba, Canada

Great Salt Lake, Utah, U.S.A.

Salar de Atacama, Chile

Manono-Kitotolo District, Zaire

These represent producing districts, districts with past or planned 

production, and districts with large identified resources. An evaluation 

of these deposits and the probability of discovery of additional resources in existing districts suggest that lithium resources will support 

the needs of the lithium industry for several decades.

INTRODUCTION

In reviewing the recent activity in the field of lithium, 

it appears that a great deal of attention has been devoted 

to it. In addition to last year's edition of Industrial Minerals and Rocks, lithium has been reviewed by Norton in 

U.S. Geologic Survey Professional Paper 820 in 1973, by 

Industrial Minerals of London in 1974, by Roskill Information Services of London in 1975, as well as by 

members of the newly created Lithium Exploration 

Group of the U.S. Geologic Survey. To these one must 

add the regular annual reviews prepared by the U.S. 

Bureau of Mines, the Engineering and Mining Journal, 

Mining Engineering, and Mining Journal. This surge in 

interest can be attributed to the anticipated potential of 

lithium in battery and possibly in thermonuclear power 

development. The continued interest in this fascinating 

element was amply demonstrated by the impressive attendance at this symposium.

RESERVES AND RESOURCES

The contents of the publications reveal two opposing 

viewpoints. Some maintain that resources are sufficiently large to satisfy future demands. Others suggest a 

serious forthcoming shortage by the end of the decade 

because of the large quantities of lithium predicted for 

battery and thermonuclear power development.

This disparity of opinion is not unusual or surprising. 

It is the result of a grave concern over the dependence 

of our economy on the imports of a significant number 

of strategic mineral commodities. This has led to a 

reevaluation of our mineral industry on the basis of a 

new reserve concept (McKelvey, 1973). This concept has 

been used by the U.S. Geological Survey in the recent 

evaluation of the lithium industry (Vine, 1975). In addition to a reserve evaluation, attempts to "estimate" 

probable lithium yields to be expected from the industry 

by the year 2000 have also been made. The "estimates" 

constitute the basis for a shortage prediction by some 

people.

While recognizing the validity of the reserve concept 

as it is proposed and applied to the evaluation of the 

lithium industry at the present time, one must nevertheless exercise great caution in using reserves (and even 

more, probable yields) to predict the ability of the 

lithium industry to fulfill future commitments, such as 

the battery or thermonuclear power. Such commitments 

are based on tenuous data. A contradiction seems apparent. Since reserves are defined on the basis of present steady state technological and economic conditions, 

they can only validly predict a steady state future. Demands resulting from battery and thermonuclear power 

development will create unsteady state conditions which 

may alter existing technological and economic conditions. For this reason, the future of the lithium industry 

cannot be precisely, nor validly, predicted on the basis of 

today's reserves.

This point can be illustrated by lithium's past history 

(fig. 18). Following World War II, the lithium industry 

experienced a period of slow growth consistent with 

commercial demand. In the few years which preceded 

the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) program, the industry did not have the capacity necessary to meet the 

AEC requirements. And yet, within the amazingly short 

period of 24 months, Foote Mineral Company, Lithium 

Corporationn of America, and American Potash and 

Chemicals Corp. were able to meet this excessive demand. Clearly, had the lithium industry been evaluated 

on the basis of reserves and of "probable yields," the 

results could not have justified the initiation of an AEC 

program. In fact, economic parameters had changed 

drastically, and resources became reserves practically 

overnight.

While the industry was able to fulfill its commitment 

by increasing its capacity, the latter caused its downfall 

as well. From 1955 to 1960, commercial demand for
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 27

50 r2

z 

o

_li 30

z

20

o 10 

o

B

1930 1940 1950 I960 

YEARS

1970 1980

FIGURE 18.—History of lithium production in the United States. A, 

Use (during World War II) of large quantities of lithium hydride to 

inflate rescue apparatus, and in the development of multipurpose 

lithium greases. B, Lithium purchase program of the U.S. Atomic 

Energy Commission.

lithium had only doubled, while the industry was faced 

with a 500 percent overcapacity. Plants operated at 

about 20 percent of their installed capacity, and the 

lithium industry experienced a period of economic depression.

In order to determine the ability of the lithium industry to meet future requirements, a comprehensive study 

of the lithium industry must be made. It is proposed 

that a valid evaluation can only be made on the basis of 

identified resources and not on the basis of reserves.

IDENTIFIED RESOURCES

An evaluation of identified resources reveals that in 

addition to existing producing districts, there are several 

areas around the world which must be included in a 

proper evaluation of the lithium industry. These areas 

contain identified resources (conditional resources) 

which could justify chemical processing centers in the 

future. The following paragraphs review existing and 

potential districts in the United States, Canada, Africa 

and South America.

TIN-SPODUMENE BELT, NORTH CAROLINA, U.S.A.

As stated by Kunasz (1975), the tin-spodumene belt of 

North Carolina constitutes the largest developed reserve 

of spodumene in the world. Following a short period of 

mining activity during World War II, Foote Mineral

Company began the mining of spodumene in 1951. In 

the 1960's, Lithium Corporation of America opened up 

its own mine some 5 miles northwest of its Bessemer 

City, North Carolina plant. Although Foote Mineral 

Company also produces significant quantities of lithium 

carbonate from its Silver Peak brine operation in 

Clayton Valley, Nev., the tin-spodumene district constitutes the most important source of lithium in the world 

today.

In 1959, when Foote Mineral Company completed its 

drilling program over the main portion of its ore body, a 

total resource of about 36,000,000 tons of pegmatite was 

reported (Kesler, 1960). In the following 16 years, several million tons of ore have been mined out.

The pegmatite belt is known to extend through the 

remaining portion of the Foote property—its resource 

potential essentially unknown. As a result of a recent 

modest drilling program, a resource of 38,000,000 tons 

has been identified over approximately one-half of the 

Foote property. Resources on the remaining half of the 

property are still unknown but will be identified in the 

next few years. Drilling increased the pegmatite resources by a full 20 percent, not only replacing the 

mined out ore, but adding several million tons of a new 

resource.

Lithium Corporation of America has more than doubled its reserves from 13.6 million tons grading 1.4 percent Li2O to 30.5 million tons grading 1.5 percent LigO. 

A preliminary mining plan indicates that 27.5 million 

tons are recoverable by open pit mining methods. The 

outlined pegmatite remains open downdip (Evans, 

1976).

Under an extensive exploration program which 

would take place under conditions of increased lithium 

demand, the probability of discovery of considerable 

additional reserves and resources is considered high.

CLAYTON VALLEY, NEVADA, U.S.A.

A benchmark in the history of lithium has been the 

discovery of this element in the brine of Clayton Valley, 

Nev. The uniqueness of this brine deposit lies in the fact 

that lithium is a primary, and not a co- or by-product.

The resources of Clayton Valley have been a subject 

of controversy and need to be clarified. As pointed out 

by Norton (1973), the large resources previously reported also included lithium contained in Tertiary and 

Quaternary lacustrine sediments present in the valley. 

In the last edition of AIME's Industrial Minerals and 

Rocks, an updated resource figure was reported 

(Kunasz, 1975). The new figure of 775,000 tons as Li 

includes only that amount calculated to be contained in 

the brine body. In addition, a yield of 44,500 tons of Li 

as recoverable product was estimated under present 

economic and technological conditions. This is only a
28 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

small fraction of the resource present in Clayton Valley. 

Favorable technological and economic conditions will 

increase the yield since weaker and deeper hypothetical 

brine resources are not being exploited or included in 

published data.

The yield estimate for Clayton Valley has been recently misinterpreted by Vine (1975) in a paper entitled 

"Are Lithium Resources Adequate for Energy SelfSufficiency?" Using the published yield of 44,500 tons Li 

and assuming a 50 percent recovery factor, Vine calculated and reported lithium resources at 90,000 tons, instead of the 775,000 tons reported by Kunasz (1975). In 

a similar evaluation of the tin-spodumene belt, a probable yield of 680,000 tons as Li is reported. In this case, 

however, even hypothetical resources have been included in the estimation of the yield. Clearly, the yield 

from a hypothetical source can only be zero. An artificial 

set of numbers has thus been generated and used to 

predict the potential of the lithium industry. The validity of such an evaluation is questionable and, more importantly perhaps, is misleading.

GREAT SALT LAKE, UTAH, U.S.A.

The Great Salt Lake constitutes a considerable resource of lithium. The importance and the reality of this 

source was well demonstrated when the Gulf Resources 

Corp. announced production plans. However, since the 

production of lithium is tied to the production of other 

salts such as potassium sulfate, sodium sulfate, magnesium chloride, contractual difficulties resulted in a 

postponement of the project.

Total resources in the Great Salt Lake have been reestimated at 526,000 tons as Li (Whelan, 1976). The 

quantity of lithium which can be extracted from this 

body of brine is restricted by the production levels of 

primary salts and by the efficiency of the extractive 

technology. An agreement with the State requires Gulf 

Resources Corp. to return all waste salt streams back to 

the lake. This eliminates waste disposal problems and 

results in a more subdued alteration of the brine salinity 

of the lake.

CANADA

In Canada, there are two significant sources of lithium 

raw materials. One is located in the Preissac-Lacorne 

area of Quebec and the other in the Bernic Lake area of 

Manitoba.

In the Preissac-Lacorne region, several pegmatites 

occur in an area approximately 8,000 feet long and 

2,000 feet wide. The identified resources have been calculated at 15,000,000 tons, carrying 1.2 percent Li2O 

(Mulligan, 1965). In 1955, the Quebec Lithium Division 

of the Sullivan Mining Group estimated their resources 

to last 45 years at current production rates. The property is developed with an underground mine, a mill, and 

a chemical plant. Its operational capacity is 1,000 tons of 

ore per day with a rated capacity of 2,000 tons per day. 

Although inactive at the present time, the company did 

operate for a number of years when it supplied the 

Lithium Corporation of America's North Carolina 

chemical plant. Following completion of the AEC contract, Quebec Lithium operated at reduced levels until 

1965. The overcapacity in the lithium industry created 

by the 5 year noncommercial demand by the AEC, 

forced the closure of the operation.

In Manitoba, Tanco began the exploitation of a complex zoned pegmatite which probably constitutes the 

world's richest tantalum and cesium mine. The pegmatite contains an uncommonly rich spodumene zone 

which averages almost 3 percent Li2O. A previously unknown spodumene zone has been intercepted beneath 

the main spodumene ore body by exploratory drilling 

(Pearse, 1973). The resources of this new body are unknown. Resources for the main spodumene ore body 

are reported at 5,000,000 tons.

In 1972, Tanco undertook a pilot plant study to 

evaluate the possibility of spodumene production. No 

significant commercial production has yet been 

achieved, as this company has been plagued by a 

number of financial problems. In 1974, KaweckiBerylco Industries bought a 24.9 percent interest. In 

addition to their cesium and rubidium interest, 

Kawecki-Berylco plans the production of about 

10,000,000 Ib of lithium carbonate and about 15,000 

tons of spodumene concentrates per year (Pearse, 

1973). Production is scheduled to begin in 1977.

BIKITA TINFIELDS, RHODESIA

The Bikita ore body became important in the 1950's 

as a result of the AEC program. In order to partially 

satisfy the needs of the program, American Potash and 

Chemicals processed Bikita lepidolite in Texas.

Although United Nations sanctions have been imposed on Rhodesian trade, eliminating an important 

source of petalite for the U.S. ceramic industry, Rhodesian ores are still mined and sold.

Resources have been reported at about 6,000,000 tons 

(Symons, 1961) with an average composite grade of 2.9 

percent Li 2 O. The pegmatites contain petalite, 

spodumene, lepidolite, and eucryptite. This appears to 

be a deposit similar to Bernic Lake in Manitoba. A chemical processing plant is, therefore, not inconceivable.

ZAIRE

The pegmatites of Manono and Kitotolo were discovered in 1910. Exploitation for cassiterite and tantalite began in 1929 when the Belgian company, 

Geomines, undertook the project.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 29

A report by Barzin, Managing Director of Geomines, 

states that the pegmatites are both 5.5 km long and 

average 400 metres wide (Barzin, 1952). The pegmatite 

sills have been proven to a depth of 125 metres by drilling. A calculation using these dimensions shows that resources are enormous. Barzin reports, however, that up 

to 50 metres are kaolinized and altered. On the other 

hand, exploratory drilling ended in pegmatite, indicating the presence of additional resources. Over the years, 

low cost mining of cassiterite and tantalite has been 

achieved from the upper decomposed layer. The pegmatites of Manono and Kitotolo probably represent the 

largest spodumene resource in the world. However, 

they have never constituted reserves because of their 

remote location in south-central Africa. The tin and 

columbium production is exported via the Angolan port 

of Lobito, located some 2,000 km away. Nevertheless, 

this deposit must be included in an appraisal of the future of lithium. In fact, the government of Zaire must 

think so, because plans for the production of lithium 

carbonate have been officially announced. The document states that Zaire will become the third producer of 

lithium carbonate in the world. Zairetain (50 percent 

government controlled) is planning a production of 

10,000,000 Ib of lithium carbonate per year beginning 

in 1980.

SALAR DE ATACAMA, CHILE

The latest development in the field of lithium has 

been the announcement by the Chilean government of 

the discovery of a large brine field containing unusually 

high lithium values. The statement indicated concentrations of 2,000 ppm Li and resources on the order of 

1,200,000 tons of lithium, presumably as Li.

In January 1975, Foote Mineral Company entered 

into a contract with the Chilean government and has 

since undertaken a program of geological, hydrological, 

and chemical research in order to assess the feasibility 

of producing lithium chemicals from the brines of the 

Salar. The Chilean government is also interested in recovering potash in order to develop its fertilizer 

industry.

The geology of the Salar de Atacama and of the surrounding areas has been described in several publications (Dingman, 1967; Chong, 1971; Moraga and 

others, 1974; Stoertz and Ericksen, 1974). The Salar has 

been interpreted as a graben (Frutos, 1972), bounded 

on the east by the Andean Cordillera and on the western 

side by the Cordillera de la Sal, a structural block which 

consists of evaporites including halite.

The Salar lies at an elevation of 7,500 feet. The southern portion consists of a halite nucleus which occupies 

an area of 1,400 km2 . The surface of the nucleus is very 

rugged, and the halite occurs as razor-sharp jagged 

ridges. The area is extremely arid. Several streams drain

into the Salar. The largest of these is the Rio San Pedro 

which enters the basin from the north. Although the 

resources reported by the government have not yet been 

verified, the work Foote has done to date supports their 

earlier claim.

CONCLUSIONS

The deposits which have been described do not constitute hypothetical resources of lithium. These are all 

reserves or conditional resources.

Today, lithium chemicals are produced in North 

Carolina (Kings Mountain and Bessemer City); in Virginia (Sunbright); Silver Peak, Nevada; Exton, Pennsylvania; New Johsonville, Tennessee; and Searles Lake, 

California. Under favorable economic conditions, one 

may expect production from Quebec and from new centers such as Manitoba, Utah, Rhodesia, Chile, and Zaire.

An evaluation of the resources held in all these deposits yields a total of 4,100,000 tons as Li. If we assume 

as little as 15 percent recovery from these resources, 

there is 617,000 tons of Li available (table 15).

If only existing and actually announced capacity is 

considered, an annual production rate of 90,000,000 Ib 

lithium carbonate may be reached by 1980. This represents 9,000 tons as Li. If we assume a consumption of 

200 kg of Li per one thousand MW(e) (Mills, 1975), a 

500,000 MW(e) capacity would require 100 tons of metal. This corresponds to the total 1970 U.S. electric 

power consumption. In addition, approximately 

100,000 tons of metal will be needed in the reactor blanket. The projected industrial capacity could supply this 

quantity in 11 years. Obviously, the lithium industry will 

not devote 100 percent of its capacity for this exclusive 

use. However, since such a thermonuclear power capacity is predicted for the year 2020, the industry would 

have ample time to expand if and when this use appeared likely. The projected capacity suggests that 

commercial as well as thermonuclear power and battery 

requirement can be met by the lithium industry.

As a final comment, one must again ask the question 

of the fate of the lithium industry after the peak deTABLE 15.—Major identified resources of the world

Short tons Li Production Reference

Tin-spodumene Belt,

North Carolina, U.S.A ______ 473,000

Clayton Valley,

Nevada, U.S.A _-______.___- 775,000

Great Salt Lake,

Utah, U.S.A __________ 526,000 

Preissac-Lacorne,

Kunasz (1975); 

Evans (1976).

Queh'"' Canada 84,000

Bernic Lake,

Manitoba, Canada ______ 69,000 

Bikita, Rhodesia _________ 81,000 

Atacama, Chile___________ 1,200,000 + 

Manono, Zaire ________ __ 1,000,000 +

Temporarily 

inactive.

Announced

Whelan (1976).

Pearse (1973). 

Pearse (1973).

Symons (1961).

Total __________________ 4,208,000+
30 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

mand for batteries and thermonuclear power has been 

met. A hasty increase in capacity installed to meet a 

projected demand based on tenuous data may have 

harmful consequences. Existing data suggests that resources are sufficiently large to satisfy projected higher 

lithium demands in the future. The existing and announced capacity of the industry are likely to satisfy the 

demands for a considerable number of years.

REFERENCES

Barzin, H., 1952, Geomines—A major open-pit tin producer in the 

Belgian Congo: Eng. and Mining Jour. v. 153, no. 11, p. 86-89.

Chong, G. D., 1971, Depositos Salinos en el Norte de Chile y el Salar 

de Atacama: Geochile, no. 3, p. 13-27.

Dingman, R. J., 1967, Geology and ground-water resources of the 

northern part of the Salar de Atacama, Antofagasta Province, 

Chile: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1219, 49 p.

Evans, R. K., 1976, Lithium Corporation of America—ore reserves: 

Company news release.

Frutos, J., 1972, Ciclos tectonicos sucesivos y direcciones estructurales 

sobreimpuestas en Los Andes del Norte Grande de Chile, in Simposio sobre los resultados de investigaciones del manto superior 

con enfasis en America Latina: Buenos Aires, p. 473-483.

Kesler, T. L., 1960, Lithium raw materials: Industrial Minerals and 

Rocks, [3ded.], p. 521-531.

Kunasz, I. A., 1975, Lithium raw materials: Industrial Minerals and 

Rocks, [4th ed.], p. 791-803.

McKelvey, V. E., 1973, Mineral resource estimates and public policy, 

in United States mineral resources: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 

820, p. 9-19.

Mills, R. G., 1975, Problems and promises of controlled fusion power: 

Mechanical Eng., no. 9, p. 20-25.

Mulligan, R., 1965, The Geology of Canadian Lithium Pegmatites: 

Geol. Survey of Canada Econ. Rept., no. 21, 131 p.

Moraga, B. A., Chong, D. G., Forttz, M. A., and Henriquez, A. H., 

1974, Estudio geologico del Salar de Atacama, Provincia de Antofagasta: Inst. Inv. Geol. Bol., no. 29, 56 p.

Norton, J. J., 1973, Lithium, cesium, and rubidium, the rare alkali 

metals, in United States mineral resources: U.S. Geol. Survey 

Prof. Paper 820, p. 365-378.

Pearse, G. H. K., 1973, Lithium: Canadian Minerals Yearbook 1973.

Stoertz, G. E., and Ericksen, G. E., 1974, Geology of Salars in Northern Chile: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 811, 65 p.

Symons, Ralph, 1961, Operation at Bikita Minerals Ltd., Southern 

Rhodesia: Inst. Mining and Met. Bull., no. 661, p. 129-172.

Vine, J. D., 1975, Are lithium resources adequate for energy selfsufficiency?: Am. Nuclear Soc. Trans., v. 22, p. 55-56.

Whelan, J. A., 1976, this report.

LITHIUM ORES

By R. KEITH EVANS, GULF RESOURCES & CHEMICAL CORPORATION,

HOUSTON, TX

ABSTRACT

Chemical differences and commercial advantages of the principal 

lithium ore minerals—spodumene, petalite, lepidolite, eucryptite, and 

amblygonite—are described. Ores and concentrates of these minerals 

are used directly in specialty glasses, glass ceramics, porcelain enamels, 

fritted glasses, raw glazes, ceramics (whitewares), and refractories. 

These lithium minerals can also be used in the production of lithium 

chemicals and lithium metal. The quality requirements for these uses 

are not as stringent as they are for "direct usage" ores.

An estimate of the demand for "direct usage" lithium ores under 

conditions of normal trading suggests a probable demand between 3.2 

and 4.5 million kg (7-10 million pounds) of lithium carbonate equivalent. The inherent uncertainties in making this estimate are discussed. 

Potential consumption of "direct usage" lithium ores would constitute 

a significant percentage of the total Free World lithium production if 

such ores were more readily available.

LITHIUM MINERALS

Although lithium occurs in a variety of minerals, 

those of principal economic interest are spodumene, 

petalite, lepidolite and, to a much lesser extent, 

amblygonite and eucryptite. In the future, lithiumcontaining clays could assume some economic significance, but neither clays nor lithium-containing brines 

fall within the scope of this short paper.

In terms of volume usage, spodumene is much the 

most important mineral; it constitutes the feed to the 

western world's current and proposed major lithium 

chemical plants. In addition, it meets a high percentage 

of the current demand for "direct use" ore, or concentrate for the manufacture of glasses and similar products. The current bulk of sales for this purpose is as 

low-iron (about 0.1 percent Fe2O3 ) concentrates grading 

between 6 and 7 percent Li2O; historically significant 

tonnages of a quartz-spodumene intergrowth similar in 

chemical composition to petalite and grading about 4.5 

percent Li2O have been sold, both for direct usage and 

chemical manufacture.

Prior to the imposition of the United Nations sanctions against Rhodesia, petalite grading approximately 

4.3 percent Li2O and 0.03 percent Fe2O3 was the principal lithium mineral used in the glass and related 

industries. New deposits have been brought into production, stimulated by the virtual absence of Rhodesian 

ore, but these have either been smaller and of poorer 

quality than the source they have sought to replace or 

have lacked the consistency of the grade of Rhodesian 

material.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 31

In most applications petalite and spodumene of comparable iron content can be substituted for one another. 

The silica/alumina ratios are different, but in the case of 

glass manufacture, for example, these can be balanced 

by the volume of other additives. This interchangeability, however, is only true in cases of total melting; petalite behaves in a more refractory manner than spodumene with no volume change accompanying its conversion from an alpha to beta phase and is the preferred 

lithium mineral in strictly ceramic applications. The 

more refractory nature of petalite makes it a marginally 

less attractive feed for chemical production. Following 

phase conversion, petalite retains a strong resistance to 

the fine grinding which is a normal prerequisite for efficient acid attack, whereas the phase change in spodumene coincides with decrepitation.

In the bulk of nonchemical uses the choice between 

the use of spodumene and petalite is dictated by the 

price of each per lithia unit and by the relative concentrations of deleterious constituents. The latter vary with 

end use, but the key ones are iron, soda, and potash.

Lepidolite differs from the two other major minerals 

in that it contains significant percentages (2-4 percent) 

of both fluorine and rubidia. The added fluxing powers 

of these make the ore an attractive one for certain glass 

and porcelain enamel compositions. Until recently 

lepidolite was the preferred source of lithia for a high 

percentage of the world's monochromatic television 

tube glass.

Although known high grade sources are rare, adequate flotation capacity exists to produce upgraded 

acceptable concentrates (3.8-4.3 percent Li2O) to meet a 

declining demand due to the increased concerns regarding fluorine emissions. Lepidolite was the ore feed for 

large scale lithium hydroxide production in the United 

States in the 1950's.

Bikita, Rhodesia, is the only known source of economic tonnages of eucryptite where it is a co-product 

from the mineral assemblage there. The mineral in its 

alpha form has no current unique commercial application. Amblygonite rarely occurs in large tonnages but 

because of its high lithia content (8 percent Li2O) is generally saleable for use, particularly, in certain porcelain 

enamel formulations. Amblygonite is the feed for small 

scale chemical production in Brazil.

DIRECT USAGE ORES

Apart from the production of lithium chemicals and 

metal, the principal current uses of lithium ores are in 

glasses, glass ceramics, porcelain enamels, fritted glazes, 

raw glazes, ceramics (whitewares), and refractories.

Glasses are formed when mixtures of inorganic substances are melted and subsequently cooled in a manner 

which usually prevents crystallization. The main ingredient is normally silica sand but, to reduce the melting 

temperature to an economically acceptable level, an alkali flux is added. This flux is normally in the form of 

soda ash; lime is added as a stabilizer. These soda-limesilica glasses constitute the bulk of the world's glass 

output.

Small amounts of alumina, magnesia, boric oxide, and 

other chemicals are added to impart specific properties 

in response to market demands. Each glass is a compromise with soda being the principal source of alkali 

because of its cost, inspite of the fact that its use introduces many undesirable qualities.

Although lithium results in the lowest increase in undesirable qualities, the difference in price and the tolerance of these in normal applications generally restricts 

its use to specialized glasses.

Specific advantages of lithia additions include the following: viscosity reductions; reduced melting temperatures; the reduction in the thermal expansion of the 

glass; increased density resulting in good electrical 

properties and high chemical durability; increased surface hardness; and other improvements which cannot 

be commented upon with brevity.

The use of lithia in container glasses is limited and 

generally restricted to those few low-tonnage types that 

require a high thermal shock resistance. Glass lenses 

subject to rapid temperature fluctuations, such as many 

sealed beam headlight glasses and borosilicate opal 

glasses, contain lithia.

High-barium monochromatic television tube production results in a major demand for lithium ores, principally as a melting aid. Similarly in much foam glass 

production, lithium is utilized as a replacement for 

other potentially polluting additives. There is increasing 

usage of lithium in the glass fiber industry. Lithium is 

added to the glass batch for the production of large 

telescopic mirrors to help the glass withstand a prolonged annealing process. It is also added to a wide 

variety of other low tonnage glasses, where one or more 

of the unique properties of lithium are necessary.

Glass ceramics are nonporous crystalline materials derived from noncrystalline glass containing nucleating 

agents. When reheated under very careful control, the 

nuclei act as centers of crystal growth. Many formulations have been devised, but the most commercially important are those for end products requiring a high 

thermal shock resistance. These are produced in 

Europe, the United States, and Japan and the resulting 

demand for lithium is substantial. Originally the demand was almost exclusively for high quality ores. The 

shortage of good grade ores coupled with increasing 

quality demands, especially in respect to low potash and 

soda contents, has resulted in a partial replacement of 

ore by lithium chemicals, particularly lithium carbonate.
32 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

Vitreous or porcelain enamels are essentially fritted 

glasses that are fused to metals for decoration and corrosion resistance. Properties attributable to the use of 

lithia in glasses apply equally to enamels; lithia is a 

common constituent in a wide range of formulae.

A high percentage of domestic United States' lithium 

demand for these applications is as lithium carbonate. 

This is because the large volume formulae are low in 

alumina, and the addition of lithia as ore minerals results in a significant and intolerable alumina addition. 

Elsewhere, low-alumina enamels are less common; providing the ore is of acceptable purity, the choice of the 

lithia source is based on the relative costs of ore and 

carbonate.

Glazes in general vary in type from "raw" to fully 

fritted, with composition differences from enamels 

which generally allow longer firing times. With increasing pressure against the use of lead oxides in glazes, 

there is a continuing increase in lithium usage because 

of its low fusion point and low viscosity, to provide brilliance, luster, and smoothness. In terms of tonnage, 

lithium ore usage is greatest in glazes on low expansion 

ceramic bodies.

The benefits of adding lithia to ceramic (whiteware) 

bodies to allow rapid firing have been well publicized. 

Apart from some low volume specialized ceramics, 

usage is small, except in Japan where large tonnages of 

petalite are used in inexpensive ovenware.

There appears to be a great potential for lithium ore 

usage in the ceramics industry for domestic and industrial use. In the domestic field, technical problems exist 

in producing glazes with coefficients of thermal expansion to match the very low thermal expansion ceramic 

bodies possible with the use of petalite.

Finally, a moderate amount of lithium ore is used in 

some refractories and kiln furniture.

ORES AS CHEMICAL PLANT FEED

All of the principal lithium minerals are, or have 

been, used as feedstock for lithium chemical production 

in the United States (spodumene, petalite, and lepidolite), Canada (spodumene), Brazil (amblygonite), England (petalite and eucryptite), West Germany (petalite 

and spodumene principally), Italy (spodumene and 

spodumene-quartz intergrowth), and Japan (petalite).

The remaining operations in other countries are 

small, while others have been abandoned completely as 

uneconomic. The closures, in part reflect the cyclical 

nature of the industry in its earlier years, but also demonstrate the generally inherent uncompetitiveness of

lithium chemical plants located away from their ore 

sources.

Even the theoretical maxima of lithia contents in the 

common minerals are low. Pure spodumene grades a 

theoretical 8 percent Li2O; 7 percent material is producible if one is prepared to sacrifice recovery, but optimisation of recovery and grade generally results in the production of chemical feed concentrates grading between 

5 percent and 6.5 percent Li2O. Petalite and lepidolite 

normally grade between 3.5 percent and 4.5 percent 

Li2O, and this cannot be improved upon.

Quality requirements for chemical feed are not as 

stringent as for direct usage ores. Iron content is not a 

major concern, but other elements such as soluble 

alumina, phosphates, fluorine, and particularly magnesium result in complicated processing requirements 

and higher costs.

DEMAND

Approximate lithium ore requirements for lithium 

chemical production can be translated back from published chemical production statistics by making reasonable assumptions regarding recoveries in milling and 

processing.

Direct usage ore demand is more difficult to estimate 

because nearly 90 percent of the Free World's supply 

originated from a source that is no longer open to the 

major consuming nations.

There are uncertainties concerning the decline in ore 

demand in certain key consumption areas such as (1) 

monochromatic television tubes and enamels, (2) the 

problem of more stringent specifications for certain 

high technology products resulting in an increasing demand for lithia as a chemical rather than an ore, (3) 

problems concerning fluorine emissions resulting from 

lepidolite usage, and (4) others which may be offset by 

increased ceramic demand. Finally there is the question 

of the relative prices per lithia unit of ores and lithium 

chemicals.

My personal opinion is that in normal trading conditions current lithium ore demand for uses other than 

chemical production would amount to between 8,000 

and 12,000 tonnes/year for lepidolite (on a 4 percent 

Li2O basis) and between 40,000 and 50,000 tonnes/year 

for petalite or spodumene if reduced to a common 4 

percent Li2O basis. These are approximately equivalent 

to lithium carbonate demands of between 3.2 and 4.5 

million kg (7.0-10.0 million pounds) a year and, thus, 

represent a significant percentage of total current 

lithium demand.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

LITHIUM PRODUCTION FROM SEARLES VALLEY

33

By LARRY E. RYKKEN, 

KERR-MCGEE CHEMICAL CORPORATION, TRONA, CA

ABSTRACT

Lithium occurs in Searles Lake brine, which is processed primarily 

for other minerals. A portion of this lithium is recovered as a crude 

concentrate in a two-stage foam-flotation process. This concentrate 

(dilithium sodium phosphate) is then converted to a relatively pure 

lithium carbonate by digestion using sulfuric acid and conversion 

using sodium carbonate.

INTRODUCTION

Lithium in the form of lithium carbonate is produced 

as a byproduct of the Trona, Calif., Plant main-plantcycle process. In this process, a dry-lake brine, pumped 

from permeable salt beds, is essentially evaporated to 

dryness in triple-effect evaporator units. Potash (KC1), 

borax (Na2B4O7 - 10H2 0), salt cake (Na2 SO4 ), and soda 

ash (Na2CO3 ) are recovered by a series of fractional 

crystallizations in a cyclic process. Lithium in the form of 

dilithium sodium phosphate (Li2NaPO4) is separated 

from a process stream by foam flotation. This separation 

is part of the refinement process for the production of 

salt cake and soda ash in the soda products section of the 

main plant cycle. The lithium values in the dilithium 

sodium phosphate are then converted to a refined 

lithium carbonate (Li2CO3 ) product, while the phosphate values are converted to a 78-percent-crude orthophosphoric acid (H3PO4). Annual production is approximately 153,000 kg as lithium (900 tons/year of 

lithium carbonate), which represents recovery of approximately one-third of the lithium contained in the 

brine fed to the main plant cycle.

DEVELOPMENT

The first attempts to remove part of the lithiumbearing slimes from the soda-products liquors were 

prompted by the problems they presented in processing 

(foaming of liquors, poor filtration, product contamination) rather than by their potential sales value. The recovery of lithium concentrates (licons in plant terminology) was started in 1936 by processing the foam from a 

process vessel on a campaign basis. Liquor was drained 

from the tank, water added, and the slurry circulated 

several hours through a line in which steam was injected 

to remove entrained air. The wet licons were removed 

on a Sweetland filter press, washed with water, partially 

air-dried, scraped from the press leaves, and hauled to 

drying plates, where the material was sun-dried for a 

week or two and them sacked for shipment.

Only minor improvements in this process occurred 

until May 1942, when the Federal War Production 

Board issued an urgent request to triple the lithium 

tonnage. An intensified research and development program was inaugurated, which resulted in the design and 

construction of a commercial-scale flotation plant in 

1943. The original plant has undergone considerable 

revision since then, although the air-flotation principle 

has been retained.

The dried licons were sold until late 1951 when the 

lithium carbonate plant in Trona began operation. This 

plant was plagued by heavy tarlike gums, which formed 

when the licons were digested with sulfuric acid. This 

problem resulted in the addition, in 1954, of a Herreshoff furnace for burning off the organic material 

from the licons. The last major addition was a secondstage flotation unit in 1956; only minor refinements to 

the process have been made since then.

FLOTATION-PROCESS DESCRIPTION

The Searles Lake brine contains from 0.007 percent 

to 0.008 percent lithium (~0.015 percent Li2O). Most of 

the lithium-bearing salt is precipitated in the mainplant-cycle evaporators and accompanies the burkeites 

through the classification and dewatering steps. The 

burkeites are double salts of sodium sulfate and sodium 

carbonate, which constitute the feed to the soda products section. After further processing a burkeite filter 

cake is dissolved in water, leaving the relatively insoluble 

lithium-bearing solids in suspension. The exact molecular structure of the lithium salts is in question, but the 

constituents closely conform to the formula Li2 NaPO4 

or dilithium sodium phosphate. It is relatively insoluble 

in neutral or basic water solutions, but very soluble in 

even slightly acidic solutions.

The lithium-plant flotation process uses soap as a flotation agent. The soaps are derived from coconut-oil 

fatty acids, which are added to the alkaline liquors at the 

main-plant-cycle evaporators. The fatty acids serve an 

additional function as foam-control agents in the 

evaporators. The sodium soaps of the fatty acids are 

believed to coat the near-colloid licon particles, making 

them relatively insoluble. Residence time is minimized 

between the solution of the lithium-containing burkeite 

and the flotation because the amount of dissolved 

lithium increases with time. The best recovery is obtained from a near-saturated solution of burkeite at a
34 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

temperature just above the crystallization temperature 

of glauber salt (~80°F). Water addition at the burkeite 

dissolver is controlled by the density of the liquor leaving the dissolver. The dissolver liquor is cooled by passing it through two induced-draft spray-cooling towers.

Flotation is carried out in two stages, with air added at 

both feed-pump suctions. The air is compressed by a 

pressure-controlled surge chamber at the discharge of 

each feed pump. Release of pressure in the flotation 

units results in the formation of a multitude of tiny air 

bubbles, which collect the soap-coated licon particles 

and float them to the surface.

The first-stage flotation takes place in four 10,000- 

gallon (37,850-l)-capacity tanks. The tanks contain an 

inner cone-bottomed tank. The liquor is released 

tangentially along the bottom of the outer tank, rises 

through the annular space surrounding the inner tank, 

and then sinks downward in the inner tank. The lithium 

froth overflows the lip of the outer tank into a foam 

trough, and the liquor is discharged from the bottom of 

the inner cone-bottomed tank. Liquor levels are automatically controlled and maintained within 2-3 inches 

(5-7.6 cm) of the top.

The second stage consists of an industrial pneumatic 

foam separator. The aerated feed liquor (discharge 

from first stage) is released inside a hooded skirt in the 

center of the unit: it spreads to the outer wall, then 

down and under the wall and up through risers to discharge into a circular launder. Lithium froth forms on 

the surface and is removed by a sweep. Additional foam 

is obtained from a sweep on the surface of one of the 

soda-products process tanks, which is kept at a constant 

liquor level.

The foam is collected in tanks where it is agitated and 

heated to break down the foam. The lithium salt is filtered from the foam-storage tanks in a batch process 

using two Sweetland filter presses. The cake is washed, 

dried with an air-stream mixture, and removed into 

hoppers. Conveyor belts carry it to the licons roaster, 

where the organics are removed by roasting and bleaching with sodium nitrate in a six-hearth, gas-fired Herreshoff furnace.

LITHIUM-CARBONATE PROCESS

In early 1945, work was started on the production of a 

comparatively pure salt of lithium in place of the crude 

lithium concentrates. Several possibilities were investigated, but a process for the production of lithium carbonate was finally decided upon. The availability of 

sodium carbonate as an in-house product for the conversion and the marketability of the carbonate form of

lithium were factors in this decision. Actual production 

did not begin until 1951.

In the lithium-carbonate process, the licons are first 

digested with concentrated (93 percent) sulfuric acid. 

The digestion reaction may be represented as:

2Li2NaPO4 +3H2SO4^2 Li 2 SO4 +Na2SO4+2H3PO4.

This reaction is accomplished in a 6,000-gallon (22,710- 

1) tank equipped with a top-entering agitator and a 

double-walled inner tank or pachuca. The doublewalled pachuca serves as the heat-exchange surface for 

both heating during the digestion of licons and cooling 

the batch preparatory to the separation of the precipitated solids. The lithium and sodium sulfates (called 

mixed sulfates) are centrifuged from the digester tank, 

washed, and dissolved in water. The filtrate is a 45-50 

percent orthophosphoric acid solution, which is evaporated down to a 78 percent phosphoric acid solution. 

The evaporation reduces the lithium in solution from 

about 3 percent as Li2O to less than 1 percent, thus 

increasing recovery. After evaporation, the solids 

(Li2SC>4 and Na2SO4) are settled out and recycled as a 

sludge back to the digester.

The dissolved, mixed-sulfate solids are introduced 

into a saturated solution of sodium carbonate at a temperature of 200°F. The lithium carbonate has a solubility of about 0.6 percent as Li2O versus about 4 percent 

for the lithium sulfate. The lithium carbonate precipitates out according to the reaction

Li2SO4(l) + Na2CO3 (l)^Li2CO3| + Na2SO4 (l).

The lithium-carbonate solids are centrifuged out, 

washed, dried in a steam-heated rotary-drum air dryer, 

and packaged in 50-pound (22.7-kg) sacks and 325- 

pound (147-kg) fiber drums for shipment. Lithium recovery is increased by treating the end liquor (lithium 

carbonate centrifugal filtrate) using dilute phosphoric 

acid and evaporating to near — Na2SO4 saturation. The 

phosphate ions cause precipitation of Li3 PO4 as a result 

of the decreased solubility of LisPO4 (<.15 percent Li2O 

versus 0.6 percent Li2O for Li2CO3 ). The reaction is

3 Li2CO3 (l) + 2 Li 3 PO4|+3 CO2 t + 3 H2O.

The Li3PO4 solids are settled out and recycled to the 

digester. Lithium is also recovered from spillages by 

pumping sump liquors back to the end-liquor 

evaporator.

"Theoretical" lithium losses are reduced to those dissolved in concentrated phosphoric acid and treated end 

liquor. Theoretical recovery is 92-94 percent, whereas 

actual recovery has averaged about 88 percent.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

THE LITHIUM-RESOURCE ENIGMA

35

By JAMES D. VINE, 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, DENVER, CO

ABSTRACT

The identified lithium resources of the United States that may be 

recoverable by the year 2000 will probably yield less than one million 

tonnes. About a third of this will be used in conventional ways, leaving 

about two-thirds for new energy-related uses, including use in batteries for electric vehicles. Exhaustion of our recoverable lithium resources for these uses would limit the development of thermonuclear 

power in the early decades of the next century. Depletion of a commodity essential to future energy independence can best be prevented 

by identifying new resources of lithium. A program of exploration for 

new deposits well in advance of the demand would help to assure a 

stable price and a steady growth and would be of benefit to the American public as well as the lithium industry. The best chance of finding 

new deposits of lithium is in association with nonmarine salt bodies. 

Undiscovered resources may exist in other geologic environments that 

have not as yet been evaluated. A modest U.S. Geological Survey effort 

to search for such deposits shows promise.

THE NEED FOR RESOURCE DATA

Previous estimates of the availability of lithium tend to 

be misleading to those who plan to use this rare metal in 

alternative energy applications. Reasons for an overly 

optimistic outlook are twofold: (1) Geologic estimates of 

resources (for example, Norton, 1973) summarize data 

on amounts of lithium in the ground without regard to 

recoverability and (2) all recently published estimates 

are biased by an unrealistic preliminary forecast of 

lithium available from one large brine field in Nevada. 

Although brine fields account for a large part of the 

lithium resource base, they will represent a much smaller fraction of the identified lithium recoverable by the 

year 2000. That is because, in practice, a large part of 

the resource base is inaccessible as a result of technical 

or other problems. Many of these other problems, including economic, political, and environmental restrictions, can be as difficult to overcome as any technical 

problem.

An accurate forecast of the amount of lithium available to the market place rather than a measure of the 

lithium contained in various inaccessible parts of the 

earth is desirable, in order to plan for the effective development of lithium batteries for automobiles and for 

storage of off-peak power for utility nets. Furthermore, 

if the scarcity of the Li6 isotope, which is required in the 

production of tritium, is a limiting factor in the development of controlled thermonuclear power, as suggested by Hubbert (1969, p. 230-233), consideration 

should be given to stockpiling this isotope prior to using

the rest of the lithium for batteries and other conventional uses.

Any mineral industry, such as the lithium industry, is 

concerned with the quantity of ore that can be profitably 

extracted from the ground. 1 This is the category of resources that we call reserves, and it may represent only a 

small fraction of the total resource base. Most companies 

will attempt to block out an ore reserve adequate to 

supply 5—10 years of mill product, or whatever is required to amortize the capital investment in mining and 

milling facilities. Under the pressure of competition 

they may tie up additional mineral leases, but most 

companies cannot afford the investment required to 

hold leases that they do not anticipate using for a few 

years.

Even if available to the government, the proprietary 

data on company-held reserves would not be adequate 

for long-range government planning. Thus, from the 

broader perspective of the long-term economic health 

of the nation, various agencies of government may need 

data on the total resources of a commodity, including 

company-held reserves, identified but subeconomic resources, and the undiscovered resources that may be 

predictable on the basis of geologic probability. Reasonably accurate forecasts are required for many different uses—from the ranking of national priorities to 

military and diplomatic strategy.

REVISED LITHIUM RESOURCES

A classification of lithium resources that includes an 

estimate for three main categories of resources, revised 

to include information up to February 1976, is shown in 

table 16. The categories include (1) identified reserves, 

which are economic at today's prices and technology; (2) 

identified low-grade resources, which are not economic 

at today's prices and technology but may become 

economic at a higher price or improved technology, and 

(3) hypothetical and speculative resources, which will 

have to be discovered and developed in order to bring 

the cumulative yield by the year 2000 up to 1 million 

metric tonnes. All classes show both the "in place" resources, which refers to the amount of lithium that is in 

the ground, and the probable yield, which refers to the

'The latest definitions for various categories of reserves and resources can be found in U.S. 

Geological Survey Bulletin 1450-A.
36 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

TABLE 16.—Classification of U.S. lithium resources in millions of tonnes of 

contained lithium

Sources

In 

place

Estimated

percent

recoverable

by 2000 1

Probable 

yield

Reserves (economic)

Kings Mtn., N.C. 2 - 

Clayton Valley, Nev 

Searles Lake, Calif1

0.510

.080

.009

35

50

50

0.185

.040

.005

0.230

Low-grade resources (subeconomic)

Kings Mtn., N.C.2 ___ 

Clayton Valley, Nev3 __-_ 

Searles Lake, Calif4 __ 

Imperial Valley, Calif5 — 

Oilfield brines^ _____ 

'/z Great Salt Lake, Utah 7 

Borate mine waste* -__ 

Black Hills, S.D. 4 ___

Total.

0.840

.625

.027

1.000

1.000

.263

.060

.010

3.825

0.200

.060

.003

.010

0.10

.010

.004

.003

0.300

Hypothetical and speculative resources9

Clays ___ ______ _ _____

Pegmatites _ --___ . . _.

Total _ __ ___ .

. _ ____ .350

25

20

0.200

.070

0.470

• various sources, including hearsay.

2 "In place" reserves estimated for two known ore bodies (Keith Evans and Ihor Kunasz, oral 

commun., Jan. 1976). Total resources for the district from Norton (1973, p. 372).

'Calculated from the estimate of recoverable reserves and total resources listed by Kunasz 

(1975, p. 796).

••Calculated from Norton (1973, p. 372).

"Extrapolated from two analyses and the geometry of the brine field suggested by White 

(1968, p. 312-313).

"Based on analytical data of Collins (1974, p. 16-20). No data on brine volume.

'Estimate by J. D. Whelan (oral commun., Jan. 1976) incorporating recent downward 

revision of the volume of brine in the lake by Carol A. Peterson.

Calculated from data presented by Robert B. Kistler (oral commun., Jan. 1976).

9This amount, in addition to reserves and low-grade resources, must be discovered and 

developed to produce a cumulative yield of 1 million tonnes in the years 1976 through 2000.

amount oflithium one might expect to be recovered and 

made available to the market place. While the in-place 

resources are a measured volume of rock times the 

grade of ore, the accuracy of which may be good (±10 

percent) or poor (±100 percent), the factor ofrecoverability is not a measurable quantity. Recoverability involves unpredictable economic and technical factors that 

can be determined only in practice. Although the accuracy of the resulting data may be questioned, the totals 

probably represent a reasonable value. For example, a 

marked price increase relative to other products and 

services could increase the total yield by a factor of 10 or 

20 percent, to more than a million tonnes oflithium, but 

additional restrictions on the use of land for mining 

could reduce the total by an equal or greater amount. 

Although the existence of hypothetical and speculative 

resources can be predicted on the basis of geologic 

probability, the quantities listed here are uncertain and 

will be a function of the imagination applied by 

geologists and the incentives available for exploration. It 

seems reasonable to forecast that the United States will 

produce somewhere between 750,000 and one million 

tonnes oflithium by the year 2000, but such production

will require an economic climate that provides incentive 

for considerable exploration and development of 

lithium in previously unknown deposits.

COMPARISON OF RESOURCES AND 

REQUIREMENTS

In the years 1971 through 1974, conventional uses for 

lithium grew at an average rate of 8.8 percent, according to proprietary data. If this figure is projected into 

the future, conventional uses may consume about 3x10 

kg of lithium by the year 2000. Requirements for new 

energy-related uses for lithium, including batteries for 

electric automobiles, batteries for the off-peak storage 

of power for utility nets, absorption-type refrigeration 

and air-conditioning units, and controlled thermonuclear power plants, are much more difficult to predict. 

Requirements for these uses depend on the success of 

current technologic research and its acceptance by the 

American public. Estimates of these requirements, as 

detailed in a previous report (Vine, 1975b) are from 3 to 

15xl08 kg for battery applications alone. Thermonuclear power plants are not expected to require much 

lithium before the year 2000 but may need as much as 

5xl08 kg by the year 2020.

Thus, about one-third of our presently identified recoverable resources will be consumed by conventional 

uses by the year 2000. The remaining two-thirds could 

easily be spent in battery applications before the year 

2000, leaving nothing for thermonuclear power, unless 

we start now to search for and develop new deposits. 

Failure to identify new resources of lithium may be regarded as irresponsible by those of the next generation.

UNDISCOVERED RESOURCES

An appraisal of lithium resources would be incomplete without discussion of undiscovered resources, 

which include extensions of identified resources in 

known districts plus identification of new districts previously unknown. Whereas the rate of discovery of new 

oilfields can be extrapolated from the past history of 

exploration and discovery for petroleum, no such record of exploration exists for the lithium industry. 

Moreover, the number of known districts is too small to 

constitute a statistical basis for projection. Even prospecting guides to aid in the exploration for lithium are 

minimal. Small lithium-bearing zoned pegmatites, such 

as those in the Black Hills of South Dakota, are generally 

characterized by large crystals, as much as 1-2 metres in 

length; their size makes them easy to recognize and unlikely to be overlooked when exposed at the surface, but 

their irregular distribution makes prediction of covered 

pegmatites nearly impossible. Unzoned pegmatites, 

such as those in the Kings Mountain tin-spodumene belt
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 37

of North Carolina, are large features that may extend 

for many kilometres; hence they are unlikely to be overlooked, except in areas of deep weathering or jungle 

cover. Thus, the chances of discovering a major new 

pegmatite district within the conterminous United 

States seem rather poor. The chances of discovering a 

new brine field, on the other hand, are relatively good, 

because relatively little effort has been devoted to 

searching for brines. Furthermore, lithium-rich rocks or 

minerals may be associated with nonmarine salt bodies, 

volcanic rocks, and vein deposits, none of which have 

received more than casual attention with respect to 

lithium (Vine, 1975a).

Whereas, by definition, reserves are identifiable, measured amounts of a commodity, the concept of resources 

is abstract in that the values can change with changes in 

economics, technology, and geologic understanding. 

For example, the possibility of discovering previously 

unrecognized lithium resources is very good because 

previous exploration was minimal and limited to a few 

geologic environments. Hence, a program of exploration for lithium in previously untested geologic environments could greatly improve the outlook for lithium 

resources.

If the future growth of the lithium industry is dependent on presently identified resources, a considerable price increase in lithium can be predicted, which will 

bring today's subeconomic resources into the category 

of economic reserves. However, any marked price increase would seriously limit the economically feasible 

uses of lithium, especially in direct consumer products 

such as electric automobiles. On the other hand, an exploration program that appraises previously untested 

geologic environments may result in a more optimistic 

forecast of resources because of the probability of discovering new deposits. Thus, a program to search for 

such deposits could make the difference between reasonably priced electric automobiles and some other 

form of personal transportation that might be too expensive for the average consumer.

Although private industry is capable of conducting a 

program of exploration for lithium, little incentive to do 

so exists at the present time, because industry has sufficient reserves for the short term and no assurance that 

major investments in exploration would ever be returned. Meanwhile, large amounts of money are being 

spent to develop new energy-related uses for lithium,

partly based on the assumption that lithium will be 

available at a reasonable price when the manufacturers 

are ready to start up production lines. However, if new 

resources are not identified and developed well in advance of this need, any sudden increase in demand will 

be met by a spectacular rise in price which will justify 

having to mine and mill lower grade lithium ore. A crisis 

in demand does not permit the time required to develop 

new resources. Moreover, a spectacular price rise would 

be self-defeating because less desirable but less expensive substitutes could be found to replace lithium in batteries.

A stable price for lithium would be beneficial to both 

the industry and the American public. The best way to 

assure both a stable price and a steady growth in the 

demand for lithium would be to conduct a program for 

the exploration of new deposits well in advance of the 

actual increase in demand. A modest program along this 

line has already been initiated by the U.S. Geological 

Survey and has begun to produce encouraging results. 

Those of us involved in this program solicit both the 

confidence and encouragement of the lithiumproducing industry as well as the support of the scientists and engineers from national and private laboratories who are concerned with the development of new 

energy-related uses for lithium.

REFERENCES CITED

Collins, A. G., 1974, Geochemistry of liquids, gases, and rocks from 

the Smackover Formation: U.S. Bur. Mines Rept. Inv. 7897, 84 p.

Hubbert, M. K., 1969, Energy resources, [Chap.] 8, in Resources and 

Man, a study and recommendations by the committee on Resources and Man of the Division of Earth Sciences, National 

Academy of Sciences-National Research Council: San Francisco, 

W. H. Freeman and Company, p. 157-242.

Kunasz, I. A., 1975, Lithium raw materials, in Lefond, S. J., ed., Industrial minerals and rocks [4th ed.]: New York, Am. Inst. Mining, Metall., Petroleum Engineers, p. 791-803.

Norton, J. J., 1973, Lithium, cesium, and rubidium-the rare alkali 

metals, in Brobst, D. A., and Pratt, W. P., eds., Unified States 

Mineral Resources: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 820, p. 365- 

378.

Vine, J. D., 1975a, Lithium in sediments and brines—How, why, and 

where to search: U.S. Geol. Survey Jour. Research, v. 3, no. 4, p. 

479-485.

Vine, J. D., 1975b, Are lithium resources adequate for energy selfsufficiency: U.S. Geol. Survey open-file rept. 75-682.

White, D. E., 1968, Environments of generation of some base-metal 

ore deposits: Econ. Geology, v. 63, no. 4, p. 301-335.
38 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

LITHIUM RESOURCE ESTIMATES—WHAT DO THEY MEAN?

By JAMES J. NORTON, 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, DENVER, CO

ABSTRACT

Lithium resources have been poorly known, mainly because there 

has been little need for information. The supply of lithium in known 

deposits, minable under prevailing conditions, has been far more than 

adequate to meet demand. Potential resources are very much larger.

Most of the major mines are in deposits that had been discovered long 

before they were developed or were found more or less by chance. 

Systematic exploration for new deposits, especially new kinds of deposits, has been meager, and thus experience with exploration 

techniques is slight.

Anticipated large demand, now centering on lithium for storage 

batteries, greatly changes the outlook but can probably be met, though 

to justify the costs of exploration and development requires assurance 

that the demand will in fact materialize.

Mutual understanding among those who will participate in enlarging the supply of lithium and those who develop new uses is a necessity. Confidence arising from large resource estimates can be seriously 

misplaced; the resources must first be developed and made ready for 

market.

The most reliable category of resources consists ot the lithium 

proved to be recoverable under current conditions from known deposits. Almost equally important in an expanding market is lithium in 

known deposits that is almost but not quite minable now. The large 

expected demand, however, can be met only if new deposits are 

found, as they probably can be.

BACKGROUND

The decision to publish the articles in this volume was 

triggered by misunderstandings of lithium resource estimates, by shortcomings in published statements, by a 

tendency to misuse the estimates because of inadequate 

comprehension of what underlies them, and by need for 

better communication among those who plan future 

uses of lithium, those who do the geologic work, and 

those who mine or will mine lithium.

An article of mine (Norton, 1973) is at the center of 

some of the problems. Many of the users of that article 

are not mining engineers or geologists. They have 

tended to quote the resource estimates without studying 

the text of the article to understand the data on which 

the estimates are based.

But I too have been at fault, in that article and in 

personal communications, by accepting premature 

company announcements of lithium reserve estimates 

for Clayton Valley, Nev., which later proved to be too 

large and which seriously distorted the total estimated 

reserves for the United States. One awkward aspect of 

compiling mineral resource estimates is that companies 

ordinarily do not reveal the data on which their calculations are based, and the shortcomings in their announcements may not be visible even to themselves.

In a generally overlooked paragraph (Norton, 1973, 

p. 375), I protested against a tendency to call my lithium 

resource estimates conservative in disregard of the fact 

that they have been the largest that available data would 

allow, but added that any truly large new demand would 

cause a search for new deposits and probably still larger 

estimates of resources. The conclusion of the paragraph 

emphasized the necessity of finding deposits and determining their lithium content before any large use actually begins.

Such uses now appear to be forthcoming. Hindsight 

shows that my 1973 article was defective in not being 

written so as to be more useful to persons not connected 

with mining or geology. A particular shortcoming was 

the absence of discussion of the outlook for lithium mining under various sets of possible circumstances.

Lithium almost certainly can become in ample supply 

to meet even the largest needs now foreseen for the 

remainder of this century, but the end of the century is 

not far away. The problem of how to bring demand and 

supply together at acceptable costs must be understood 

by all persons involved or likely to become involved with 

lithium.

MINERAL RESOURCE CLASSIFICATION 

AND NOMENCLATURE

The word "reserves" is widely misinterpreted as including all material expected ever to come to market. 

Idiosyncratic usage of the term is not unusual among 

mining engineers and geologists, and the published 

record contains definitions that are incompatible with 

one another.

More rigorously defined, "reserves" include only 

material that can be profitably mined, or at least is expected to be profitable, under present economic and 

technologic conditions, and for which considerable information has been obtained. The drilling, geologic investigation, chemical analyses, and other work necessary 

to outline reserves are ordinarily time consuming and 

costly: Reserves may be said to be "bought" rather than 

"found," though at some single point in the process 

there is, of course, a discovery and at the same time or a 

later time there is a decision that profitable mining is 

possible.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 39

"Resources" is the term used to include all material, 

discovered and undiscovered, profitable and now unprofitable, which seems likely to become a source of a 

mineral commodity.

The nature of the various categories of mineral resources has been greatly clarified by what has come to be 

known as the McKelvey diagram, a simplified version of 

which is shown as figure ISA. This is the basis for the 

current U.S. Department of Interior nomenclature and 

classification of mineral resources, most recently described in comprehensive form by the U.S. Geological 

Survey (1975). Among the many other publications discussing the diagram are McKelvey (1972), Brobst and 

Pratt (1973), and Schanz (1975).

Resources may, as a first step, be divided into four 

categories: (1) those classified as reserves because they 

have already been discovered and can now be worked at 

a profit, (2) those yet to be found that would also be 

profitable, (3) discovered material of too low quality to 

be used, and (4) material that is both undiscovered and 

unprofitable.

Reserves is the most important category for the next 

few years. The undiscovered but profitable category 

generally takes second rank, especially when the time 

span is some decades. Yet under special circumstances 

the known low-quality deposits can take over the second 

or even the first position, as during times of great increase in demand or price, or after a major technological change, or when conventional sources are cut off by 

war or embargoes. The necessity for speed in mining 

may then be too great to allow time to explore. An 

example for lithium was the intensive mining in the 

1950's of deposits in granitic pegmatites that previously 

had been only moderately attractive. The possibility of 

finding nonpegmatitic deposits was already suspected, 

but there was no time to look for them. If demand again

Discovered Undiscovered

In known districts In undiscovered districts

DECREASING GEOLOGIC INFORMATION—————»

FIGURE ISA.—Classification of mineral resources. Modified from 

McKelvey (1972, fig. 3).

increases greatly and if exploration of brines, clays, and 

so on is insufficiently intense or is unsuccessful, pegmatitic deposits will again assume their earlier importance, despite their probably higher costs of mining.

Industry's interest is generally in or near the category 

represented by the rectangle labeled reserves on figure 

ISA. Most industry reserve estimates are for single 

mines or small groups of mines, chiefly for the purpose 

of acquiring the information needed to plan operations 

and to keep financial arrangements on a firm footing. 

Government has broader and longer term responsibilities, and thus tends to be concerned in considerable 

degree with other segments represented by the diagram.

Reserves are customarily divided into smaller 

categories on the basis of how much is known about the 

position, size, shape, grade (ordinarily expressed as the 

percentage of a metal in the deposit), amenability to 

processing, and other factors necessary to appraise a 

deposit.

In figure ISA, reserves are divided into classes called 

measured, indicated, and inferred, following the practice of the U.S. Department of Interior. The mining 

industry prefers the terms "proved," "probable," and 

"possible" ore (Banfield and Havard, 1975). Measured 

and proved are generally agreed to have nearly the 

same meaning. They refer to ore that is so well known as 

to be ready for development and extraction. Neither the 

words "probable" and "indicated" nor "possible" and 

"inferred" seem to be equivalent, but the issue does not 

need to be discussed here.

A formerly unprofitable deposit is promoted to the 

reserve category usually because of higher prices, 

technological advances leading to lower costs, or an increase in demand permitting larger scale and hence 

more efficient operation. A deposit can also cease to be 

profitable and lose its standing as a reserve, as by a decrease in price caused by lowered demand.

Many other circumstances can cause a body of ore to 

move into or out of the reserve category or even to be a 

reserve for one company and not another. Construction 

of public highways or railroads can make mining more 

feasible. A deposit can become of value through an opportunity for cheap transport of the product in ships; 

loss of such an opportunity can return the deposit to 

worthlessness. After the gold mine closing order of 

World War II, many operators of small gold mines were 

unable to keep their facilities in working order and 

never reopened the mines; their unmined ore ceased to 

be reserves. Other governmental actions, such as starting or ending a price support program, can move deposits from one category to another. The opening of 

better mines can cause other mines to become unprofitable, as has happened twice with lithium: (1) in the
40 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

1950's, when greatly increased demand led to the opening of large mechanized mines and ultimately to the 

closing of the old small handsorting mines and (2) when 

the Clayton Valley, Nev., brine operation caused the 

Quebec Lithium mine, near Barraute, Quebec, to be no 

longer competitive. Some mineral deposits may be profitably worked by a company that already has a large 

plant nearby but not by a company that must build new 

facilities. Other possibilities can be conceived by anyone 

who gives a little thought to the subject.

What constitutes a profit introduces questions. A mining company expects a rate of return commensurate 

with its risks. Certainly the prospective return must be 

greater than the yield of high-grade bonds to be attractive. Yet once a mine has been developed and a plant 

built, mining will continue as long as cash income exceeds cash outgo, even if part or all of the capital cost 

must be written off.

Individuals making reserve calculations may have different motives that can lead to different results from 

essentially the same data. Congressman Harold Runnels 

(U.S. Congress, 1975, p. 28) has expressed this neatly by 

saying that a person borrowing money to develop a 

newly discovered oilfield will want the largest possible 

reserve estimate, but when evaluating the same oilfield 

for an estate he would want the smallest possible estimate. Mining company reserve calculations made during the planning process that precedes the large financial outlays necessary to start mining have a tendency to 

be low: Caution can do no harm to the company except 

to lead to missed opportunities, but recklessness can do 

the company very serious financial damage.

If the reserve concept is so complex and the calculations are hard to evaluate, it is not suprising that those 

who estimate undiscovered resources open themselves 

to disputes. The test of the precision of a calculation is 

the reproducibility of results obtained by different persons using different methods. Oil is currently the most 

instructive example, partly because the urgency of its 

problems has given it wide attention but mainly because 

an enormous quantity of information is available. The 

disparities in the estimates of undiscovered oil in the 

United States seem extraordinary to many persons, but 

actually the spread is equivalent merely to several decades of U.S. consumption at its current rate. Though 

this spread is important in planning the future of U.S. 

energy usage, its size is insignificant compared to what 

would result from similar examination of most other 

mineral commodities.

A mineral commodity for which reserves are much 

larger than required by the market presents great uncertainties. Lithium is a good example. Most of the 

major known lithium deposits were easily found in surface exposures, and the others were found virtually by

chance. Their lithium content is far greater than has 

ever been needed to meet the demands for lithium. The 

circumstances create little reason to search for more deposits, thus offering slight experience or information to 

use as a guide in estimating the magnitude of undiscovered resources. My recent estimates of undiscovered resources (Norton, 1973, table 73, p. 372) were little more 

than informed guesses, as the text of the report makes 

clear, but they have been widely credited with more accuracy than they possess.

Resource estimates for coproducts and byproducts 

have problems which are neglected in figure ISA and 

which rarely, if ever, are examined in the literature, 

though the mining industry is well acquainted with 

them. The lithium produced as one of the minor products, along with several major products, from brine at 

Searles Lake, Calif., is a useful example. A change in the 

processing plant to add to the overall efficiency of the 

operation could have the side effect of making the 

lithium unrecoverable. The reserve (if it ever should 

have been called a reserve, for the lithium content is 

only about 70 ppm) then no longer exists. Other lithium 

brines have marketable components that must be produced to make mining economically viable. A lithium 

company can thus be put into another business in which 

it has little expertise and little influence, hence complicating the appraisal of its outlook for lithium production.

In short, resources of various categories can change 

through time for a great variety of reasons. Estimates of 

their magnitude range from careful, elaborate, and expensive measurements to mere guesses. These estimates 

are furnished by persons who cover the whole spectrum 

from those of indisputable expertise and objectivity to 

those of questionable reliability. Persons who provide 

estimates should explain how their results were obtained 

so that others can make independent interpretations. 

With lithium the chief shortcoming in existing resource 

estimates is lack of information caused by the little past 

need for exploration.

METHODS OF EXPRESSING 

RESOURCE ESTIMATES

Metal mining companies ordinarily state reserves in 

terms of the tonnage of ore and its grade. Grade is generally expressed as the percentage of a metal in the ore. 

Not all of the metal is recovered during mining and 

processing, but few companies issue estimates of the recoverability. In making broad appraisals of metals reserves, the lack of such estimates is rarely important 

because recoverability of metals tends to be near enough 

to 100 percent so as not to introduce errors that are 

much if any greater than the errors made in the normal 

reserve estimating process. Some mines actually recover
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 41

more than 100 percent of the measured reserves, for 

unanticipated ore may be found during mining or lowgrade ore not originally calculated in the reserves may, 

inadvertently or by necessity, be extracted.

The practices in stating reserves of deposits of industrial minerals and rocks (commonly called nonmetals) 

are too varied to be discussed briefly. The products may 

be rocks, minerals, chemical compounds, elements, or 

manufactured materials. A deposit's grade (in the sense 

applied to this word in the metals industry) may be no 

more important than many of its other properties.

Recoverability is critical in the oil industry's examination of its resources, for only about a third of the oil in 

the ground can be obtained profitably. The oil industry 

emphasizes what it calls "proved reserves," which includes only the amount that is reasonably certain to be 

recovered under existing conditions. Of course the oil 

terminology also provides for estimates of the total in 

the ground and for methods of expressing other estimates serving various purposes.

For lithium the practice has been to state tonnage and 

grade, but recoverability is also very important. Of all 

the lithium ever extracted from pegmatites, probably at 

least one-third and possibly nearly half has been lost 

during mining and the elaborate processing needed to 

make the many kinds of lithium products on the market. 

In the brine at Silver Peak, Nev., the most recent estimate by Kunasz (this report) indicates a known content 

of 775,000 tons of lithium but a recoverable amount of 

only 44,500 tons. Applying the word "reserves" to the 

775,000 tons, as has been done by Kunasz (1975, p. 

796), is akin to the practice of the metal mining industry; applying it to the 44,500 tons follows the methods of 

the oil industry. This difference illustrates a vital problem in expressing lithium reserve estimates.

RELATION OF RESERVES TO PRODUCTION

Often since the beginning of this century, it has been 

noticed that the reserves of many mineral commodities 

were adequate to last only a few decades. With the passage of time, reserves in most of the mineral industry 

stayed ahead of production by about the same amount. 

Some have attributed this experience to transitory good 

luck by prospectors, to the incompetence of geologists, 

and to machinations of mining companies. The principal reason is none of these. It is merely that the size of 

reserves depends largely on the magnitude of production, which in turn reflects demand. In the phraseology 

of mathematics, reserves are a function of production. 

They are also a function of the geologic availability of 

deposits, accessibility, political environment, and many 

other influences.

A hypothetical example will clarify this point. Suppose all the world's copper deposits were identical in

every way that affects how the copper is mined, processed, and sold. Suppose also that the deposits contain 

enough copper to last thousands of years, and that 

price, rate of consumption, and other economic factors 

will remain unchanged. The effect of these assumptions 

is to reduce all the variables to a constant except reserves 

and production.

Now suppose the lifetime of every deposit, at the most 

efficient rate of mining, is 100 years. Each year some 

deposits will be abandoned as mined out, and an equal 

number of deposits will begin to be mined. The reserves 

in operating mines will at all times amount to 50 years of 

supply, despite the existence of very large resources.

No authority would disagree that the recoverable reserve of lithium in the United States is at least 350,000 

tons. At the 1975 production rate of probably between 

4,600 and 5,100 tons (estimated from Wood, this report), this reserve would last about 70 years. Such a 

large reserve-production ratio is unusual, and seems in 

conflict with the belief that reserves tend to be kept at 

the minimum necessary level. Actually reserves are so 

large relative to demand not because there has been any 

need for large reserves but merely because some lithium 

deposits are of such great size that dividing a small 

number (production) into a big one (reserves) yields a 

large result. As a consequence, reserves are not only 

adequate to meet the assured market but also provide 

leeway to prepare to meet larger, less certain needs.

Other articles in this volume suggest that annual demand for lithium will greatly increase by the end of this 

century. If demand thereafter is expected to continue at 

a high level, then reserves must be correspondingly increased to maintain an adequate backlog for subsequent 

years.

HOW RAPIDLY CAN PRODUCTION OF 

LITHIUM BE INCREASED?

An astonishing assumption underlying many discussions of future uses of lithium and whether supply will 

meet demand is that if resource estimates are large 

enough, there need be no worry about supply.

Actually, the chief concern should be whether lithium 

can be brought to market in suitable amounts when 

needed. Theoretically one should also be concerned 

about whether the inadequately explored or undiscovered resources exist and can eventually be converted to 

reserves, but on this score I remain an optimist.

A way of visualizing the circumstances is to look at the 

McKelvey diagram (fig. ISA) as if it were three dimensional and the third dimension is time. In this third 

dimension, the reserve box would be continuously depleted by mining and continuously replenished by discovery of additional deposits and by raising low-grade 

material to a profitable level. How fast this can be done
42 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

is a critical and difficult question, especially with a commodity for which there has been very little exploration.

Figure 18B presents the problem in a different light. 

Wood (this report) suggests a 5-percent growth rate in 

U.S. production for the next 5 years. If this growth rate 

were to continue, the production in the year 2000 would 

be about 15,000 tons of lithium. At the other extreme, 

Chilenskas and others (this report) suggest a consumption for storage batteries alone in the year 2000 at 

somewhere between 90,000 and 170,000 tons. The 

maximum likely figure for U.S. annual demand at the 

end of the century seems to be about 180,000 tons.

The disparity between 15,000 and 180,000 tons raises 

obvious enough uncertainty to those who must find deposits, drill them out, develop mines, and build plants. A 

further problem lies in the rate of change in demand. 

Curve 1 of figure 18B shows the most probable form of 

increasing annual consumption if lithium batteries do 

come into common use—a modest expansion in the next 

few years and a great upswing at the end of the century. 

A curve of this shape cannot, of course, continue upward forever. It must eventually turn downward because of a shortage of lithium, because of something else 

affecting lithium usage, or through other ancillary cir1975 1980 1985 1990 

YEARS

1995 2000

FIGURE 18B.—Schematic graph of how an increase in lithium production may proceed in the years 1975 to 2000. Lines 1, 2, and 3 are 

possible generalized curves showing annual production (the actual 

curve will, of course, be far more irregular). Point A is 1975 production, which in the United States was probably somewhat less than 

5,000 tons of contained lithium. Point B is U.S. demand in the year 

2000, which may be as small as 15,000 tons or as great as 180,000 

tons. Lines a through i signify production levels at which new mines 

and plants must start operation.

cumstances. Curve 2 represents merely a straight-line 

increase. Curve 3 has the shape to be expected if lithium 

resources minable at acceptable costs turn out to be hard 

to find or if the demand for lithium has a dimishing rate 

of increase at the end of the century.

Along any curve representing increasing production, 

there are points at which new mines and plants must 

start operating. These are represented schematically by 

the horizontal lines labeled a through i. The lines indicate considerable uncertainty about when new mines 

will be needed. This uncertainty is important for anything that requires as long a lead time as a mine, 

especially a mine in a new kind of deposit requiring 

experimentation with processing methods. Mining 

companies in lithium and the other so-called rare elements have heard about many anticipated large new 

uses that did not materialize, and they have learned the 

importance of caution and skepticism.

The outlook beyond the end of the century can also 

be influential, though its importance may be little more 

than theoretical now. Nevertheless it can affect the rate 

at which capital costs must be amortized and the prudence necessary in developing new mines.

The history of other mineral products that have gone 

through large increases in demand can give hints about 

how large an increase is practicable in lithium.

Let us assume that the production capacity desired for 

the United States by the year 2000 is 150,000 tons of 

lithium. Starting from a current capacity of not much 

more than 5,000 tons (Wood, this report), an approximately 30-fold expansion in 25 years would be needed.

Increases of this amount are rare in segments of the 

mineral industry controlled mainly by private markets. 

For oil, which has an outstanding reputation as a growth 

industry, U.S. output increased 58-fold in the 75 years 

from 1896 through 1970, which was the peak year. The 

increase from 1921 through 1970 was merely 7.5 times. 

Copper increased only eight-fold from 1896 through 

1970, also the peak year for it.

To find increases that were proportionately much 

greater and took place over a shorter time, it is best to 

search among commodities which had small production 

until recently and for which there was assistance from 

the Federal Government. Uranium is the greatest success story. U.S. uranium production increased from virtually nothing in the late 1940's to a high peak in 1960. 

Meanwhile world production, in the non-Communist 

group of nations, increased 22-fold.

Niobium (columbium) is especially pertinent because 

in 1950 its situation was similar to that of lithium today. 

The main difference between the two is that notice of an 

increase in niobium demand, chiefly for use in jet engines, came very suddenly. The geologic literature 

available in 1950 indicated, as with lithium now, that
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 43

major deposits of niobium probably could be found, and 

notes in trade journals implied that some were ready for 

development. A U.S. Government purchase program 

began that exceeded the wildest expectations, and after 

its end in 1959 world production increased even more 

rapidly. Niobium output of the world, outside the 

Communist segment, was about 14,565 tons in 1975 

(U.S. Bureau Mines, 1976, p. 45), in contrast to about 

500 tons in 1950 (when production data were, for several reasons, imprecise). The increase was about 30-fold. 

With such experiences in the background, and if one 

can assume the availability of adequate lithium resources, there seems little reason for pessimism about 

increasing lithium production enough to meet the 

maximum demands anticipated for the end of the century. In lithium, unlike niobium in 1950, the United 

States is already the world's largest producer and has the 

world's largest reserves as well as favorable geologic environments for the discovery of more deposits. For the 

expansion to be orderly and not too costly, new deposits 

must be found and the demand must be assured long 

enough in advance for the construction of producing 

facilities.

PROBLEMS IN RECENT ESTIMATES OF 

LITHIUM RESOURCES

Several articles in this volume treat various aspects of 

existing information about lithium resources. The principal assessments of resources are in the articles by Vine 

and by Kunasz. Their tables of resource estimates may, 

to the casual reader, seem greatly different, but actually 

the main difference is in their approach to the available 

data. Vine emphasizes the very proper view that the 

critical figures are for lithium that almost certainly can 

be mined by the end of the century, for this is the only 

lithium that users can be sure to obtain. Kunasz takes 

the equally proper view that in an expanding market the 

known resources that are less adequately known or are 

of lower quality will take on increasing importance. Both 

of them would undoubtedly agree that search for new 

deposits is necessary if U.S. demand is indeed going to 

increase greatly by the year 2000. If a proper reserve base 

should amount to at least a 30-year supply, and if the 

annual production at the end of the century is to be 

180,000 tons of lithium, reserves at that time should be 

about 5,400,000 tons, which is larger than either of their 

estimates of known resources and far larger than any 

estimate of reserves.

My own recently published appraisal of resources 

(Norton, 1973, p. 372-375) is not fundamentally incompatible with those of Vine and Kunasz. The most 

obvious difference is that I estimated or (in more correct 

words) made guesses of undiscovered world resources; 

Kunasz makes no such guesses and Vine does so only for

the United States, arriving at a total (if his Kings Mountain, N.C., low-grade resources are included) similar to 

mine but via a different route. Both Vine and Kunasz 

use Great Salt Lake brines, which I chose to disregard. 

Vine also uses oil field brines, for which I had virtually 

no information. Kunasz promotes the Zaire and Chilean 

deposits to identified resources, chiefly on the basis of 

recent information.

A source of some contention has been the estimates 

for Clayton Valley, Nev. The original claim was 2.5 to 

5 million tons of lithium "reserves" (obviously meaning 

"resources"). My examination of the published data 

(Norton, 1973, p. 374) led to assigning 500,000 tons to 

reserves and relegating the rest to more dubious 

categories of resources. Kunasz (this report), using 

newer information, now estimates the identified resources at 775,000 tons of lithium, of which only 44,500 

tons is currently recoverable. He adds that the total resources in the valley, apparently in clay as well as brine, 

are undoubtedly very much larger, though when and 

how these resources can be mined seems questionable. 

Vine (1975 and this report) stresses the 44,500-ton 

figure, because one can rely on obtaining this amount. 

Yet to say that no more than this quantity of lithium will 

ultimately be extracted from Clayton Valley may be too 

conservative, though some such event as the development of better deposits elsewhere, making Clayton Valley not competitive, could prevent enlargement of its 

supply of recoverable lithium for a long time.

OUTLOOK FOR INCREASING 

LITHIUM RESERVES

Questions about the future success of lithium exploration are difficult to answer, and the answers are impossible to quantify. The small amount of exploration and 

geologic study has yielded a correspondingly small 

amount of information about where and how to search 

for new deposits.

The traditional source of lithium has been pegmatite. 

Most lithium pegmatite has about 0.7 percent lithium, 

apparently for geologic reasons summarized recently 

(Norton, 1973, p. 368-369). The main economic difference between a good and a not-so-good lithium pegmatite is size: A large one can be mined more cheaply than 

smaller ones. Another difference is accessibility. The 

Zaire deposits may be the best in the world except for 

their remote location and the political environment.

Pegmatites are the source of several unusual mineral O

products and for this reason they have been prospected 

carefully in much of the world. Not many large lithium 

pegmatites exposed at the surface seem likely to have 

remained undiscovered. The stage of exploration probably is near maturity. Nevertheless, the great disparity 

between the amount of known lithium pegmatite in
44 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

North America and in the rest of the world suggests 

some hope for the potential of other continents.

Exploration is decidedly immature for lithium pegmatites concealed beneath the surface and for small but 

possibly useful pegmatites. Kesler in this report makes 

suggestions about how to find additional large deposits 

in the Kings Mountain region, North Carolina.

Several clay deposits are known to contain about 0.2 

percent lithium, but none have been mined for lithium. 

For these deposits, little laboratory work on extraction 

processes has been attempted, the geology is poorly 

known, and all the discoveries were little more than accidental. A grade of 0.2 percent by weight seems very 

low, but opportunities for low cost mining and processing may offset this defect. Furthermore, weight percent 

is somewhat misleading with elements of low atomic 

weight: for example, spodumene (LiAlSi2C>6), the principal lithium mineral of pegmatites, contains 10 percent 

lithium in terms of atoms but only 3.7 percent by weight.

The likelihood of finding lithium-rich brines was suspected long before the more or less fortuitous discovery 

of the Clayton Valley deposit, which is now probably the 

second most productive deposit in the world. The deposit in the Salar de Atacama, Chile, reputedly also 

found by chance, appears to be richer than Clayton Valley and probably also large. Whether even better deposits are awaiting discovery is unknown and will be 

beyond even guessing until the geology and geochemistry of lithium brines have been investigated much more 

thoroughly.

In short, exploration for lithium brines and clays is at 

a very immature stage.

No other kinds of lithium deposits are known, but 

they may exist. The source of the lithium in lithium-rich 

pegmatites is uncertain (Norton, 1973, p. 368-369). The 

lithium may have been obtained by partial melting of 

lithium-bearing metamorphic rocks. If so, some of the 

lithium pegmatite regions of the world may also contain 

nonpegmatitic deposits. Because nearly all lithium pegmatite localities were first prospected for tin, the association between tin and lithium may be worth examining. 

Many publications indicate that rocks allied with the 

Cornwall, England, tin deposits have lithian mica, and 

one wonders if they have other lithium minerals.

Ocean water has often been cited as a potential source 

of lithium. Its content of only about 0.2 ppm lithium 

multiplied by the large tonnage of ocean water is impressive, but actually does nothing but reaffirm the 

eye-catching effect of such arithmetic. With so many 

better possible sources of lithium to test, one cannot 

regard ocean water seriously except perhaps for byproduct lithium. In processing ocean water, other commodities would probably be more remunerative, and the 

lithium output would depend on their market. This is

not to say that the work of Steinberg and Vi-Duong 

Dang (this report) is not a useful contribution to the 

chemical engineering of extracting lithium from seawater. The subject has been so much discussed that its 

technology must be examined.

HOW TO ADAPT RESOURCE NOMENCLATURE 

TO LITHIUM

Three aspects of lithium resources have caused most 

of the misunderstandings and disputes: (1) the difference between the lithium contained in the deposits and 

the amount recoverable, (2) the existence of deposits 

that are not now minable at a profit but are equal in 

quality to deposits mined in the past and in some instances have actually been mined, and (3) the potential 

for finding new deposits.

Uncertainty about undiscovered deposits can be alleviated only by geologic work of many kinds coupled 

with exploration to teach us where, how, and at what 

rate new resources can be found. If uses in the next 25 

years are to become as large as now anticipated, a sizable 

body of geologic data must be acquired soon.

The problems with recoverability and with marginal 

deposits can be clarified by dividing the resource estimates into the smallest feasible categories. Resources in 

operating mines, closed mines, and undeveloped but 

known deposits should be separated from one another. 

Resources in different kinds of deposits should also be 

segregated, because future technological advances may 

have different effects on the various categories. Separation of deposits by size, grade, mineralogy, and other 

traits would also be worthwhile. As Singer (1975) shows, 

"disaggregated" information of this kind will facilitate 

the process of predicting the supply outlook for the various possible combinations of future economic and 

technologic circumstances.

Reserves should include only lithium that is currently 

recoverable, and should exclude lithium now lost in 

mining and milling. In other words, reserve estimates 

should encompass only material reasonably certain to 

enter market channels. The unrecoverable lithium is not 

a reserve in this sense, but because the recoverability 

may increase or the lithium in mine dumps and mill 

tailings may someday become obtainable, it is of potential value. Companies may be reluctant to reveal recoverability, but probably in most instances they can 

hide the data they prefer not to release. Certainly frank 

statements of recoverable reserves would eliminate a 

major source of confusion that may endanger the future 

of the lithium business.

The importance of marginal resources is illustrated by 

the Quebec Lithium Corp. deposit at Barraute, Quebec, 

which could quickly assume its former status as one of 

the world's best and most productive deposits. The deci-
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 45

sion to stop operation because of inability to compete 

with Clayton Valley brine made it no longer a reserve 

but merely a paramarginal resource. However accurate 

this term may be, it implies that the deposit's standing is 

lower than it really is. Other pegmatite deposits have a 

similar problem. They have often been called reserves, 

and some of them are in fact either reserves or so near 

to being reserves that misunderstanding is created by 

treating them slightingly.

Lithium seems unready for a well-organized, systematic, and exact procedure for stating resources, but a 

step in that direction would be well taken. One can more 

easily be optimistic that knowledge of the lithium potential of the United States can and probably will be greatly 

increased in the next decade.

REFERENCES CITED

Banfield, A. F., and Havard, J. F., 1975, Let's define our terms in 

mineral valuation: Mining Eng., v. 28, no. 7, p. 74-78.

Brobst, D. A., and Pratt, W. P., 1973, Introduction, in Brobst, D. A., 

and Pratt, W. P., eds., United States mineral resources: U.S. Geol. 

Survey Prof. Paper 820, p. 1-8.

Kunasz, I. A., 1975, Lithium raw materials, in Lefond, S. J., ed., Industrial minerals and rocks [4th ed.]: Am. Inst. Mining, Metall., 

and Petroleum Engineers, p. 791-803.

McKelvey, V. E., 1972, Mineral resource estimates and public policy: 

Am. Scientist, v. 60, no. 1, p. 32-40. Repr. in Brobst, D. A., and 

Pratt, W. P., eds., 1973, United States mineral resources: U.S. 

Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 820, p. 9-19.

Norton, J. J., 1973, Lithium, cesium, and rubidium—the rare alkali 

metals, in Brobst, D. A., and Pratt, W. P., eds., United States 

mineral resources: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 820, p. 365-378.

Schanz, J. J., Jr., 1975, Resource terminology—an examination of concepts and terms and recommendations for improvement: Washington, D.C., Resources for the Future, 116 p. [Prepared for Electric Power Research Inst.].

Singer, D. A., 1975, Mineral resource models and the Alaskan mineral 

resource assessment program, in Vogely, W. A., ed., Mineral 

materials modeling: Washington, D.C., Resources for the Future, 

p. 370-382.

U.S. Bureau of Mines, 1976, Commodity data summaries 1976: U.S. 

Bur. Mines, 196 p.

U.S. Congress, 1975, Oversight—Bureau of Mines, Geological Survey, 

Ocean Mining Administration: U.S. Cong., 94th, 1st sess., House 

of Representatives Comm. Interior and Insular Affairs, Comm. 

Print, 75 p.

U.S. Geological Survey, 1975, Mineral resource perspectives 1975: 

U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 940, 24 p.

Vine, J. D., 1975, Lithium in sediments and brines—how, why, and 

where to search: U.S. Geol. Survey Jour. Research, v. 3, no. 4, 

p. 479-485.

OCCURRENCE, DEVELOPMENT, AND

LONG-RANGE OUTLOOK OF LITHIUM-PEGMATITE ORE

IN THE CAROLINAS

By THOMAS L. KESLER (retired), HENDERSONVILLE, NC

ABSTRACT

Unzoned lithium pegmatites occur in a narrow area 50 km long in 

the Carolina Piedmont. The pegmatites are composed of approximately 20 percent spodumene that contains about 7.5 percent Li2O. 

The ore bodies are as much as 90 m thick and 1,000 m long. Tens of 

millions of tonnes of ore are minable by open pit. Development began 

gradually in the 1930's, and two large mines are now in operation. The 

area containing the pegmatites occurs mostly within and parallel to the 

strike of metamorphosed shallow-water sediments of the Kings Mountain belt and bounds the east side of the Permian(?) to Mississippian(P) 

Cherryville Quartz Monzonite of the Inner Piedmont. Pegmatites 

elsewhere in and around the monzonite do not contain lithium minerals. The quartz monzonite provided the main components of the 

lithium pegmatites, but the lithium was probably derived from contiguous evaporites in the metasedimentary rocks. Deep pegmatites of 

long-range interest for underground mining are probably west of 

those now known, because the metasedimentary rocks dip westerly 

and should dip less steeply at depth.

GEOLOGIC SETTING

The western world's largest reserves of lithium are in

the pegmatites of an area of metamorphic rocks in the 

Carolinas. Geologic maps of much of the area (Sterrett, 

unpublished map, 1912; Keith and Sterrett, 1931; 

Kesler, 1942, 1944, 1955; Griffitts, 1958; Espenshade 

and Potter, 1960) have been used in the preparation of 

figure 19, which shows features related to this discussion.

Most of the area is in the western part of the Kings 

Mountain belt of the Piedmont. The country rocks are 

mostly metasedimentary and of lower metamorphic 

rank than those to the east and west. They include 

quartzite, conglomerate, fine-grained schist with traces 

of pyroclastic texture, chloritoid schist, biotite schist and 

gneiss, thin-layered amphibolite, crystalline limestone, 

and phyllitic metashale that is interbedded with the 

other types of rocks.

The more quartzose of these rocks underlie a series of 

ridges, of which Kings Mountain is the most prominent 

(figs. 19 and 20). The less quartzose rocks, which strati-
46 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

\Anderson \v."Mtn

Mostly Permian Yorkville 

Quartz Monzonite

Permianf?) to Mississippian(? 

Cherryville Quartz Monzanite

and Paleozoic metamorphic 

racks

r-'x\~|'/ '-Gastoma

CJ^O(^Tj^AR^^^X';^t^>l'l 

SOUTH CAROLIl\lA~'V^'"?,rf——"

Lithi 

<</ Corp 

Americ

Area containing 

NORTHCAROL WA lithium pegmatites

SOUTH CAROLINA Stratigraphic zone or 

discontinuous crystalline 

limestone beds

...... Quartzose, ridgeforming rocks x\\x Blacksburg

Boundary between 

Piedmont belts

Active lithium-ore mine

FIGURE 19.—Areal features of the Carolina lithium region.

graphically overlie the quartzose rocks, crop out west of 

the ridges with uniform westerly dip except at Gaffney, 

where the beds are overturned. These west-dipping 

rocks identify the western limb of an arch originally more than 15 km wide, and vertical isoclinal folds 

mapped in the ridges by Espenshade and Potter (1960)

identify the strongly compressed core of the structure. 

In the northern part of the belt (section A-A') the 

eastern limb of the arch is missing, having been displaced by a major intrusive of the adjoining Charlotte 

belt. This is the biotitic and porphyritic Yorkville Quartz 

Monzonite of Permian age (Overstreet and Bell, 1965).
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 47

KINGS MOUNTAIN BELT

2 MILES

2 KILOMETRES

KINGS MOUNTAIN BELT

PALEOZOIC IGNEOUS ROCKS

EXPLANATION

PALEOZOIC METAMORPHIC ROCKS

LJI-

<t

I 

O

Permian 

Yorkville 

Quartz 

Monzonite

Permian(?) to 

Mississippian(?) 

Cherryville 

Quartz Monzonite

Thin-layered 

amphibolite

Meta-argilla- Crystalline 

ceous rocks limestone 

with quartzose beds

Schistose Schists and

pyroclastic gneisses of

rock diverse origin

FIGURE 20.—Cross sections showing geologic relations of the pegmatites. Location of sections shown in figure 19.

The forceful intrusion of the Yorkville left discordant 

contacts and contact-metamorphic effects (Espenshade 

and Potter, 1960; Overstreet and Bell, 1965), but this 

intrusive shows no relation to the lithium pegmatites.

Along the western boundary of the Kings Mountain 

belt there is a transition involving four features: (1) a 

gradual decrease in dip from that shown in figure 20; 

(2) an increase in metamorphic rank; (3) a change from 

the northeast structural grain of the Kings Mountain 

belt to a complex of diversely oriented, broad, open 

folds characteristic of the Inner Piedmont; and (4) a 

profusion of large and small bodies of a muscovitebiotite quartz monzonite of the Cherryville, many of 

which occur as concordant sheets. Limited data on the 

Cherryville yield radiometric ages ranging from 375 to 

260 million years, a spread regarded by Overstreet and 

Bell (1965) as inconclusive. Whether this results from

inadequate sampling or from a long and relatively passive intrusive history is unknown. However, the Cherryville differs from the Yorkville in that it does not truncate major country-rock structures.

The Cherryville contains nonlithium pegmatite, and 

similar pegmatite also occurs in the surrounding country rock; however, it is only along the east side of the 

intrusive that the outermost of the pegmatites are 

lithium bearing. Of particular significance (Kesler, 

1961) is a compound pegmatite 30 m wide within amphibolite and 60 m from the quartz monzonite to the 

west and lithium pegmatite to the east. In composition, 

this body grades eastward across its strike from simple 

quartz-monzonite pegmatite to spodumene-bearing 

pegmatite. The Cherryville, therefore, shows a genetic 

relation to the lithium pegmatites; this relationship is 

considered further in discussing future exploration.
48 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

THE PEGMATITES

The lithium pegmatites occur at close intervals in an 

area about 50 km long and less than 3 km in maximum 

width (fig. 19). Sporadic spodumene crystals also occur 

in pegmatite near Gaffney, 19 km farther south. The 

bodies are as much as 90 m thick and almost 1,000 m 

long. To date drilling has reached a maximum depth 

more than 200 m below outcrop without encountering 

any change in the geologic characteristics of pegmatites 

or wall rocks.

In general, pegmatite was intruded parallel to the 

foliation of mica schist. Thin-layered amphibolite, 

where not interlayered with schist, was ruptured irregularly with respect to dip, but parallel to strike. Thin 

pegmatites were intruded into joints with diverse trends 

in massive hornblende gneiss.

Five minerals make up about 99 percent of the 

lithium pegmatites. As previously reported (Kesler, 

1961), long-term control on the milling of crude ore 

showed an original content of 20 percent spodumene, 

32 percent quartz, 27 percent albite, 14 percent microcline, 6 percent muscovite, and 1 percent trace minerals 

including cassiterite in which there has been recurrent 

mining interest since the 1880's. Only near the collapsed 

shaft of the old Ross tin mine near Gaffney have pegmatite cores been recovered in which spodumene is very 

scarce. Elsewhere it is common and averages about 7.5 

percent Li2O (theoretical maximum 8.03). Thus, crude 

ore with 20 percent spodumene should grade about 1.5 

percent I^O, or 7,000 parts per million Li. The pegmatites, with rare and small-scale exceptions, are not 

zoned, and the grade of crude ore is fairly uniform as 

shown in published assay sections (Kesler, 1961). This 

feature has also stimulated the recovery of feldspar and 

mica byproducts, which are liberated in grinding the 

ore.

Late features include contact-alteration selvages between pegmatite and amphibolite, rarely as much as 0.5 

m thick, consisting of rare-alkali biotite, holmquistite, 

calcite, and apatite. Near some of the large pegmatites, 

dynamically brecciated amphibolite containing fractured black tourmaline has been altered to coarse chlorite rock containing much pyrrhotite and a little 

holmquistite and chalcopyrite. Extreme weathering of 

such breccia leaves only a conspicuous float of fragmental black tourmaline. A few nearly vertical, northwesttrending faults of very small displacement cut some of 

the pegmatites. The walls are separated by a few centimetres to nearly a metre of amphibolite breccia and 

gouge, partly altered to a biotitic rock tfiat resembles 

minette.

DEVELOPMENT

In 1938, our government's concern with supplies of

strategic minerals caused a renewed interest in the cassiterite content of the pegmatites. The U.S. Geological 

Survey assigned me and other personnel to an investigation that included two seasons of detailed mapping, and 

the results (Kesler, 1942) indicated a large potential for 

developing minable reserves of lithium ore.

Others had foreseen this possibility. Limited prospecting was started in the mid-thirties by the Tennessee 

Mineral Products Company, by Phillip Hoyt, and by L. 

M. Williams, who was still active when our survey began.

On leases of Williams, the Solvay Process Company 

operated a mine and flotation plant in the early forties 

and did considerable diamond drilling. This effort 

ended in 1945, and uncertain market conditions following World War II prevented further work until 1951, 

when Foote Mineral Company reactivated the mine and 

mill and did more extensive drilling. An account of all 

exploration on this property through 1959 has been 

published (Kesler, 1961). Shortly after Foote started its 

operation, the Lithium Corporation of America began 

construction of a chemical plant at Bessemer City and 

did some preliminary mining at two localities 8 km south 

of Lincolnton. Their present mine is near Tryon School, 

6.5 km northwest of their plant, where much exploratory drilling has also been done.

The large open-pit mines of Foote and Lithium Corporation are expanding, and during their early years 

purchases of lithium by the Atomic Energy Commission 

caused a flurry of prospecting in the Carolina area as 

well as in Canada, its nearest potential competitor. In 

fact, until early in 1956, published articles had listed 286 

lithium interests in 16 areas in 3 Canadian provinces 

plus the Great Slave Lake region. The Canadian activity 

had a strong influence on developments in Carolina and 

finally matured into temporary competition. The 

domestic industry should not forget.

MINING

The mines in the Carolinas must penetrate the zone 

of weathering before encountering the fresh ore that 

gives best recoveries in milling. The base of the zone of 

weathering is irregular, mostly from 10 to 20 m below 

the surface in pegmatite, but generally deeper in the 

country rocks. Little of the pegmatite in the zone of 

weathering is decomposed, but substances deposited 

from ground water stain the cleavage surfaces of the 

minerals. Flotation reagents therefore cannot reach 

clean surfaces, and only part of the stains are acid soluble at practicable concentration. Separation by heavy 

media requires crushing that preferentially shatters the 

spodumene, which has better cleavage than the other 

minerals. Power requirements for abrasive scrubbing of 

total crude ore to remove the stains would become increasingly uneconomic because of rising fuel costs, and
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 49

this disadvantage would also apply to any effort to 

bypass the concentration of spodumene by roasting the 

crude ore for treatment. Whatever may be the solution 

to this problem, it must be found to eliminate a continual drain on ore reserves.

LONG-RANGE OUTLOOK

It is generally agreed (Kesler, 1961; Norton, 1973) 

that reserves of minable lithium ore in the Carolina area 

amount to tens of millions of tonnes. The rate at which 

they will be consumed is unknown, but their location 

gives them a competitive advantage over other pegmatite ores. The advantage will continue until mounting 

costs of open-pit stripping and initial stages of underground mining bring competition from foreign sources.

As reserves in the Carolina area are depleted and 

costs increase, the lithium industry will then enter a second stage in which the domestic market may be divided 

between domestic and foreign suppliers. A third stage 

will eventually be reached in which foreign sources will 

also experience rising costs, bringing the location of ore 

reserves back into major importance. At that time the 

domestic industry, if it prepares well in advance, can be 

in position to recapture lost segments of the world 

lithium market.

The preparation will require exploration beyond anything yet attempted, based on the certainty that all ore 

of sufficient bulk for open-pit mining will have been 

discovered and that new targets will be much deeper. 

Where and how these efforts should be directed requires consideration of the origin of the Carolina lithium pegmatites.

Scarcely half of the Cherryville Quartz Monzonite as 

illustrated in figure 19 actually consists of monzonite. 

The remainder consists of Inner Piedmont metamorphic rocks with widely divergent structural trends, a feature also characteristic of Inner Piedmont rocks marginal to the Cherryville. The quartz monzonite is accepted 

as the source of all pegmatites in and around its area of 

outcrop, but only those containing lithium occur in an 

area having a preferred and essentially straight trend. 

That trend is along the west side of the Kings Mountain 

belt and parallel to its structural grain as reflected by the 

zone of limestone shown in figure 19. Thus, the distribution of the lithium, considered apart from the nature of its host, seems to be more closely related to the 

Kings Mountain belt than to the Inner Piedmont.

In an effort to account for high concentrations of 

pegmatitic lithium without an obvious source, Norton 

(1973) has suggested that deep melting, or anatexis, of 

lithium-rich metasedimentary rocks could form the 

pegmatite magma. This concept, though not entirely 

compatible with known conditions in the Carolina area, 

provides a new approach.

The low metamorphic rank and well-preserved 

sedimentary structures of the rocks at Kings Mountain 

preclude their having reached conditions usually 

specified for anatexis, but their lithology suggests an 

original shallow-water environment that could have included evaporites. All of the rocks are thin bedded, and 

the bedding planes are sharp and continuous along the 

trend of the belt without appreciable distortion. The 

limestone is lenticular and was originally silty; the 

quartzite is relatively pure and reflects good sorting; the 

conglomerate is mostly fine textured, but contains pebbles as much as 7.5 cm in diameter; and the metaargillaceous rocks are nonuniform in composition, particularly their micas. These features show that the original sediments at Kings Mountain were deposited under 

conditions of variable currents, in water too shallow for 

massive, poorly sorted deposits to be formed. They were 

apparently deposited in a basin bordering an area that 

would later become the Charlotte belt (fig. 19) on whose 

margin Espenshade and Potter (1960) have found evidence of volcanism, and therefore a possible source of 

thermal waters.

The final stage in the filling of such a basin could have 

included the formation of evaporite deposits whose position would have been in the present downdip section 

beneath the eastern edge of the Inner Piedmont. During the slow invasion of the Cherryville Quartz Monzonite, volatiles expelled into the rocks of the Kings Mountain belt would have served as collectors of loosely 

bonded elements, including lithium if present; such volatiles are essential parts of pegmatite magma.

This hypothetical framework implies that rocks of the 

Kings Mountain belt should persist in depth as the wallrocks of the lithium pegmatites. Their normal dip is 

westward beneath the rocks of the Inner Piedmont (section A-A') and adjacent to the Cherryville Quartz Monzonite. In the entire extent of the Cherryville and the 

metamorphic rocks (fig. 19), the many bodies of the 

monzonite are so uniformly concordant with the Inner 

Piedmont metamorphic rocks that abrupt departure 

from this habit is unlikely. The eastern limit of the 

Cherryville Quartz Monzonite and its bordering fringe 

of lithium pegmatites can therefore be expected to shift 

westward at depth, and deeper pegmatites of interest 

for future exploration should lie west of the axis of 

present outcrops.

Outside of this area, the apparently barren gap between Grover and Gaffney could reflect an original divide between evaporate deposits, but the presence of 

spodumene near Gaffney requires reconsideration of 

that area. Closer study is also needed beyond the presently known limit of the pegmatites to the northeast, 

where conditions are not clear (Broadhurst, 1956) but 

where the continuity of typical metasedimentary rocks
50 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

in the Kings Mountain belt may indicate continuity of 

lithium source beds.

There is no known physical reason why underground 

mining of the strategically located Carolina ore bodies 

cannot reach depths many times the present maximum; 

it is also an economic probability for the future, not only 

because mineral values rise as raw materials are depleted, but also because essentially the entire mineral 

content of this ore has large-scale industrial use.

REFERENCES CITED

Broadhurst, S. D., 1956, Lithium resources of North Carolina: North 

Carolina Div. Mineral Resources Inf. Circ. 15, 37 p.

Espenshade, G. H., and Potter, D. B., 1960, Kyanite, sillimanite, and 

andalusite deposits of the southeastern states: U.S. Geol. Survey 

Prof. Paper 336, 121 p.

Griffitts, W. R., 1958, Pegmatite geology of the Shelby district, North

Carolina: U.S. Geol. Survey open-file rept., 123 p. 

Keith, Arthur, and Sterrett, D. B., 1931, Description of the Gaffney

and Kings Mountain quadrangles: U.S. Geol. Survey Geol. Atlas,

Folio 222, 13 p., maps. 

Kesler, T. L., 1942, The tin-spodumene belt of the Carolinas: U.S.

Geol. Survey Bull. 936-J, p. 245-269.

————1944, Correlation of some metamorphic rocks in the central 

Carolina Piedmont: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 55, p. 755-782.

————1955, The Kings Mountain area, in Russell, R. J., ed., Guides to 

southeastern geology: New York, Geol. Soc. America, p. 374-387. 

-1961, Exploration of the Kings Mountain pegmatites; Mining

Eng., v. 13, p. 1062-1068. 

Norton, J. J., 1973, Lithium, cesium, and rubidium—the rare alkali

metals, in Brobst, D. A., and Pratt, W. P., eds., United States

mineral resources: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 820, p. 365-378. 

Overstreet, W. C., and Bell, Henry, III, 1965, The crystalline rocks of

South Carolina: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1183, 126 p. 

Sterrett, D. B., 1912, Geology of the Lincolnton quadrangle, North

Carolina: U.S. Geol. Survey, unpublished map.

A COMPARISON OF THREE MAJOR LITHIUM PEGMATITES: 

VARUTRASK, BIKITA, AND BERNIC LAKE

By E. WM. HEINRICH 

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, ANN ARBOR, MI

ABSTRACT

A reassessment of the mineralogical and geological characteristics of 

three major lithium pegmatites, Varutrask, Sweden; Bernic Lake, 

Manitoba; and Bikita, Rhodesia, shows that Bernic Lake and Bikita are 

mineralogically and structurally very similar. Both also contain significant reserves of lithium, especially in very low iron secondary 

spodumene which is especially suitable for utilization as glass-ceramic 

raw material.

INTRODUCTION

Three of the world's most highly localized major 

Li-Rb concentrations are the structurally and mineralogically complex pegmatites of Varutrask, Sweden; Bikita, 

Rhodesia; and Bernic Lake, Manitoba, Canada. This 

paper compares these deposits and assesses their past 

importance and future potential as Li-Rb sources.

The writer has examined all three: Varutrask first 

some 25 years ago; Bikita, in 1966 and 1967; and Bernic 

Lake several times beginning in 1972.

PEGMATITIC LITHIUM MINERALOGY

There are some 26 different "independent" lithium 

minerals, of which nine silicates and eight phosphates 

occur in granitic pegmatites. Five other lithium minerals 

occur almost exclusively in highly alkalic subsilicic pegmatites (nepheline-syenitic) and related deposits.

Of the many subordinate elements that characterize

granitoid pegmatites, lithium is undoubtedly one of the 

most versatile and, indeed, is so in several ways. It not 

only forms its own pegmatitic species but can also appear vicariously in other minerals, including such diverse groups as pyroxenes, amphiboles, micas, and 

tourmalines. Its granitic pegmatitic minerals are equally 

varied: the pyroxene, spodumene; the amphibole, 

holmquistite; the micas, lepidolite, zinnwaldite; and the 

zeolite, bikitaite. Both a variety of silicates and of phosphates (for example, amblygonite, triphylite) are represented. In alkalic granitic pegmatites lithium may even 

appear as the fluoride, cryolithionite.

In granitic pegmatites lithium minerals appear in all 

three structural types of pegmatites: unzoned, zoned, 

and structurally complex. In addition, holmquistite occurs as an exogenic wallrock constituent (Heinrich, 

1965). In zoned pegmatites, spodumene and 

amblygonite-montebrasite are not uncommonly multigenerational, with differences among generations in 

form, crystal size, and composition (Heinrich, 1953). 

Lepidolites of complex pegmatites are normally multigenerational with conspicuous variations among generations in color, grain size and form, and, of course, in 

composition (Heinrich and Levinson, 1955; Heinrich, 

1967).

The lithium minerals range, paragenetically, from 

such earliest species as phenocrysts of iron-rich
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 51

spodumene, through the intermediate magmatic stages 

(spodumene, petalite, amblygonite, triphylite), through 

the post magmatic replacement period (lepidolites), into 

intermediate to low-temperature hydrothermal alteration stages (eucryptite, bikitaite, cookeite, and secondary 

phosphates).

PARAGENETIC TYPES OF SPODUMENE

Recent studies (Heinrich, 1975; 1976) have identified 

three distinct paragenetic types of spodumene in pegmatites:

1. Phenocrystic spodumene in essentially unzoned 

pegmatites of the "King's Mountain type." These 

laths, usually less than a foot long, commonly are 

greenish and contain essential Fe3+ in substitution 

for A13+ , usually in the range of Fe2O3 = 0.6 — 0.9 

percent.

2. Zonal spodumene, commonly as large laths that 

occur in intermediate zones and cores of wellzoned pegmatites. This spodumene is low in iron 

(Fe2O3 = 0.01 —0.03 percent). It may contain significant manganese (x.O — 0.x percent), and 

whereas most is white, some is pink or lilac (kunzite).

3. Secondary spodumene. Produced by the isochemical 

decomposition of petalite:

petalite —> spodumene + quartz 

LiAlSi4O10 -*LiAlSi2O6 + 2SiO2

This spodumene is relatively fine grained; commonly the aggregate retains the crystal form and 

basal cleavage of the parent petalite. It is white and 

has very low iron (Fe2O3 = 0.007-0.03 percent), 

because of the low-iron content of the parent petalite.

The substitution of even small amounts of Fe3+ for 

A13+ in spodumene markedly increases its thermal stability field (Appleman and Stewart, 1968). Iron spodumene was synthesized in air at 1,100°C and is stable up 

to at least 800°C at 2Kb H2 O pressure compared to 

~ 565°C at 2Kb for essentially iron-free spodumene. 

Geothermometric data obtained by Sheshulin (1963) 

from fluid-inclusion studies, indicate that early (his 

Generation I) spodumenes crystallized between 600° 

and 640°C, whereas younger (his Generation II) spodumenes crystallized at 330°-390°C. Thus phenocrystic 

spodumene, which is iron rich as compared to 

paragenetically younger intermediate zone and core 

spodumene, represents a higher temperature 

spodumene.

After secondary spodumene has been formed from 

petalite, it may be recrystallized and texturally rearranged, becoming coarser, unoriented, and very difficult to distinguish from primary white inner zone

spodumene. Some such spodumene occurs at Bernic 

Lake where Cerny and Ferguson (1972) distinguish 

three types of spodumene: Type A, tabular aggregates 

of fibrous spodumene intergrown with quartz, clearly 

pseudomorphous after petalite which constitute 90 percent of all spodumene in the pegmatite. Type B, laths 

up to 1.5 m long, in the intermediate core-margin zone, 

not associated with petalite, and identified as primary 

zonal spodumene. Type C, fibrous to columnar 

spodumene in quartz, but not tabular (may be secondary).

VARUTRASK, SWEDEN

The Varutrask pegmatite, described in 37 articles by 

Percy Quensel and his students (see Quensel, 1952, 

1956) is "C"-shaped in plan with the "C" open to the 

north, the western, thinner limb which trends northwestward dips inward to the northeast at a low angle, 

whereas the eastern thicker limb which trends northeastward dips 30° NW. Thus the pegmatite is synclinal 

with the trough plunging to the north at a shallow angle.

The internal structural units are as follows:

1. Border zone, 1-3 cm, fine-grained, quartz and muscovite.

2. Wall zone, up to 5 m, coarse-grained, quartz, muscovite, schorl, and locally beryl.

3. Outer intermediate zone, microcline-perthite, 

quartz, muscovite.

4. Inner intermediate zone, microcline-perthite, quartz, 

muscovite, amblygonite, spodumene-quartz pseudomorphous after petalite, petalite remnants. 

Units 3 and 4 together are 40-75 m thick.

5. Pollucite masses (Quensel's "Caesium replacement 

unit"), as much as 5 m across, which in the eastern 

limb are marginal to the core.

6. Core, quartz, 12m across.

7. Lepidolite replacement unit. This is centrally located 

in the western limb and replaces mainly rock of the 

inner intermediate zone. In the eastern limb it also 

replaces parts of this zone but in addition transgresses into the outer intermediate zone and the 

wall zone.

8. Cleavelandite replacement bodies, irregularly developed in all older units.

BERNIC LAKE, MANITOBA

The geology of the Tanco pegmatite at Bernic Lake, 

Manitoba, has recently been described in detail in a 

series of papers by Cerny and Ferguson (1972). The 

east-west-striking pegmatite is an almost horizontal 

sheet that crops out only in the bed of Bernic Lake from 

whence it dips at a low angle to the north and plunges 

slightly both toward the east and west. As in most flatlying pegmatites, the zonal configuration is markedly
52 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

asymmetric with outer zones 1, 2, 4, and 5 (see below) 

forming a series of shells that enclose the lensoid to 

tabular inner units 3, 6, 7, 8, and 9 (see below). Of these 

inner tabular units the albitic fine- to medium-grained 

assemblages are concentrated in the lower interior, 

whereas lithium- and silica-rich assemblages with giantcrystal dimensions predominate in the upper interior.

The sequence of units in probable order of formation 

is (Grouse and Cerny, 1972):

1. Border zone, albite, quartz, locally tourmaline.

2. Wall zone, albite, quartz, microcline-perthite, locally 

tourmaline.

3. Sheet and lenses of aplitic ("sugary") albitite.

4. Lower intermediate zone, microcline-perthite, albite, 

quartz, spodumene + quartz, (replacement of 

petalite), locally amblygonite.

5. Upper intermediate zone, spodumene (laths), 

spodumene + quartz (replacement of petalite), 

quartz, locally amblygonite and petalite.

6. Central intermediate zone, microcline-perthite, albite, quartz, locally beryl and wodginite.

7. Core units, lenses and sheets of quartz in several different positions.

8. Lens-shaped bodies of pollucite in zone 5 and between zone 6 and hanging-wall zones 1 and 2.

9. Sheets and pods of lithian muscovite rock in zone 6.

BIKITA, RHODESIA

The Bikita pegmatite is an irregular sheet that strikes 

north-northeast and dips 14-45° eastward. 1 It ranges in 

thickness from 95 to 210 ft and has been explored over a 

strike length of 5,100 ft. Again the internal zonal structure is strongly asymmetric, and there are major 

changes in the sequences of units along the strike. Our 

first knowledge of the internal structure stemmed from 

Symons (1961) and Cooper (1964) who both unfortunately use a variety of nonequivalent terms (mineralogical, structural, textural, and grade) to designate the 

units. Studies by Gallagher (1962) and by the writer in 

1966 and 1967 (Heinrich, unpublished company report, 

1966) have supplied additional information on the units. Table 17 is an attempt to decipher and interpret the 

interrelationships.

COMPARISON

The three pegmatites are compared in table 18. The 

reassessment of the nature of the finer grained units in 

the Bikita pegmatite demonstrates that Bikita and Bernic Lake are structurally very similar, both having aplitic 

albitites (some wavy banded) and lepidolite replacement

'Actually the "main Bikita pegmatite" may be but one limb (the easternmost) of a much 

larger undulatory sheet. The eastern limb passes north of the Al Hayat sector into an anticlinal unit, and thus connects southwestward into a synclinal phase to the east of which lies a 

third main unit, an east-dipping synclinal limb (see Gallagher, 1962).

units. The latter is centrally located in both but is much 

more strongly developed, both in size and grade, at 

Bikita than at Bernic Lake. At Bikita the lithium mica is 

chiefly lepidolite, whereas at Bernic Lake it is predominantly lithian muscovite. As at Bernic Lake, the aplitic 

albitites at Bikita are concentrated in the lower part of 

the pegmatite.

One of the main differences between Bikita and Bernic Lake is in the extent to which the petalite has been 

transformed to spodumene + quartz. At Bikita about 50 

percent of the petalite has been converted; at Bernic 

Lake probably about 90 percent of the petalite has been 

transformed.

RESERVES 

VARUTRASK

There has been no mining at Varutrask since early 

1950, but in late 1960 "some stockpiles of lithium minerals" still were available (Erland Grip, written commun., 1967). Doubtless these are small, and the total 

amount of lithium in all reserves at Varutrask (petalite, 

spodumene, lepidolite, amblygonite) is small, possibly 

no more than about 100 tons of ore.

BERNIC LAKE

Lithium reserves for the Bernic Lake pegmatite were 

calculated by Howe and Roundtree (1967) who estimated lepidolite reserves at 107,700 tons containing an 

average of 2.24 percent Li2O and spodumene reserves 

at 4,727,263 tons containing an average of 2.01 percent 

LigO, excluding ore that must be left in a pillar unless 

the overlying lake is drained. These data indicate a total 

of 45,000 tons of lithium (Norton, 1973). Since then 

drilling has considerably extended the dimensions of 

the spodumene ore body, and the total lithium reserves 

are at least 50 percent greater.

BIKITA

Symons (1961) calculated reserves of 6,700,000 tons 

of all lithium-mineral ores (petalite, spodumene, lepidolite, amblygonite, eucryptite) averaging 2.90 percent 

Li2O or 90,000 tons of lithium (Norton, 1973). Calculations on measured reserves of all types of ores known at 

the end of 1965 available to the writer show that 76,000 

tons of lithium were in these reserves. This total does 

not include the unmeasured resources of the northern 

extension and the two western "arms."

REFERENCES CITED

Appleman, D. E., and Stewart, D. B., 1968, Crystal chemistry of 

spodumene-type pyroxenes [abs.]: Geol. Soc. America Spec. Paper 

101, p. 5-6.

Cerny, Petr, and Ferguson, R. B., 1972, The Tanco pegmatite at Ber-
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 

TABLE 17.—Internal structure of the Bikita, Rhodesia, pegmatite from hanging wall downward tofootwall

53

Symon's (1961) and Cooper's (1964) designations

Al Hayat Sector Bikita Sector Mineralogy Interpretation (this paper)

Border zone — — — _-__-__—_ — _—--_____ Border zone — ____ —__— ________-- — f. gr. alb., qtz., musco

Wall zone—mica band ._______._. Wall zone—mica band _-______-___ c. gr. musco., qtz

Hanging-wall feldspar zone ------------- Hanging-wall feldspar zone -----------

Intermediate zone: Intermediate zone:

petalite-feldspar zone___ —-___.__ petalite-feldspar zone -__________-

Intermediate zone: Intermediate zone:

spodumene zone _-___ — - —— — — -___-_ spodumene zone ---.___------ — _-

micro.-perth., qtz., musco _— ____.__ — 

pet., micro.-perth., alb., muse., qtz —---__

spod.-qtz., in matrix alb., musco., qtz., 

eucryptite, bikitaite.

Intermediate zone:

feldspathic lepidolite zone__--_------__- --__-____— — — --_-____— — — - — ______ f. gr. lepid., alb., qtz

Intermediate zone:

pollucite zone __._— -__-_______.

Intermediate zone: 

"all mix" zone „

Intermediate zone:

pollucite zone __-____--_________ pollucite, lepid — — ____ — — — — — — _ — _ —

Intermediate zone:

feldspar-quartz ______..____________ micro.-perth., qtz---------- — — ____ — __ —

Intermediate zone:

"all mix" zone. —- — -________ — __——. micro.-perth., qtz., pet., spod.-qtz., beryl +

cleav., lepid.

—- —— _- — --____- ——-__________-_____ — Core zone:

"High grade" i lepidolite _-__-- lepid —-___- — — — — — — — — - — - — —

"Near solid" | lepidolite _. — _ — — -_ lepid., qtz __---- — — — __ — — -.-. — -_--

lepidolite-quartz shell ________---_ lepid., qtz., amblyg. —— —————-___ — _ —

— --_--_-------________._-_______...-_- Lower intermediate zone lepit., alb., qtz ___-_--_-_-_-_-_-_____

"cobble zone."

— ___ — _____-—-________-_ — — _-______— Lower intermediate zone lepid., alb., qtz ________________________ _

feldspathic lepidolite.

— -_ — — ______ — __________ — -_-_______ — Not recognized by Cooper _____ _ _____ alb., qtz _-_- — _---__________________-_ —

—___ — ____ — -—________ — — -_____— — ___ Rhythmically banded beryl zone _______ lepid., alb., qtz,, beryl, tant. -—-_--_-_____

— -------- — _--_ — ______ — ________ — --__ Muscovite band --__________._.________ musco., qtz ______ _ ____________________

Footwall feldspar zone — — ---____-.--___ "Spotted dog" zone ____ — — -______-__— alb. + blebs of musco.-qtz — — — -- — ______

1) Hanging-wall border zone.

2) Hanging-wall wall zone.

3) Intermediate zone.

4) Intermediate zone.

4a) The spodumene-quartz aggregates 

represent former petalite crystals.

5) Aplitic lepiodolite albitite.

6) Pollucite zone.

7) Core-margin intermediate zone.

8) Spodumene-quartz replace petalite. 

Clevelandite and lepidolite are secondary. Part of core-margin intermediate zone.

9) Lepidolite replacement of a quartz 

core. Quartz increases downward.

10) Remnants of quartz-amblygonite core.

lla) Lepidolite "bands", lenses, veins in 

banded aplitic albitite.

lib) Lepidolite disseminated in aplitic albite-quartz rock.

1 Ic) Aplitic albitite.

1 Id) Banded aplitic lepidolite albitite.

12) Footwall wall zone.

13) Footwall border zone.

Abbreviations: alb. = albite; amblyg. = amblygonite; cleav. = cleavelanditic albite; lepid. = lepidolite; micro.-perth. = microcline-perthite; musco. = muscovite; pet. = petalite; qtz. = quartz; 

spod. = spodumene, tant. = tantahte; f. = fine; c. = coarse; gr. = grained; i •= sequence frqm center core outward.

TABLE 18.—Comparison of Varutrask, Bernic Lake, and Bikita pegmatites

Varutrask

Characteristic

Bernic Lake 

(2.6 b.y.)

Bikita 

(2.65 b.y.)

Shape and attitude Flat-troughed sheet Nearly horizontal sheet

Size (strike and dip) 

Thickness _______

______ 1,050 ft( + ?)___.

.___ 10-100 ft _____.

Wall rock_________._ Amphibolite __.

Wallrock alteration ______ Albite, tourmaline .

Internal sti ucture _______ Relatively symmetric; lepidolite

replacement.

Major accessory elements __ Li, Cs, Rb, B, P, F _ _____—

Minor accessory elements ____ Nb, Ta, Ti, Sn, U, Mn

Be, As, Sb.

Lithium mineralogy ________ Petalite, spodumene, amblygonite, lepidolite, Li-muscovite, 

cookelite, triphylite -lithiophilite, ferri-sicklerite.

Types of spodumene ____ Secondary (major); recrystallized secondary (minor).

Economic minerals .____ Petalite, spodumene-quartz, pollucite, lepidolite.

4,000 by 1,500 (+) _____— 

60-280 ft _-_____————— 

Amphibolite — — ————— ———— 

Biotite, holmquistite, tourmaline,

apatite. 

Strongly asymmetric; aplitic albitites; lepidolite replacement. 

Li, Cs, Rb, Ta, Ti, F ____— 

Nb, Sn Mn, B, P, Mo, Bi ______

Petalite, spodumene, amblygonite, lepidolite, Li-muscovite, 

eucryptite, cookeite, triphyllitelithiophilite, lithiophosphate.

Zonal (very minor); secondary 

(major) (minor).

Spodumene-quartz, Ta minerals, 

pollucite.

Irregular to tabular gently dipping. 

5,100 (+) 

95-210 ft 

Amphibolite. 

Biotite, tourmaline (?).

Strongly asymmetric aplitic albitites; lepidolite replacement.

Li, Cs, Rb, Be, P.

Nb, Ta, Ti, Sn 

B, Cu.

Petalite, spodumene amblygonite, lepidolite, Li-muscovite, 

eucryptite, bikitaite.

Secondary; recrystallized secdondary (very minor).

Petalite, spodumene-quartz, 

lepidolite, amblygonite, eucryptite, pollucite, beryl, microcline, Ta minerals, cassiterite.

nic Lake, Manitoba; IV, Petalite and spodumene relations: Canadian Mineralogist, v. 11, p. 660-678. 

Cooper, D. G., 1964, The geology of the Bikita pegmatite, in The

geology of some ore deposits of Southern Africa, v. II: p. 441-

461. 

Grouse, R. A., and Cerny, P., 1972, The Tanco Pegmatite at Bernic

Lake, Manitoba; I, Geology and paragenesis: Canadian

Mineralogist, v. 11, p. 591-608. 

Gallagher, M. J., 1962, Mineralogy of the Bikita pegmatites, Southern

Rhodesia with special reference to beryl deposits in Bikita Main

pegmatite: Geol. Survey Great Britain, Atomic Energy Div., Rept.

242, p. 1-20. 

Heinrich, E. Wm., 1953, Chemical differentiation of multi-generation

pegmatite minerals [abs.]: Am. Mineralogist, v. 38, p. 343.

—1965, Holmquistite and pegmatitic lithium exomorphism: Indian Mineralogist, v. 6, p. 1-13.

—1967, Micas of the Brown Derby pegmatites, Gunnison County, 

Colorado: Am. Mineralogist, v. 52, p. 1110-1121.

—1975, Economic geology and mineralogy of petalite and 

spodumene pegmatites: Indian Jour. Earth Sci., v. 2, p. 18-29. 

-1976, Mineralogy and structure of lithium pegmatites: Journal

Mineralogia, Djalma Guimaraea Vol. (in press). 

Heinrich, E. Wm., and Levinson, A. A., 1955, Geological, mineralogical, and crystallographic factors in the exploitation of lepidolite

deposits [abs.]: Am. Inst. Mining Engineers Program, Ann. Mtg.,

1955, p. 29-30. 

Howe, A. C. A., and Roundtree, J. C., 1967, Geology and economic

significance of the Bernic Lake pegmatite: Canadian Inst. Mining
54 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

Metallurgy Bull., Feb. 1967, p. 207-212. 

Norton, J. J., 1973, Lithium, cesium, and rubidium—the rare alkali

elements, in United States mineral resources: U.S. Geol. Survey

Prof. Paper 820, p. 365-378. 

Quensel, Percy, 1952, The paragenesis of the Varutrask pegmatite:

Geol. Mag. [Great Britain], v. 89, p. 49-60. 

————1956, The paragenesis of the Varutrask pegmatite including a

review of its mineral assemblage: Arkiv. Mineral. Geol., v. 2, no. 2,

p. 9-125. 

Sheshulin, G. I., 1963, Composition of gas-liquid inclusions in the

minerals of spodumene pegmatites, in New data on rare element

mineralogy, Ginzburg, A. I., ed.: New York, Consultants Bur., p.

47-55. 

Symons, Ralph, 1961, Operation at Bikita Minerals (Private), Ltd.,

Southern Rhodesia: Inst. Mining and Metallurgy Bull. 661, p.

129-172.

NONPEGMATITE LITHIUM RESOURCE POTENTIAL

By JAMES D. VINE 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, DENVER, CO

ABSTRACT

The lithium content of most sedimentary rocks ranges from about 

0.0005 to 0.01 percent, but rocks deposited in basins that contain 

evaporite minerals may contain 0.01-0.1 percent lithium, and clay 

minerals related to hectorite containing 0.3-0.5 percent lithium have 

been reported from several localities in the western United States. 

Although marine evaporite sequences that include potassium salts may 

suggest conditions favorable for the entrapment of lithium-rich 

brines, nonmarine evaporite basins probably represent the most 

favorable trap for concentrated lithium brines. Areas known to contain such exotic salts as borates and nitrates in nonmarine basins of 

Tertiary age also contain anomalous concentrations of lithium in clastic rocks, volcanic ashes, clays, and magnesium-rich carbonate rocks.

Once dissolved, lithium tends to remain in solution in residual 

brines, even after evaporative concentration and precipitation of the 

salts of sodium, potassium, and magnesium. Brines associated with 

these evaporite minerals may contam as much as 1,000 times more 

lithium than seawater contains.

INTRODUCTION

The distribution of lithium is less well understood in 

sedimentary rocks than in igneous rocks where the concentration of lithium in the late stages of crystallization 

and in mineralizing fluids expelled from the magma 

chamber is fairly well documented (Heier and Billings, 

1972). All the commercially important lithium minerals 

occur in pegmatites or greisen associated with igneous 

rocks. Recent studies (Horstman, 1957; Ronov and 

others, 1970; Tardy and others, 1972) suggest that most 

of the lithium content of sedimentary rocks is associated 

with the clay minerals. Because clays are so widely dispersed in sedimentary rocks and the manner of lithium 

fixation on clays is generally weak, lithium is only rarely 

concentrated in sedimentary rocks in amounts of more 

than a few tens of grams per tonne. The exceptions to 

this broad dispersal of lithium in sedimentary rocks are 

of special interest in the search for potential new sources 

of lithium.

NORMAL MARINE SEDIMENTS

Seawater has an average lithium content of slightly 

less than 0.2 mg/1 (Goldberg, 1963), an amount that is 

equal to the influx from river waters in about 6.4xl06 

years (Wedepohl, 1968, p. 1010). Hence, the residence 

time for lithium in the sea is a relatively short interval of 

geologic time, equal to about one-tenth the interval of 

time since the end of the Cretaceous Period. Thus, an 

amount of lithium equal to the total quantity in the 

ocean must be removed every 6.4 m.y. Marine clays, 

which contain an average of about 60 g/t lithium, provide the reservoir for this excess lithium. However, this 

process of adsorption of lithium on clay particles is so 

uniform throughout the ocean that it is unlikely that any 

significant enrichment of lithium will occur in the sediments deposited in normal marine environments.

MARINE EVAPORITES

Local marine basins with restricted circulation may 

develop hypersaline environments, and in warm dry regions these waters will become concentrated enough to 

precipitate evaporite minerals, including gypsum 

(CaSO4 - 2H2O), halite (NaCl), and various complex salts 

of potassium and magnesium. Such evaporite deposits 

have been estimated to compose no more than 1 percent 

of the total mass of sedimentary rocks (Wedepohl, 1969, 

p. 265), and most of these are of marine or marginal 

marine origin. However, lithium is so soluble it will not 

precipitate by evaporative concentration until after most 

of the sodium, potassium, and magnesium salts have 

been precipitated. Lithium precipitation is so rare a 

situation that natural lithium salts have never been observed.

In order for a restricted basin to accumulate a large 

quantity of salt, it must have a regular source of fresh
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 55

seawater by transport across a shallow bar or by periodic 

flooding during storms. The heavier, more concentrated brines may be preserved by entrapment in the 

pore spaces of the already precipitated salts, but some 

brine may also be mixed and diluted with the fresh seawater. Some of the diluted brine will generally escape to 

the open sea by ebbtide or through gravity return across 

a permeable bar. Hence, in a basin of marine evaporites, 

if we sum the sodium and lithium in both the precipitated salts and the entrapped brine, the ratio Li:Na may 

be less than, but cannot exceed, the ratio (0.0001) for 

normal seawater.

With continued deposition and burial, the body of 

permeable salt and brine will recrystallize into a solid 

dry mass causing the brine that once filled the pores to 

be expelled into adjacent clastic rocks such as sandstone. 

Most of the lithium will be carried away from its original 

environment of deposition into these adjacent sediments.

Because only those salts deposited from the most concentrated marine brines contain potassium minerals, the 

occurrence of potassium may be an indication of the 

former existence of a lithium-rich brine. Lithium does 

not significantly substitute for sodium or potassium in 

the common salt minerals, but the salts deposited from 

the most concentrated brines may contain anomalous 

amounts of bromine. This relation provides a way to 

recognize areas favorable for potassium exploration, 

and it may help to guide the search for lithium brines or 

for neoformed lithium minerals that are a result of the 

interaction between a brine and the rock in which it was 

contained.

NONMARINE EVAPORITES

Nonmarine evaporites are the product of evaporative 

concentration of water in undrained basins within the 

continental landmass. Most rivers drain into the sea, but 

an undrained basin may occur where the crust of the 

earth is deformed so rapidly—or the rate of evaporation 

is so high—that the streams cannot maintain their 

course to the sea. Streams may also be blocked by volcanic activity, landslides, and glacial activity, but the 

larger basins such as Death Valley in California and the 

Dead Sea trough in Israel are the result of tectonic deformation of the earth's crust in an arid climate.

The Great Basin area in the southwestern United 

States (fig. 21) includes a relatively large area of undrained basins, both large and small. Some major rivers 

flow into this area and contribute to the load of dissolved 

mineral matter that is carried into a terminal lake or 

playa. The Owens River of California drains the eastern 

Sierra Nevada and terminates at Owens Lake, Calif. The 

Walker River also drains an area of eastern California 

and empties into Walker Lake, near Hawthorne, Nev. 

The Truckee River forms the outlet for Lake Tahoe in 

eastern California and flows into Pyramid Lake, northeast of Reno, Nev. The Bear River drains part of southeastern Idaho and southwestern Wyoming, and flows 

into the Great Salt Lake, near Ogden, Utah. The Sevier 

River, which drains central Utah, terminates at Sevier 

Playa, south of Delta, Utah. The Humboldt and Reese 

Rivers flow through a large part of central and northern 

Nevada and drain into Carson Sink, a large playa, near 

Fallon, Nev.

The structural framework responsible for these basins 

originated in mid-Tertiary time—some 20-25 m.y. 

ago—when faulting produced the system of basins and 

ranges extending from the front of the Wasatch Range, 

near Salt Lake City, Utah, across western Utah and 

Nevada to the eastern front of the Sierra Nevada, near 

Bishop, Calif. Since the initial breakup, some parts of 

this region have been integrated into the major drainage 

of the Colorado River. However, the present course of 

the Colorado River is geologically quite recent, and so 

some basins that contain upper Tertiary evaporites have 

only-recently been exposed by erosion. One such body 

of salt is exposed along the Overton Arm of Lake Mead, 

Nev. Salt deposits of nonmarine origin differ somewhat 

from those of marine origin in not being laminated and 

in being very low in bromine. Moreover, the ratio Li:Na 

may be much greater in nonmarine evaporites than in 

marine evaporites.

Chemical differences between evaporite basins are 

pronounced. Great Salt Lake, Utah, and the Great Salt 

Lake Desert to the west are characterized by high concentrations of sodium chloride. Others, such as Railroad 

Valley, southwest of Ely, Nev., contain a large body of 

salt that includes a body of gaylussite (Na2Ca(CO3)2 

• 5H2 O). Bristol Lake in California is characterized by an 

unusually high concentration of calcium chloride. Other 

basins in the Mojave Desert area in California are 

characterized by high concentrations of boron. Clayton 

Valley, southwest of Tonopah, Nev., is characterized by 

a high lithium-to-sodium ratio in a chloride brine. Attempts to explain these differences in terms of the 

chemistry of the immediate drainage basin are only 

partly satisfactory. This is because the history of the region is complicated. Many basins received overflow from 

other basins during previous wet climate periods', and 

some receive drainage by ground water flow from adjacent basins at the present time. Significant ground water 

flow has been suggested as the reason that some basins 

such as Clayton Valley have a wet surface while adjacent 

slightly higher basins have a hard dry surface. 

The origin of most of the major constituents of nonmarine evaporites—including the sodium, calcium, 

magnesium, as well as the sulfate, chloride, and 

carbonate—can be explained either by weathering of 

rocks, including marine evaporites, within the drainage 

basin or by the airborne salt carried into the area by the 

prevailing westerly winds off the Pacific Ocean. How-
56 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

MONTANA

W Y 0 M I N G

-^^v^

A H

A R I Z 0 N A

EXPLANATION

Area of interior 

drainage

COLORADO

0 200 400 MILES

0 200 400 KILOMETRES

FIGURE 21.—Undrained basins in western United States.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 57

ever, neither explanation seems to account for the unusually high ratio of lithium to chloride that distinguishes some of these brines, such as that of Great Salt 

Lake, from sea-water. Deep ground water circulation 

with subsurface heat and volcanic activity seems to be 

the best alternative explanation for the source of the 

lithium.

HYDROTHERMAL WATER

Although freshwaters generally contain only a few 

tens of micrograms per litre of lithium, many hot 

springs and geothermal waters contain 1-10 mg/1 

lithium, and a few contain more. The high ratio of 

lithium to sodium is so characteristic of geothermal waters that a ratio approaching 1:100 may be useful in recognizing a geothermal source, even where the water has 

been cooled and diluted by surface waters (Ellis, 1975, p. 

516). The elevated temperature of geothermal water 

generally indicates deep circulation of ground water in 

the vicinity of a buried heat source, such as a magma 

chamber or volcano. Pore water in the rocks adjacent to 

such a heat source will tend to circulate as in a giant 

convection cell. Taylor (1974) has shown that the quantity of water pumped to the surface in this manner in 

mineralized districts such as Tonopah, Nev., is very 

large. Hot water is more effective than cold water in 

leaching lithium from rocks; hence, the amount of 

lithium carried to the surface in hot springs is probably 

very large. In Yellowstone National Park, and in similar 

geothermal areas, most of the lithium is lost to streams 

that carry it directly to the sea. However, the lithium 

mica lepidolite has been reported from a drill core in the 

Lower Geyser Basin in Yellowstone National Park (Bargar and others, 1973), and lithium-rich clays, from the 

Pliocene Teewinot Formation, have been reported 

south of the park near Jackson, Wyo. (J. D. Love, written commun., 1973).

Geothermal systems not only circulate lithium, but 

may in some areas represent the ore-forming fluid responsible for deposition of base and precious metals. A 

lithium asbestos, known as eckermannite, is associated 

with lead and other metallic ores at the Camp Albion 

district, Boulder County, Colo. (Wahlstrom, 1940). 

Another example is the Spor Mountain beryllium deposit, Juab County, Utah, where lithium occurs with beryllium, fluorite, manganese, and uranium. The possibility of finding commercially significant quantities of 

lithium minerals associated with hydrothermal mineral 

deposits should not be overlooked.

BURIAL METAMORPHISM

When sedimentary rocks are deeply buried, many 

changes take place that we associate with compaction, 

diagenesis, and burial metamorphism (Noble, 1963). 

Hydrous minerals that are stable during weathering at 

the surface of the earth are, when deeply buried, transformed to less hydrous or anhydrous species (Coombs 

and others, 1959; Jolly, 1974). Thus, at depth, hydrous 

clay minerals such as montmorillonite are transformed 

to anhydrous illite or mica, zeolites may be altered to 

feldspars, hydrous iron oxides related to limonite are 

transformed to hematite or may be reduced to pyrite, 

and gypsum is transformed to anhydrite. All these 

changes involve the loss of water, which can be quantitatively significant. Moreover, the lithium, which is lightly 

adsorbed by many of these hydrous minerals, may be 

released to solution. The water, released at depth, cannot readily escape to the surface but will be forced into 

fractures where it may be responsible for the deposition 

of various vein minerals, such as cookeite.

SUMMARY

Because pegmatites and brines have supplied sufficient lithium to date, there has been no pressing 

economic reason to look for new sources of lithium. The 

predicted future demand for lithium suggests that new 

sources of lithium will be needed. To find new resources, new prospecting techniques based on increased 

knowledge of the behavior of lithium in different 

geologic environments have to be developed. Hydrothermal sources of lithium may result in lithium deposits 

similar to the beryllium deposit at Spor Mountain, Utah. 

Concentrations of lithium in brines or sediments may 

also be associated with nonmarine evaporite deposits or with extremely concentrated marine evaporites. 

Cookeite deposits may be found in low-grade metamorphic terranes, and other lithium deposits associated with 

hydrothermal activity may also be found.

REFERENCES CITED

Bargar, K. E., Beeson, M. H., Fournier, R. O., and Muffler, L. J., 1973, 

Present-day deposition of lepidolite from thermal waters in Yellowstone National Park: Am. Mineralogist, v. 58, no. 9-10, p. 

901-904.

Coombs, D. S., Ellis, A. J., Fyfe, W. S., and Taylor, A. M., 1959, The 

zeolite facies, with comments on the interpretation of hydrothermal syntheses: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 17, p. 53-107.

Ellis, A. J., 1975, Geothermal systems and power development: Am. 

Scientist, v. 63, no. 5, p. 510-521.

Goldberg, E. D., 1963, Composition of sea water, in Hill, M. N., ed., 

The composition of sea-water [and] comparative and descriptive 

oceanography, v. 2 of The sea—Ideas and observations on progress in the study of the seas: New York, Interscience Publishers, p. 

3-25.

Heier, K. S., and Billings, G. K., 1972, Lithium, [Chap.] 3, Pt. B, in 

Wedepohl, K. H., ed., Handbook of geochemistry, Volume 2-1: 

Berlin, Springer-Verlag, looseleaf.

Horstman, E. L., 1957, The distribution of lithium, rubidium, and 

cesium in igneous and sedimentary rocks: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 12, nos. 1-2, p. 1-28.

Jolly, W. T., 1974, Behavior of Cu, Zn, and Ni during prehnitepumpellyite rank metamorphism of the Keweenawan Basalts, 

Northern Michigan: Econ. Geology, v. 69, no. 7, p. 118-1125.

Noble, E. A., 1963, Formation of ore deposits by water of compaction: 

Econ. Geology, v. 58, no. 7, p. 1145-1156.
58 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

Ronov, A. B., Migdisov, A. A., Voskresenskaya, N. T., and Korzina, G.

A., 1970, Geochemistry of lithium in the sedimentary cycle:

Geochemistry Internal., v. 7, no. 1, p. 75-102. 

Tardy, Yves, Krempp, Gerard, and Trauth, Norbert, 1972, Le lithium

dans les mineraux argileux des sediments et des sols [Lithium in

sediment and soil clay minerals]: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v.

36, no. 4, p. 397-412. 

Taylor, H. P., Jr., 1974, The application of oxygen and hydrogen

isotope studies to problems of hydrothermal alteration and ore

deposition: Econ. Geology, v. 69, no. 6, p. 843-883.

Wahlstrom, E. E., 1940, Ore deposits at Camp Albion, Boulder 

County, Colorado: Econ. Geology, v. 35, no. 4, p. 477-500.

Wedepohl, K. H., 1968, Chemical fractionation in the sedimentary 

environment, in Ahrens, L. H., ed., Origin and distribution of the 

elements: Oxford, Pergamon Press, p. 999-1016.

———1969, Composition and abundance of common sedimentary 

rocks, Chap. 8, in Wedepohl, K. H., ed., Handbook of geochemistry, Volume 1: Berlin, Springer-Verlag, p. 250-271.

LITHIUM CONTENTS OF 

THERMAL AND MINERAL WATERS

By DONALD E. WHITE, J. M. THOMPSON, and R. O. FOURNIER 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, MENLO PARK, CA

Reported lithium contents of natural waters range 

from less than 0.01 ppm to more than 500 ppm (table 

19). Although absolute contents are of major interest in 

commercial recovery, the ratios of Li to other major 

constituents are more significant in evaluating origin 

and diverse effects of evaporation, dilution, and waterrock interaction. The most useful single ratio is Li/Cl, 

which is emphasized in this text, but Li/Na has nearly 

equal usefulness.

Lithium/chlorine (by weight) is lowest in ocean water 

(0.00001, table 19) and becomes progressively higher in 

major North American rivers (0.00004) and in small 

streams and meteoric springs (variable and unreliable 

values because so dilute, but ranging from 0.001 to 0.1). 

For comparison, the ratios in major crustal types are 

granite, 0.15; basalt, 0.17; and shale, 0.38 (table 20).

Thermal and mineral waters of high salinity tend to 

have intermediate Li/Cl ratios, generally ranging from 

about 0.0001 to 0.001 (table 19). The median ratio for 

oil-field waters is probably near 0.0003, but a few ratios 

attain 0.001 and even higher; one notable example is 

brine from the Jurassic Smackover Formation of Texas 

and Arkansas, which averages 0.001. Individual 

analyses are greater than 0.002 and Li contents are as

TABLE 20.—Lithium contents of average rocks, in ppm

[Data from Krauskopf (1967)]

Rock type Na

Li/Na 

ratio

Crust -- 

Granite 

Basalt _- 

Shale __

20

30

10

60

24,000

28,000

19,000

6,600

0.0008

.0011

.0005

.009

130

200

60

160

Li/Cl 

ratio

0.15 

.15 

.17 

.38

TABLE 19.—Lithium contents of various waters, in ppm

Li

Li/Na 

Na ratio Cl

Li/Cl 

ratio Source

Water

Meteoric warm springs, (median of 5, -50°) ________ _

(~350°C) ____ _ _ __ .... __

... — 0.17

.003

... - .04

— ... 215

10,500 ~-9

-30

50,400

0.00002

.0003

.001

.043

19,000

8

5

155,000

0.00001

.0004

.008

.0014

Krauskopf (1967).

Livingston (1963).

Mariner and others (1975).

White (1968).

Oilfield brines

Jurassic Smackover Formation brines of

. ___ . 174

. _ ... 81

-— — 9.9

67,000

42,000

6,700

0.0026

.0019

.0015

172,000

113,000

15,300

0.0010

.0007

.0006

Collins (1974).

White (1965).

White (1965).

Evaporate brines

Clayton Valley (connate?), Nev ___......___..._..

Searles (connate?), Calif .___.......___„-_-__

Permian Salado Formation (connate?), N. Mex_-______

Permian Salado Formation (solution of salts), N. Mex-.

Pennsylvanian Paradox Member; Hermosa Formation

(connate?), Utah ____---_______-_--_____________.

380

81

16

2.8

66

66,200 0.0057

110,000 .0007

14,300 .0011

95,000 .00003

6,000 .011

95,200 0.004 Kunasz (1970).

121,000 .0007 G. I. Smith (oral commun., 1975).

200,000 .00008 White and others (1963).

157,000 .00002 White and others (1963).

241,000 .0003 White (1965).
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 59

much as 500 ppm (Collins, 1974). The interstitial waters 

of some evaporites, marine and nonmarine, are notably 

high in Li (table 19): 81 ppm in the upper salt brine of 

Searles Lake (Li/Cl ratio 0.007) and 300 ppm in the 

commercial Clayton Valley brines (Li/Cl ratio 0.004).

Nearly all saline waters of high temperature geothermal systems are much enriched in Li. The Salton Sea 

brine (350°C and 26 percent salinity) has 215 ppm of Li 

(Li/Cl ratio of 0.0014 and an estimated 1.0 million tonnes of Li in 5 km3 of brine; White, 1968). Moderately 

saline geothermal waters exceeding 200°C and closely

associated with young silicic volcanism range from about 

1 to 50 ppm of Li and have the highest Li/Cl ratios of 

any major group of thermal and mineral waters, ranging from less than 0.001 to more than 0.02; the median 

ratio is about 0.004 (White and others, 1963). The relatively dilute thermal waters of Yellowstone National 

Park are especially notable, having an average Li content of about 3 ppm and an Li/Cl ratio of about 0.01. 

The calculated discharge of Li from Yellowstone Park is 

about 480 tonnes per year, or 48 million tonnes over the 

probable minimum activity of 100,000 years (table 21).

TABLE 21.—Lithium contents of waters of Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, in ppm

[From Thompson and others (1975)]

pH Na

Li/Na 

ratio

Li/Cl 

ratio

Temerature

Near-neutral chloride waters

Upper Geyser Basin:

Ear _________________ _. - 9.2 5.2 335 0.016 417 0.012 95

Giantess ______________________________ 9.2 5.7 365 .016 439 .013 95

Punch Bowl __._____________ 8.3 4.0 425 .009 295 .014 95

Sapphire____-_______________________ 9.0 2.3 450 .005 308 .007 95

Interchange __________________________ 8.6 3.2 300 .011 226 .014 74

Spring near Y-8 ____________________ 8.9 2.9 429 .007 293 .010 79

Myriad near C-l __.___________ 9.9 4.0 310 .013 404 .010 94 

Midway-Lower Basins:

Rabbit Creek (Y-5) _________„_______ 8.4 3.3 375 .009 271 .012 95

Fountain P.P. near Clepsydra ______ 9.4 2.8 380 .007 325 .009 92

Porcupine Hills near Y-l 3 _________ 9.2 4.6 341 .013 312 .015 93

Ojo Caliente (Y-3) __________________ 8.2 4.2 335 .013 331 .013 95

River Group ________________________ 9.4 3.4 339 .010 323 .011 93

Fairy Meadows _______________ 8.7 3.4 390 .007 319 -Oil 87

Imperial Group___________.____________ -9.1 2.4 290 .008 222 .011 93

Sentinel ______________________________ -8.5 1.7 309 .006 300 .006 94

Sylvan ______________________________ 5.7 4.8 410 .012 531 .009 93

Norris:

Cistern.__________________________ 7.1 4.3 316 .014 476 .009 93

Fenner drillhole _______________ 4.6 7.9 440 .018 720 .011 92

Porcelain Terrace, base __________ 8.4 6.8 400 .017 713 .010 93

Pork Chop _________.______._ 8.0 6.3 470 .013 780 .008 91

Yellowstone Canyon (7 mile) __________ 8.9 3.3 347 .010 376 .009 92

Vermillion Group________________ 8.6 .35 430 .0008 244 .0014 67

Rainbow Group________________________ 8.4 .55 354 .0016 304 .0018 92

Heart Lake, Spike Group ___________ 9.5 6.7 400 .017 363 .018 93

Lewis Lake _____________________ 8.0 .6 140 .004 79 .008 Hot

Shoshone Basin, Bronze Group ______.__ 8.8 1.5 315 .005 167 .009 93

Lone Star (Y-6)________________________ 8.2 1.7 329 .005 417 .004 68

	Travertine-depositing springs

Hillside ______________________ 8.6 0.84 151 0.006 73 0.012 83

Firehole Lake, Steady ________________ 8.4 .40 85 .005 44 .009 93

Terrace Springs —_______.___________ 7.3 .75 305 .002 65 .012 59

Mammoth ________________________ 7.3 1.6 130 .012 166 .010 73.5

	Thermal, acid SO4-C1 waters

Norris Basin:

Little Whirligig ___ ______________ 3.2 4.6 345 0.013 582 0.008 93

Realgar2 _ ___ _____ _____—__ 3.2 3.6 334 .011 492 .007 88.5

Horseshoe2 _ ____ ___________ 2.5 2.8 235 .012 341 .008 86

Echinus2 _ _ __ _ _________ 3.2 .93 160 .006 103 .009 85

Emerald2 ..____________________ 3.05 3.6 308 .012 460 .008 89

Unnamed _ ________ 3.3 3.7 290 .013 468 .008 54

Green Dragon .________________ -2.7 2.3 145 .016 216 .011 -93

Green Dragon ________________________ -2.7 4.0 273 .015 447 .009 92

Northwest of Fenner drill hole ______ acid .70 63 .011 88 .008 63

Shoshone Basin ____ _____________ 2.4 .16 60 .003 60 .003 93
60 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

TABLE 21.—Lithium contents of waters of Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, in ppm—Continued

Location pH Na

Li/Na 

ratio

Li/Cl 

ratio

Temperature

Thermal, acid SO4 waters

Summit Lake2

Washburn

Hot Springs Basin

Joseph Coats _ .

________ 2.8

________ 4.5

. _ _ 1.8

._ _ _. 2.0

._ __ 2.8

. _ _ 1.8

0.02

.02

.01

.01

<.01

.01

30

14.8

11.0

25 4

2.2

7.0

0.0007

.001

.0009

.0004

<.005

.001

5

.1

.1

2.1

3

.1

0.004

•2(?)

.!(?)

.005

<.003

.!(?)

94

-90

76

88

87.5

86

Dilute neutral waters

Cold Streams

Thumb Creek

Little Thumb

Elephant Back ___

Cold Springs:

West of Black Sand

Midway Picnic area _ _

Sylvan area __

Thermal meteoric waters:

Fairy Meadows

Southwest of Gibbon Hill ___

North of Gibbon Falls _ _

Specimen in Geyser Creek area

Hillside _. __ __

North of Biscuit Basin _ _ _

7.5

7.4

_____ 7.3

7.5

— - 7.3

_ __ 7.80

not reported

_____ 8.6

___ 6.0

_____ 7.9

_____ 7.4

6.9

0.04

.01

.02

.02

.12

.02

.09

.12

.1

.05

.04

.01

27

4.4

9.2

6.7

32

3.0

16.2

63

24

65

10.4

10.0

0.0015

.002

.002

.003

.004

.007

.006

.002

.004

.0008

.0004

.001

1.4

1.3

.8

3.8

17

.2

1

1.6

.8

5

4.0

.8

0.03

.008

.03

.005

.007

.!(?)

.06

.08

.12

.01

.01

.01

5

7

Cold

14

21

5 .

26

68

31

92

32

48

'Boiling at this elevation is 93°C. Springs above 93°C are superheated. 

2 Unpuolished data of Thompson.

The most probable explanation for Li-enriched geothermal waters is selective leaching of part of the Li from 

rocks at temperatures above 200°C; 300° to 500°C may 

be especially favorable. The evidence for direct involvement of magmatic fluid high in Li and other constituents is a real but still controversial possibility.

Lithium is evidently removed from river and ocean 

waters and is fixed by low-temperature reactions in clay 

minerals. In simple evaporational processes, most brines 

require source waters that are higher in Li/Cl than is the 

brine. The Clayton Valley brine (table 19), which has an 

Li/Cl ratio of 0.004, probably requires a main supply 

from hot springs containing an Li/Cl ratio of 0.01 or 

higher and a localized evaporation basin with little 

inflow of other Cl. The upper Tertiary rhyolitic volcanism and hydrothermal ore deposits west of Clayton 

Valley may have been essential in supplying Li.

Diagenetic, metamorphic, and igneous-related 

water-rock interactions at moderate to high temperatures are probably essential in accounting for the relatively high Li contents of most thermal and mineral 

waters.

REFERENCES CITED

Collins, A. G., 1974, Geochemistry of liquids, gases and rocks from the 

Smackover Formation: U.S. Bur. Mines Rept. Inv. 7897, 84 p.

Krauskopf, K. B., 1967, Introduction to geochemistry: New York, 

McGraw-Hill Book Co., Internal. Ser. Earth and Planetary Sci., 

721 p.

Kunasz, I. A., 1970, Geology and geochemistry of the lithium deposit 

in Clayton Valley, Esmeralda County, Nevada: Pennsylvania State 

Univ. Ph.D. thesis, 128 p.

Livingston, D. A., 1963, Chemical composition of rivers and lakes: 

U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 440-G, 64 p.

Mariner, R. H., Presser, T. S., Rapp, J. B., and Willey, L. M., 1975, 

The minor and trace elements, gas, and isotope compositions of 

the principal hot springs of Nevada and Oregon: Menlo Park, 

Calif., U.S. Geol. Survey open-file rept., 27 p.

Thompson, J. M., Presser, T. S., Barnes, R. B., and Bird, D. B., 1975, 

Chemical analysis of the waters of Yellowstone National Park, 

Wyoming, from 1965 to 1973: U.S. Geol. Survey open-file rept. 

75-25, 53 p.

White, D. E., 1965, Saline waters of sedimentary rocks, in Young, A., 

and Galley, J. E., eds., Fluids in subsurface environments—a symposium: Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geologists Mem. 4, p. 342-366.

————1968, Environments of generation of some base-metal ore deposits: Econ. Geology, v. 63, no. 4, p. 301-335.

White, D. E., Hem, J. D., and Waring, G. A., 1963, Chemical composition of subsurface waters, in Data of geochemistry [6th ed.]: U.S. 

Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 440-F, 67 p.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

LITHIUM RECOVERY FROM GEOTHERMAL FLUIDS1

61

By C. E. BERTHOLD, HAZEN RESEARCH, INC., GOLDEN, CO, and 

D. H. BAKER, JR.,U.S. BUREAU OF MINES, BOULDER CITY, NV

ABSTRACT

The lithium resource of the Imperial Valley, Salton Sea KGRA 

(Known Geothermal Resource Area), in southern California, appears 

to be of significant size, comparable to the Clayton Valley, Nevada, 

lithium reserve in quantity of contained lithium.

Lithium occurs, presumably as lithium chloride, in amounts of 

about 200 ppm (as Li) in the geothermal fluids obtained from depths 

of 5,000 feet or more (as typified by Sinclair No. 4 fluid).

Recovery of lithium from this resource can be achieved by chemical 

concentration (precipitation) techniques and ion-exchange methods, 

both liquid and solid, among others.

The paper will discuss in general terms the studies undertaken and 

preliminary results obtained in attempting to recover lithium from this 

resource.

INTRODUCTION

Geothermal fluids from various sources in the Western United States contain quantities of lithium ranging 

from the low parts per million level to concentrations of 

hundreds of parts per million (ppm). Some of these 

geothermal resources can be considered to be significant, if not major, resources or reserves of lithium.

In some studies on recovery of mineral values from 

geothermal fluids for the U.S. Bureau of Mines, a sampling survey was made of several hot springs and geothermal sites in the Western United States. Table 22 

presents a summary of the lithium content found in 

some of these geothermal fluids and hot springs waters. 

As can be seen, the geothermal fluids of the Salton Sea 

Known Geothermal Resource Area (KGRA), Imperial

TABLE 22.—Lithium contents of selected geothermal fluids and hot 

spring watersl

Lithium 

concentration 

Location (ppm Li)

Mesa L-6-1, Imperial County, Calif..

pre-flash, 8,000-ft depth.._____.______________..._____ 55 

Magmamax No. 1. Imperial County, Calif.,

pre-flash, 2,400-ft depth _____________________________ 143

Sinclair No. 4, Imperial County, Calif.,

post-flash, 5,400-ft depth _______ .__________________ 238

Coso Hot Spring, Inyo County, Calif.,

average of published analyses _____________________________________-Trace to 0.)

Darrough Hot Springs, Nye County, Nev.

post-Hash.__,-________!______________________________________________ .06

Golconda Hot Springs, Humboldt County, Nev:

No. 1 ____ _________ __'_ _ __ __ _________ .45

No. 2 ___-_--__-_____--__-______________________________________ 1.0

Beowawe Steam Well, Eureka County, Nev.

post-flash.... _________________________________________________________ 3.3

'From work performed by C. E. Bert hold and others, June 1973 for the U.S. Bureau of Mines 

under contract No. SO 133084, Process Technology for recovering geothermal brine minerals.

"The data and results presented herein were obtained during the performance of work for 

the U.S. Bureau of Mines under contracts SO 133084 and HO 144104. The views and 

conclusions presented herein should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official 

policies or recommendations of the Interior Department, Bureau of Mines, or of the U.S. 

Government.

County, Calif., contain significant concentrations of 

lithium. Lithium reserves within this KGRA site have 

been compared in quantity with those of the Clayton 

Valley, Nevada, area, that is, approximately 40,000 

tonnes of contained lithium (Kunasz, 1975).

The lithium content of the Salton Sea geothermal 

fluids appears to vary, both with respect to location 

within the reservoir and depth of the producing zone. 

As an example, Magmamax No. 1 well produces brine 

from the 2400-foot level and has a lithium content of 

about 150 ppm with a total salinity of approximately 

180,000 ppm. Contrasted to this geothermal fluid are 

those of Sinclair No. 4 brine (well located one mile south 

of Magmamax No. 1) at 5400-foot depth, with over 200 

ppm lithium and a total salinity of nearly 300,000 ppm. 

Figure 22 shows the locations of these geothermal wells 

in the Imperial Valley area.

Lithium occurs in the Salton Sea KGRA fluids, presumably as lithium chloride, since the predominant 

anion is chloride, with small amounts of bromide, 

fluoride, and sulfate also present. The major cations 

present in these geothermal fluids are sodium, calcium, 

potassium, and ammonia, with minor amounts of magnesium, rubidium, and cesium also present. Table 23 

presents a partial analysis for Mesa, Sinclair, and Magmamax geothermal fluids, together with a comparison 

of lithium-sodium and lithium-calcium ratios for these 

geothermal fluids with other naturally occurring saline 

brines.

It appears that brine from Mesa L-6-1 well at the 

southern fringe of the Salton Sea KGRA is considerably 

higher in Li/Ca ratio as compared to other geothermal 

fluids found in this KGRA. Whether this implies a different source for this fluid or a different subsurface 

rock matrix that supplies the lithium for this fluid is not 

known. In any event, recovery of lithium from Mesa 

L-6-1 fluid would appear to be somewhat easier than 

from either Sinclair No. 4 or Magmamax No. 1, owing 

to the relatively higher lithium level with respect to the 

other salines present.

Recovery of lithium from such naturally occurring 

geothermal fluids is complicated by several factors: (1) 

relatively low concentration in the fluid, (2) high temperature of the fluid, and (3) presence of relatively large 

amounts of other potentially valuable minerals such as 

iron, manganese, silica, zinc, lead, barium, strontium, 

and magnesium. In general, geothermal fluids from the
62 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

Magmamax Nor200Magmamax No. 3

Sinclair No. 4 

Sinclair No. 3

El Centre/ 1^ "X

Holtz No. i\= 

Holtz No. 2 0\

CALIFORNIA 

———^

TES ___

FIGURE 22.—Imperial Valley geothermal area showing location of geothermal wells, highways, and cities.

Salton Sea KGRA require clean-up, or removal and 

perhaps recovery, of the silica, iron, manganese, lead, 

zinc, and magnesium therefrom prior to recovery of the 

lithium values.

RECOVERY METHOD

Recovery methods for lithium contained in solution 

can be broadly categorized into two general schemes: (1)
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 

TABLE 23.—Analyses, in ppm, of geothermal fluids

63

Sample Ca Mg NH4 SO, Li/Na Li/Ca

Mesa L-6-1 .......... _ ....

.____._- 162 186,000 71,000 35,000 18,000

22

152

39

611 238

143

1.5

5.8

4.6

16

42

50

0.005

.003

.003

.0045

.007

0.04

.007

.007

.6

NoCa

present

direct recovery from the brine via liquid (Baniel and 

Blumberg, 1963; Fletcher and Wilson, 1961; Grinstead 

and Davis, 1970; Morris and Short, 1963; Morrison and 

Freiser, 1962; various patents2 and written communications3 ) or solid ion exchange (Kennedy, 1961) and (2) 

removal of the lithium by precipitation as an insoluble 

compound or double salt.

In discussing methods of lithium recovery from 

geothermal fluids, it should be kept in mind that such 

recovery processes are secondary to the original intent 

behind the development of geothermal resources, 

namely power generation and production of freshwater.

Whatever method or methods are used to recover 

lithium from such resources must be adaptable to the 

constraints imposed upon geothermal wells. These are:

1. The almost universally accepted belief that waste 

geothermal fluids must be reinjected back into the 

producing structure to maintain hydraulic balance 

and prevent ground surface subsidence. Alternatively, fresh or brackish water, if available, could be 

used as a substitute fluid, thus allowing some concentration of the geothermal fluid, if this would aid 

in recovering some of the constituents from the 

geothermal fluid.

2. Whatever methods or means used for lithium recovery must be compatible with the need for geothermal fluid reinjection. That is, no material should 

be present that might precipitate out in the subsurface structure, thereby leading to plugging-off of 

the aquifer(s). The presence of organic compounds, such as might result from liquid ionexchange methods of lithium recovery, constitutes 

yet another unknown if reinjected back into the 

producing zone.

Keeping these constraints in mind, a series of laboratory studies on lithium recovery was started, using 

Sinclair No. 4 geothermal fluid as the raw material.

Post-flash Sinclair No. 4 geothermal fluid required a 

"clean up" treatment to remove soluble silica, iron,

'Israel patent 16017, and U.S. patents numbered 3,307,922; 2,964,381; 3,306,700, U.S. 

Department of Commerce, Patent and Trademark Office, Washington, D.C.

3 C. Hanson, 1970 written commun., "Extraction of magnesium chloride from brines using 

mixed ionic extractants," University of Bradford, Bradford, York. W. C. Keder, 1970, written 

commun., from Redder and others, "Separation of alkali metals by solvent extraction with 

mixtures of organic-soluble acids and phenols," Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington. R. L. Focht and others, 1961, oral commun., "Separation of lithium aluminate" paper presented at the Pittsburgh Conference on analytical chemistry, Pittsburgh, 

Penn., 1961.

manganese, zinc, and lead prior to lithium removal. 

This was achieved by adjusting pH to a nominal value of 

7.5 to 8.0 and removing the precipitated hydroxides, 

together with adsorbed zinc and lead values. At this 

point, the purified Sinclair No. 4 fluid can be used directly for lithium recovery or else concentrated (using 

steam evaporation or solar evaporation), if such concentration is deemed necessary and/or desirable.

Our studies utilized both types of Sinclair No. 4 

geothermal fluid, post-flash and concentrated. Figure 

22A illustrates the behavior of lithium in post-flash 

Sinclair No. 4 fluid, during the course of concentration 

by simulated solar evaporation. Using magnesium as a 

tracer element to follow the course of evaporation, it 

appears that no lithium is lost from solution up to a 

concentration ratio in excess of 5.

The limiting factor in degree of solution concentration becomes saturation with respect to the calcium 

chloride content of the geothermal fluid. Further concentration of Sinclair No. 4 fluid results in crystallization 

of large quantities of calcium chloride hexahydrate 

(CaCl2'6H2O) which entrains significant quantities of 

the valuable, concentrated, lithium-bearing fluid.

While much has been published in the literature and 

in the patent files regarding recovery of lithium values 

from solution, our studies have indicated that precipitation of lithium values as the aluminate complex to be the 

most effective.

Organic solvents such as butyl and amyl alcohols, have 

been used to selectively dissolve away lithium chloride 

from mixtures of alkali metal chlorides (Lindal, 1970; 

Morrison and Freiser, 1962). Alcohol-ketone mixtures 

have been used to extract lithium from brines, but urea 

or ammonia additions are required to prevent calcium 

interference4. Lithium Corporation of America has 

patented a process5 where lithium is extracted as a complex lithium tetrachloroferrate, but this scheme requires 

pretreatment of the lithium-containing fluid with both 

hydrochloric acid and ferric chloride to establish proper 

operating conditions.

In addition, the application of liquid or solid ionexchange techniques to such hot saline fluids (T^l 10°C)

4U.S. patent, 3,307,922, U.S. Department of Commerce, Patent and Trademark Office, 

Washington, D.C.

5 U.S. patent, 3,537,813, U.S. Department of Commerce, Patent and Trademark Office, 

Washington, D.C.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

SINCLAIR NO. 4 BRINE

2345

CONCENTRATION RATIO, Mg TRACER 

FIGURE 22A.—Behavior of lithium and other elements during concentration by evaporation.

leads to problems regarding solvent degradation and 

losses due to evaporation of the carrier solvent, while 

ion-exchange resins are subject to dehydration and 

shrink-swell fracturing with consequent destruction of 

the resin beads.

The preferred method for lithium recovery from 

Sinclair No. 4 geothermal fluid is the precipitation as a 

complex lithium aluminate using either freshly precipitated aluminum hydroxide or in-situ precipitation of 

aluminum hydroxide via aluminum chloride with pH 

control.

Ratios of concentration in excess of 150 have been 

obtained by this method with lithium recoveries in excess of 98 percent. Figure 23 presents data on lithium 

recovery versus mole ratio of aluminum to lithium used 

to effect the precipitation. Apparently the optimum 

Al/Li ratio for 98+ percent lithium recovery is about 

2.75/1. Precipitation temperature for these results was 

in the 75°C-85°C range.

Control of pH is critical to achieve maximum lithium 

recovery, with a range of 5.5 to 8.2 appearing to be 

optimum for Sinclair No. 4 brine as shown in figure 24. 

This pH range is somewhat different than that called 

for in the literature and is probably dependent to some

degree on the composition of the fluid used. For example, R. L. Focht (1961, oral commun.) recommends a 

pH range of 10 to 12.5 as being optimum for maximum 

lithium extraction.

S 80 

UJ

u.

u. 

o

tS 60 

O

or

UJ 

0.

z

.--40

O 

UJ

O 

CO

co 20 

O

0

C

— X,

— \

\

RATIO'- AI 2 03 /Li 2 0 BY WEIGHTtX

246 o^^^ 10 

1 1 1 1 ^~~O —— 1—

1 1 1 1 2 3

MOLE RATIO Al/Li

FIGURE 23. — Effect of Al:Li ratios on lithium recovery.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

100 iQ 

UJ 

UJ

UJ 

CJ

a:

90

80

70

60

o 50

UJ

»- 

<

t 40 

O.

CJ 

UJ

£ 30

2

I 20

10

34 56 789 

PH

FIGURE 24.—Effect of pH on precipitation of lithium with aluminum 

hydroxide.

A major difficulty associated with the aluminate 

method of lithium recovery is the gelatinous nature of 

the precipitate formed. This is probably due to the high 

mole ratio of aluminum to lithium used in previous 

work. In addition, pH of precipitation exerts a profound effect on the settling characteristics of the precipitate as shown in figure 25.

Optimum pH of precipitation for maximum settling 

rate appears to be about 8.3, using an Al/Li ratio of 4/1. 

However, a pH of 8.3 is just outside the optimum pH 

range for maximum lithium recovery.

Using an aluminum to lithium ratio of 3/1 and a precipitation pH of 7.5 resulted in both maximum lithium 

recovery and a reasonably rapid settling precipitate as 

shown in figure 26.

In conclusion, it should be noted that the conditions 

outlined for maximum lithium recovery from Sinclair 

No. 4 geothermal fluid may not be optimum for other

60 90 120 

TIME, IN MINUTES

FIGURE 25.—Settling data for aluminum (lithium) hydroxides.

Ai:Li =

40 60 80 

TIME, IN MINUTES

FIGURE 26.—Settling curve—aluminum (lithium) hydroxide at

pH = 7.5.

geothermal fluids. A properly planned experimental 

program should enable one to determine optimum 

lithium recovery conditions for each type of lithiumcontaining fluid.

REFERENCES CITED

Baniel, A., and Blumberg, R., 1963, Concentration of aqueous solutions by liquid-liquid extraction: London Indust. Chem., v. 39, 

p. 460.

Fletcher, A. W., and Wilson, J. C., 1960-61, Naphthenic acid as a 

liquid-liquid extraction reagent for metals: Inst. Mining and 

Metallurgy Trans., v. 70, p. 355.

Grinstead, R. R., and Davis, J. C., 1970, Extraction by phase separation 

with mixed ionic solvents: Indust. Eng. Chem., v. 9, no. 1, p. 66.

Kennedy, A. M., 1961, The recovery of lithium and other minerals
66 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

from geothermal water at Wairakei: U.N. Proc. 1961, Art. G/56,

p. 502. 

Kunasz, I. A., 1975, Lithium raw materials, in Industrial minerals and

rocks (1975 revision): Am. Inst. Mining, Metall., and Petroleum

Engineers, p. 791-803. 

Lindal, B., 1970, The production of chemicals from brine and sea

water using geothermal energy: U.N. Symposium on the Development and Utilization of Geothermal Resources, v. 2, pt. 1,

p. 910. 

Morris, D. F. C., and Short, E. L., 1963, Extraction of lithium chloride

by tri-butyl phosphate: Jour. Inorganic Nuclear Chemistry, v. 25,

p. 291. 

Morrison, G. H., and Freiser, H., 1962, Solvent extraction in analytical

chemistry: New York, John Wiley and Sons, 269 p.

LITHIUM RESOURCES OF SALARS IN THE CENTRAL ANDES

By GEORGE E. ERICKSEN, U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, RESTON, VA;

GUILLERMO CHONG D., UNIVERSIDAD DEL NORTE, ANTOFAGASTA, CHILE;

and TOMAS VILA G, INSTITUTO DE INVESTIGACIONES GEOLOGICAS,

SANTIAGO, CHILE.

ABSTRACT

Lithium occurs in potentially commercial concentrations in salars of 

the central Andean region of northern Chile, western Bolivia, and 

northwestern Argentina, and in the nitrate deposits of northern Chile. 

Preliminary exploration of the salars indicates that Salar de Atacama, 

one of the largest in the region, contains large amounts of brine that 

average between about 2,000 and 4,000 mg/1 lithium, so that this one 

salar may contain several million tonnes of recoverable lithium. Brines 

from several smaller salars in the Chilean Andes were found to contain 

as much as 200 mg/1 lithium. Information about the lithium content of 

brines in the many other salars of the Andean Highlands is lacking, 

although some, such as Salar de Uyuni in Bolivia, appear favorable for 

accumulation of large amounts of lithium-rich brine. Lithium is concentrated locally in brines and saline crusts of salars in the coastal 

desert of northern Chile in amounts of several hundred to a few 

thousand parts per million, but potential resources of material averaging more than 100 mg/1 lithium are small. Nitrate ore generally contains 20-50 ppm lithium, which is recoverable as a byproduct.

INTRODUCTION

Saline-encrusted playas, locally known as salars, and 

associated brines 1 that have accumulated in closed basins in the central Andean region contain huge amounts 

of saline materials. Recent exploration has shown that 

some of the salars contain relatively high concentrations 

of lithium, and it seems likely that this region has potentially large lithium resources. Associated saline resources include sodium chloride, sodium sulfate, potassium, boron, and magnesium. Some lithium-rich brines 

contain small but potentially recoverable amounts of 

cesium and rubidium.

The salars are in a region of internal drainage in 

northern Chile, western Bolivia, and northwestern Argentina, an area of more than 1 million km2 (fig. 27). 

The region has more than 100 closed basins in which are 

found at least 75 salars ranging in size from about 1 km2

'In this report, a brine is defined as a body of water containing more than 35,000 mg/1 

dissolved solids—the approximate concentration of sea water—and saline water is one containing 10,000-35,000 mg/1.

to several thousand square kilometres. Salar Uyuni in 

Bolivia, the largest of the salars, has an area of about 

9,000 km2 . Saline lakes occur in several of the basins, 

and lakes formerly existed in many others that are now 

occupied by salars. Lake Titicaca, the largest freshwater 

lake in South America, is at the border between Bolivia 

and Peru and in the northern part of the region of 

interior drainage.

The region has an arid climate, and precipitation is 

now more or less balanced by evaporation so that lake 

levels and ground-water levels are relatively stable, 

though during the last several thousand years evaporation has tended to exceed precipitation in the region as a 

whole. Precipitation is in part dependent upon altitude, 

ranging from less than 10 mm per year in the Atacama 

Desert of coastal Chile, at altitudes below 2,000 m, to a 

maximum of about 300 mm in the Andean Highlands of 

Chile and nearby parts of Bolivia and Argentina.

Most of the region of internal drainage in the Andean 

Highlands is underlain by volcanic rocks of Pliocene and 

Quaternary age, which are considered to be a major 

source of salines in the region (Ericksen, 1963). Thick 

rhyolitic ash-flow tuffs, chiefly of Pliocene age, are present throughout the area, representing one of the 

greatest known accumulations of rocks of this type. 

Superimposed on this rhyolitic terrane are several hundred volcanoes, most of which are of andesitic composition but a few of which are rhyolitic. Most of these 

volcanoes are now dead; only a few show fumerolic activity. Ash-flow tuffs from this part of the Andes have 

been found to contain about 500-3,500 ppm of watersoluble salines (Ericksen, 1961, 1963). Saline thermal 

springs are found at many places today and probably 

were widespread during former times of intense volcanic activity. Several spring deposits of the borate mineral ulexite have been found in northwestern Argen-
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 67

70"

SOUTH 

AMERICA 

Area of 

fig.

Quillogua

______S£ 

TccopXo «Ofkina La Joya

*

Chuquicamata 

0 Calama 

San Pedro 

de Atacama

On:ina c 

Ma ria Elena

Ofi« ina Pedra 

de Valdivia

Sii trra Gorda 

"65

Baquedano >** C*-" 

r £

26°

SALARS AND LAKES

1 -Laguna Blanco

2-Salar de Surire

3-Salar de Coipasa

4-Salar de Obispo

5-Salar de Uyuni

6-Salar de Empexa

7-Salar del Guasco

8-Salar de Coposa

9-Salar de Pintados 

10-Salar de Bella Vista 

11 —Salar Grande

12-Salar de Sur Viejo

13-Salar de Lagunas

14-Salar de Llamara

15-Cerro Solcdad (mountain)

16-Salar d« Ollague

17-Salar de San Martin

18-Salar de Chiguana

19-Salar de Ascotan

20-Salar del Carmen 

21 -Salar de Navidad

22-Salar Mar Muerto

23-Pampa Elvira

24-Salar de Imilac

25-Salar de Punta Negra

26-Llano de la Paciencia

27-Salar de Atacama

28-Salar de Tara

29-Pampa de Tara

30-Salar de Aguas Calientes

31-Salar de Pujsa

32-Salar de Quisquiro

33-Salar de Aguas Calientes

34-Laguna Miscanti

35-Salar de Laco

36-Salar de Talar

37-Laguna de Tuyajto

38-Salars de Aguas Calientes 

and Purisunchi

39-Salar de Pular

40-Salar de Incaguasi

41-Salar de Aguas Calientes

42-Laguna de la Azufrera

43-Salar d« Pajonales

44-Salar de Gorbea

45-Salar de Agua Amarga

46-Salar de la Isla

47-Salar de las Parinas

48-Salar de Aguilar

49-Salar de Infieles

50-Salar Grande

51 —Salar de Pedernales

52-Salar de Piedra Parada

53-Lagunas Bravas

54-Laguna Wheelright

55-Laguna Escondida

56-Salar Wheelright

57-Laguna Verde

58-Salar de Maricunga

59-Laguna del Negro Francisco

60-Salar de Cauchari

61-Salar de Arizaro

62-Salar del Hombre Muerto

63-Salar de Antofalla

64-Salar d« Pocitos

65-Salar de Pampa Blanca

66-Name unknown

0 50 KILOMETRES

70° 68°

Figure 27.—Index map of the central Andean region showing location of salars and saline lakes. (Modified from Stoertz

and Ericksen, 1974).
68 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

tina, some of which are associated with present-day 

thermal springs (Muessig, 1966, p. 153-154).

In contrast to the Andean Highlands, the Atacama 

Desert to the west is underlain chiefly by sedimentary, 

volcanic, and plutonic rocks of Jurassic to early Tertiary 

age. Except for the salines in continental sedimentary 

rocks of Jurassic to Tertiary age in the region of Salar de 

Atacama, the rocks of the Atacama Desert lack saltbearing strata and have contributed a relatively minor 

portion of the widespread and abundant salines here. A 

considerable portion of the salines of the Atacama Desert is probably of oceanic origin, having been released 

from the ocean surface as sea spray and bubble spray 

and transported inland by wind and fog.

GEOLOGY OF THE SALARS

Three types of salars can be recognized as follows: (1) 

zoned salars of the Andean Highlands and front ranges, 

(2) dry silty salars of the Atacama Desert, and (3) Salar 

Grande, which is a mass of recrystallized halite. Zoned 

salars show lateral changes in crustal type and composition (fig. 28); they generally have a relatively thick, hard, 

dry interior crust of halite or gypsurn and a thin, soft, 

moist outer crust consisting of mixtures of these minerals with mirabilite, thenardite, and ulexite. The gypsum 

crust commonly contains layers or abundant nodules of 

ulexite. The saline minerals in crusts of zoned salars 

crystallized chiefly from surface and near-surface saline 

waters and brines. Ponds and lakes, ranging from a few 

tens of metres to about a kilometre in diameter, now 

exist perenially at the margins and in interior low areas 

of many zoned salars, and the low areas are more extensively flooded during the rainy season. The silty-salar 

crusts in the coastal region of Chile formed by crystallization of saline minerals, chiefly halite, which served as 

near-surface cementing material in silty playas in the 

capillary fringe of the ground-water table. The resulting 

crust generally is a few tens of centimetres to a metre in 

thickness and consists of a somewhat loosely cemented 

mass of nodular to platy fragments of silty salt. The 

fragmental character of the crust is due to the combined 

processes of desiccation, heaving, and breaking of old 

crust as new crust forms beneath it and to leaching by 

infrequent rains. Salar Grande, near the coast in northern Chile (fig. 27), is unique. It is a huge deposit of 

coarsely crystalline pure halite nearly 50 km long, as 

much as 8 km wide, and as shown by drill cores, it has a 

maximum thickness of at least 160 m. The salt is dry, as 

is the alluvium beneath it, except for abundant fluid 

inclusions; former brines evidently drained away along 

recent faults that cut the salar.

As the result of faulting and tilting during their formation, many of the Andean salars are crowded toward 

one side of their basin and show asymmetrical zoning

(fig. 29). Salar surfaces also may be gently inclined. 

Many of the basins were tilted towards the northwest, as 

is well shown by three of the four salars in figure 29. 

Others were tilted towards the west or southwest; one 

example is Salar del Guasco, also shown in figure 29. In 

some cases old salar crusts may have been covered with 

marginal alluvium deposited during and after tilting.

Lacustrine and playa sediments beneath the salar 

crusts are known only from shallow pits and short drill 

holes. Layers of saline minerals have not been encountered within these sediments and probably do not exist 

beneath most of the salar crusts, which may have 

formed as single-stage drying of a saline lake or by capillary evaporation of near-surface ground water. On the 

other hand, some of the large salars such as Atacama, 

which have had a more complex history, may have additional saline layers at depth. Such layers might contain 

significant quantities of "fossil" lithium-rich brines. The 

lacustrine sediments of the salars penetrated by drill 

holes consist of poorly sorted to well-sorted sand, silt, 

and clay with varying amounts of calcium carbonate-rich 

mud and sporadic diatom- and ostracod-rich layers. 

Several drill holes in marginal areas of Salar de Atacarna 

show abundant calcium carbonate mud and ostracodes to 

depths as great as 43 m (Moraga and others, 1974, p. 

47-51), and thin, relatively pure diatomite layers have 

been found interbedded with clastic sediments at several 

salars.

CHEMICAL COMPOSITION

Chemical analyses of saline waters of northern Chile 

show them to be chloride waters (Clark, 1924, p. 202) in 

which sodium is the dominant cation, as indicated in 

table 24. The similarity of salar crusts elsewhere in the 

central Andes suggests that essentially all of them 

formed from chloride waters. Concentrations of saline 

components range from several tens of g/1 in saline 

ground water or brine within gypseous salar crusts, to 

nearly 400 g/1 in brine within halite-rich salar crusts. 

The saline components in brine tend to show relative 

concentrations as follows:

C1->SO4 =>BO3 => HCO3~.

Spring waters, which generally contain less than 10 g/1 

dissolved solids, also are chloride waters but have variable relative amounts of K, Ca, and Mg; HCOs- is much 

more abundant than BO3 = in spring waters and may 

occur in amounts equal to or greater than SO4= .

As indicated by the analyses in table 24 and by other 

analyses of saline waters and brines associated with salars in northern Chile, lithium and potassium both tend 

to show an increase in concentration as total salinity 

increases. Potassium is generally 10-15 times more
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

66°

69

~--

Solar de Aguas 

Calientes

L la no de la 

Paciencia

:i^40'9: : : : - : : : I '^ .Salarde_Laco

alientes and Purisunch

Solar de Aguas Calientes

Soft surfaces, wet to dry, 

of solars

Lakes or areas frequently 

flooded Solar de 

Quisquiro

18,606 Mountain peak showing 

A elevation, in feet

Salar or old lakebed, (1000 Feet = 305 Metres)

undifferentiated; most are

shown in detail an inset

maps

Area of lakebeds and shore- — — Divides of closed basins —

lines of former lakes

5 10 KILOMETRES

Hard saline crusts of solars

25 Number of solar and

basin keyed ta figure 27 .

\Aguas''////./'. 

.Calientes

18,701 

Salar de Paionales '•'

FIGURE 28.—Salars and basins of interior drainage in the eastern central part of Antofagasta Province, Chile. (Modified from

Stoertz and Ericksen, 1974).

abundant than lithium, but this relationship is not have been tested for lithium. Figures 30 and 31 show the 

necessarily linear, nor does it apply to all brines that relation between concentrations of lithium and potas-
70 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

EXPLANATION

Drainage basin border

Hard evaporite crusts, predominantly 

massive to silty rock salt (chloride 

zone)

Soft, moist saline soil, subject to 

flooding; chiefly sulfate zone, containing gypsum and\some halite

Lakes or oreas frequently flooded

Slightly elevated marginal zone of sal or, 

characterized by shallow stream channels 

and shorelines of former lakes; generally 

contains abundant gypsum

Former salar or lakebed, apparently above 

the level af present flooding or ground-water 

evaporation; includes deltas, shorelines, 

and beaches of former lakes

FIGURE 29.—Asymmetrical zoning of salars in basins of interior drainage in northern Chile, attributed in part to faulting and tilting 

of the basins during late Pleistocene and Holocene time. (Modified from Stoertz and Ericksen, 1974).
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 

TABLE 24.—Chemical concentrations, in milligrams per liter, in selected lithium-rich brines from northern Chile

71

Locality

Do . ____ __ _________ __

Do __________________________

Do ... __ .......

Do __.. ___..._______ _

Do ——- — — _.._._______

Salar de Ascoton 3 ._

Salar de Bellavista4 Pintados _ _ ..

Dissolved 

solids'

______ 370,000

___ _ 190,000

______ 73,000

62,000

— ... 40,100

47,022

89,298

______ 81,436

______ 102,138

170,300

______ 390,000

Na

91,100

18,220

10,280

13,870

28,160

50,000

126,800

K

4,220

1,690

1,670

1 295

1,183

2,614

5,403

14,280

Mg

6,350

1 930

827

653

6,252

3,665

3,630

Ca

450

1,100

900

360

1,080

1,160

1,195

375

2,538

1,566

5,935

110

Li

1,570

940

520

290

190

130

137

152

187

85

412

Cl

189,500

163,900

83,780

36,750

27,500

20,300

24,000

27,660

46,690

60,050

100,600

176,600

SO4

15,900

8,540

18,170

3,430

7,900

2,160

4,693

28,110

3,154

2,490

2,720

47,770

HC03

230

280

240

320

100

92

0

0

0

625

178

406

B

440

360

360

100

88

61

595

675

474

426

225

979

'By evaporation.

2 From Moraga and others (1974, table 4).

"From Vila (1975, table 6).

4 Instituto de Investigaciones Geologicas (unpub. data, 1975).

1,400

1,200

1,000

800

a: CD

i 600

400

200

5,000 10,000 15,000 

K, IN MILLIGRAMS/LITRE

20,000

FIGURE 30.—Lithium-potassium ratios (dots) in saline ground water and brine, Salar de Atacama. Average Li:K ratio as indicated by line is

1:15. Analytical data from Moraga and others (1974, table 4).
72 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

Ul 

OC

oc 

o

1,400 r

1,200

,000

800

600

400

200

100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000

DISSOLVED SOLIDS, IN MILLIGRAMS/LITRE

FIGURE 31.—Lithium-salinity ratios (dots) in saline ground water and brine, Salar de Atacama. Average Li:dissolved solids ratio as indicated 

by line is approximately 1:300. Analytical data from Moraga and others (1974, table 4).

slum and between lithium and total salinity for saline 

waters and brines from Salar de Atacama.

DISTRIBUTION OF LITHIUM IN SALINE 

DEPOSITS OF THE CENTRAL ANDES

Lithium is concentrated in brine in salars and saline 

lakes, in salar crusts, and in the nitrate deposits of the 

coastal region of northern Chile. Brines associated with 

salars contain by far the greatest amounts of lithium and 

offer the greatest potential for future production. Some 

salar crusts may prove to be exploitable, but the amount 

of recoverable lithium is relatively small. The nitrate 

deposits contain lithium that is recoverable as a byproduct. The few saline lakes tested for lithium show 

concentrations of 20-40 mg/1 (Vila, 1975). Other highsalinity lakes, which have not yet been tested for lithium, 

may have still greater concentrations.

Of the more than 75 salars in the central Andean 

region, only four—Atacama, Lagunas, Bellavista, and 

Pintados—have been extensively tested for lithium and 

potash. More than 200 analyses of saline water and 

brine from Salar de Atacama have been published 

(Moraga and others, 1974), and it is evident that this 

salar contains potentially large lithium resources. Most 

of these analyses are from shallow pits along the southern and eastern margin of the salar, and relatively few 

are from the area within the salar that is covered by a 

thick halite crust. Nine drill holes as much as 43 m deep 

also were sampled. Moraga and others (1974) show that 

amounts of both lithium and potassium in brine increase 

inwards from the salar margin. They reported that the
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 73

lithium content of brine in a marginal zone (referred to 

as the zone of efflorescence) averages between 200 and 

300 mg/1, whereas an intermediate or transition zone 

has 500-1,600 mg/1 and the marginal interior halite 

zone has 1,510-6,400 mg/1. Guillermo Chong, co-author 

of this report, found that brines sampled along a 20-km 

line within the halite zone in the southern part of the 

salar averaged 4,100 mg/1 lithium and 12,000 mg/1 

potassium.

Analyses of saline water and brine from another 13 

salars in the Andean Highlands of Chile show lithium 

contents ranging from 3 to 200 mg/1, and potassium 

contents ranging from 154 to 3,000 mg/1 (Vila, 1975, 

G. E. Erickson, unpub. data, 1975). Total dissolved solids range from 17,000 to 400,000 mg/1. Correlations between lithium, potassium, and salinity in these salars are 

only fair in comparison to those of Salar de Atacama. 

Brines containing more than 100 mg/1 lithium were 

found in the salars of Aguas Calientes I, Laco, Pujsa, 

and San Martin (fig. 27). Brines of Salar de Pedernales, 

which are known to be high in potassium, may contain 

more than 100 mg/1 lithium.

Because of the lack of chemical analyses from salars in 

the Andean Highlands of Bolivia and Argentina, it is 

not possible to estimate their lithium potential. 

Nevertheless, it can be suggested that the Salars of 

Coipasa and Uyuni in Bolivia are among the most favorable for accumulation of large quantities of lithium-rich 

brine. 2 These salars consist chiefly of thick halite crusts 

that are subject to partial flooding during the annual 

rainy season. Together with the nearby salars of 

Empexa and Chiguana (Fig. 27) and Lago Poopo, a 

large saline lake northeasteast of Salar de Coipasa, they 

are remnants of the former Lago Minchin, an upper 

Pleistocene lake that extended over an area of about 

40,000 km2 of the present-day Bolivian Altiplano 

(Ahlfeld and Branisa, 1960, p. 158-163). Salars Coipasa 

and Uyuni contain most of the saline materials that accumulated in Lago Minchin and in an earlier Pleistocene 

lake that existed in the same area.

Chemical compositions of brines and crusts of salars 

in the Atacama Desert of coastal Chile were reported by 

Ericksen (1963) and are recorded in unpublished 

analyses of the Coporacion de Fomento de la Produccion of Chile (CORFO), the Institute de Investigaciones 

Geologicas, and the former nitrate company Cia, Salitrera Tarapaca y Antofagasta. The crust and brine of 

Salar de Lagunas are unique in that they contain relatively high concentrations of nitrate, perchlorate, and 

iodate, as well as abundant lithium and potassium. 

Lithium content of the brine and crust of this salar is as 

much as 500 ppm. The presence of unusual saline com2The first known lithium analyses of brine from Saler de Lyuni were made by Shirley L. 

Rettig, U.S. Geological Survey, on two samples collected in April 1976 by William D. Carter, 

U.S. Geological Survey, and Paul Ballon, Servicio Geologico de Bolivia, at the request of the 

senior author of this report. These analyses show 490 and 1,510 ppm lithium, respectively.

ponents in Salar de Lagunas indicates that the brines 

were enriched, at least in part, by rainwater leaching of 

nearby nitrate deposits. Local concentrations also may 

be due to contamination by leach solutions from waste 

dumps at three nitrate beneficiation plants that once 

operated here.

Salar de Bellavista and Salar de Pintados at the western side of the Central Valley in northern Chile have 

silty saline crusts relatively rich in potassium and 

perhaps also in lithium. Ericksen (1963, p. 128-132) reported that 1,700,000 tonnes of salar crust averaging 

2.87 percent K was mined from the southern part of 

Salar de Bellavista. A pit was opened in this area to test 

the rate of regeneration of new potassium-bearing salt 

crust, and two samples of new crust which formed in the 

pit were found to contain 350 ppm and 3,100 ppm 

lithium, and 3 percent and 10 percent potassium. Brine 

from this same pit was found to contain 2,130 mg/1 

potassium, but lithium was not determined.

The nitrate deposits of Chile contain anomalous 

amounts of lithium in the water-soluble salines from 

which the nitrate is recovered. The amount of lithium 

present in this form is generally in the range of 20-50 

ppm but locally is as much as 250 ppm, as indicated by 

about 50 analyses we performed on nitrate ore samples. 

This lithium becomes concentrated in the recycled 

brines utilized to extract the nitrate from the ore. The 

former owner of the two largest nitrate beneficiation 

plants, the Anglo-Lautaro Nitrate Corp., determined 

that the lithium could be recovered by a solar evaporation process integrated with the plants. The calculated 

annual yield was estimated to be 1,610 tonnes of lithium 

sulfate (209 tonnes of lithium) from 17,000,000 tonnes 

of nitrate ore, the annual capacity o,f the two plants. This 

is based on a concentration of about 60 ppm lithium in 

the water soluble portion of the nitrate ore, which is 

about a third of the ore.

SOURCES AND FACTORS FAVORING LITHIUM 

CONCENTRATION IN ANDEAN SALARS

Information about chemical composition of salars and 

associated saline waters is too scanty to allow a precise 

evaluation of the sources of lithium and of the causes for 

its occurrence in relatively high concentrations in certain salars and not in others. However, a volcanic source 

of lithium is suggested, because Pliocene and Quaternary volcanic rocks and their erosion products cover 

large areas in the Andean Highlands where salars are 

most numerous and are virtually the only rocks exposed 

in many of the closed basins. Furthermore, it seems 

likely that thermal spring waters associated with these 

volcanic rocks were major sources of the lithium. White, 

Thompson, and Fournier (this report) point out that 

high-temperature geothermal systems are generally enriched in lithium and that moderately saline waters
74 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

above 200°C associated with silicic volcanic rocks contain 

1-50 ppm Li. They conclude that these hightemperature waters selectively leach lithium from the 

volcanic rocks. Ellis (1975) reported that hightemperature thermal water from the El Tatio geyser 

field, which is in a drainage basin to the north of the 

Salar de Atacama basin, contains 47.5 ppm lithium.

Conditions that would favor concentration of lithium 

in the salars are as follows: (1) the relatively old age of 

basins—some may have been in existence since middle 

or even early Pleistocene; (2) the large basin/salar ratio, 

which might contribute to the high degree of concentration of saline waters; (3) the high degree of basin closure 

so that water loss by either surface or underground flow 

was minimal; and (4) abundant saline-rich rhyolite ashflow tuff subject to leaching and widespread fumarolic 

activity and saline thermal springs associated with volcanic activity. Salar de Atacama, which has the greatest 

lithium concentrations yet known in the region, has 

three of these attributes. It has a relatively small basin/ 

salar ratio as is indicated in figure 27. On the other 

hand, this basin is unique in having Jurassic, Cretaceous, 

and Tertiary saline continental sedimentary rocks 

(Dingman, 1967) that furnished a considerable amount 

of saline material to the salar. These rocks may have 

been a major source of the lithium.

POTENTIAL LITHIUM RESOURCES

Salars in the central Andean region have large potential resources of lithium chiefly in brines and to a lesser 

degree in saline crusts. Of the few salars that have been 

tested for lithium—all in northern Chile—Salar de 

Atacama appears to have the greatest quantity of 

lithium-rich brine. Moraga and others (1974) estimate 

that the brine in a 400-km2 area of Salar de Atacama 

contains 40,000 tonnes of lithium per metre depth. 

(Their calculation was based on an average lithium content of 2,000 mg/1 and a brine recovery of 100 l/m3; this 

gave an estimate of 80,000 tonnes, which the authors 

reduced by half to be conservative.) This estimate was 

made for an area within the central part of the salar 

where several drill holes show the halite crust ranges 

from 50 to 335 m in thickness and where brines sampled

along a 20-km line (see paragraph 2, "Distribution of 

Lithium in Saline Deposits of the Central Andes") were 

found to average 4,100 mg/1 lithium. Consequently, 

total lithium resources may be very large, perhaps 

amounting to several million tonnes. The potential 

lithium resources in brines of other salars in northern 

Chile would be far less. Lithium contents generally are 

not greater than 200 ppm, and the amounts of brines 

are such that a comparable-sized area in most salars 

would yield less than 1,000 tonnes of lithium per metre 

depth.

The lithium potential of salars in the Andean Highlands of Bolivia and Argentina cannot be estimated because of the lack of lithium analyses. However, Salars 

Coipasa and Uyuni in Bolivia appear to be most favorable for accumulation of large amounts of lithium-rich 

brine.

REFERENCES CITED

Ahlfeld, Federico, and Branisa, Leonardo, 1960, Geolog'ia de Bolivia:

La Paz, Inst. Boliviano Petroleo, 245 p. 

Ahlfeld, Federico, and Schneider-Scherbina, Alejandro, 1964, Los

yacimientos minerales y de hidrocarburos de Bolivia: Dept. Nac.

de Geologia Bol. 5, 388 p. 

Clark. F. W., 1924, The data of geochemistry [5th ed.]: U.S. Geol.

Survey Bull. 770, 841 p. 

Dingman, R. J., 1967, Geology and ground-water resources of the

northern part of the Salar de Atacama: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull.

1219, 49 p. 

Ellis, A. J., 1975, Geothermal systems and power development: Am.

Scientist, v. 63, no. 5, p. 510-521. 

Ericksen, G. E., 1961, Rhyolite tuff, a source of the salts of northern

Chile, in Geol. Survey research 1961: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof.

Paper 424, p. C224-C225. 

————1963, Geology of the salt deposits and the salt industry of

northern Chile: U.S. Geol. Survey open-file rept., 164 p. 

Moraga, B. A., Chong D., Guillermo, Fortt Z., M. A., and Henriquez

A., H., 1974, Estudio geologico del Salar de Atacama, Provincia

de Antofagasta: Institute de Investigaciones Geologicas Chile,

Bull. 29, 56 p. 

Muessig, Siegfried, 1966, Recent South American borate deposits, in

Rau, J. L., ed., Second symposium on salt, Volume 1: Northern

Ohio Geol. Soc., p. 151-159. 

Stoertz, G. E., and Ericksen, G. E., 1974, Geology of salars in northern

Chile: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 811, 65 p. 

Vila G., Tomas, 1975, Geologia de los depositos salinos Andinos, Provincia de Antofagasta, Chile: Revista Geologica de Chile no. 2, p.

41-55.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

LITHIUM RESOURCES OF UTAH1

75

By J. A. WHELAN, UNIVERSITY OF UTAH, SALT LAKE CITY, UT and 

CAROL A. PETERSEN, UTAH GEOLOGICAL and MINERAL SURVEY, SALT LAKE CITY, UT

ABSTRACT

Known lithium resources of Utah consist of Great Salt Lake brines, 

subsurface brines of the Great Salt Lake Desert and Sevier Lake, and 

Spor Mountain beryllium ores.

The total metric tonnage of lithium in Great Salt Lake is 526,000, of 

which perhaps half is recoverable. Extraction of lithium from Great 

Salt Lake will be as a byproduct of magnesium-metal or salt recovery.

The Bonneville-Salt-Flats part of the Great Salt Lake Desert has a 

recoverable resource of from 1,300 to 2,000 tonnes. This amount 

could be increased from 1,700 to 2,700 tonnes by recharging a shallow 

brine aquifer now being utilized to produce potassium and magnesium salts with brines from existing deep wells.

Sevier Lake contains a shallow subsurface brine containing 450 to 

540 tonnes of recoverable lithium.

The beryllium ores contain 1,400 to 18,000 tonnes of lithium.

The average lithium content of brines from 58 oil wells in Utah is 

7.1 mg per liter. Brines from three oil wells contain over 39 mg/1 

lithium.

The mean lithium content of 35 hot springs in Utah was 2.33 ppm.

The total lithium resources of Utah are between 200,000 and 

240,000 tonnes. No lithium is produced in Utah at present. Plants to 

recover lithium as a byproduct from existing brine-processing or 

beryllium-extraction plants could recover from 160 to 600 tonnes of 

lithium per year.

INTRODUCTION

Only nonpegmatite sources need to be considered in 

evaluating the lithium resources of Utah, because 

neither spodumene nor other lithium minerals are reported from the few pegmatites of Utah (Bullock, 1967). 

Evaluating nonpegmatite lithium resources is a new endeavor for most geologists, and some of the various 

types of occurrences are discussed by Vine (1975). 

Lithium in the following occurrences will be considered 

in this paper: Great Salt Lake brines, subsurface brines, 

volcanic rocks, and miscellaneous lithium-bearing mineral localities. Location of the occurrences are shown in 

figure 32.

GREAT SALT LAKE BRINES

The brines of Great Salt Lake constitute the largest 

lithium resource of Utah. The lake contains three distinct brine types: (1) a nearly saturated brine (320 g/1 

total dissolved solids) in the area north of a semipermeable railroad causeway, (2) a relatively fresh (117 g/1) 

brine in the south part of the lake at depths less than 

about 7 m, and (3) a brine of intermediate concentration 

(222 g/1) in the south part at depths greater than 7 m. 

The three brine types have formed because Great Salt 

Lake is cut in two by an east-west-trending railroad

'Permission to publish granted by Director, Utah Geological and Mineral Survey.

causeway built of gravel armored with rip-rap. Over 90 

percent of the surface inflow enters the lake south of the 

causeway. Flow through the causeway into the north 

arm is restricted, and high evaporation there forms a 

concentrated brine. The shallow south-arm brine is becoming fresher each year. The deep south-arm brine 

represents return flow from the north arm. The northarm brine contains 64 ppm lithium, the shallow southarm brine contains 22 ppm lithium, and the deep 

south-arm brine contains 43 ppm lithium. This amounts 

to tonnages of 214,000 tonnes, 203,000 tonnes, and 

109,000 tonnes of lithium, respectively, in each of the 

brines; the total tonnage is 526,000 tonnes.

Because lithium follows magnesium during processing of the brines, and because of the low lithium content of the brines, economic recovery of lithium from

Bonneville Salt 

Flat

Spor Mountain 

'Honeycomb Hills

'Clay Basin" 

Field

Red Wash 

Field •

Tintic Mining 

• District

Lake

^Roosevelt KGRA 

Morysvole

Seven Mile 

Canyon «

Rabbit Ears 

Field, .

100 KILOMETRES

FIGURE 32.—Locations of lithium resources and mineral occurrences in Utah.
76 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

Great Salt Lake depends on a viable magnesium industry. NL Industries has a magnesium plant at Rowley, on 

the west side of the lake, that uses shallow south-arm 

brines. Design capacity is 41,000 tonnes of magnesium 

per year; but, to date, the plant has had start-up difficulties and has only produced at a maximum rate of about 

14,000 tonnes per year. About 5 kg of lithium can be 

produced per tonne of magnesium, so the NL plant has 

the potential to produce 70-200 tonnes of lithium per 

year.

Great Salt Lake Mineral and Chemical Corporation, 

located west of Ogden uses north-arm brines. It has a 

design capacity of 220,000 tonnes of potassium sulfate 

annually. Although production figures are not available, 

the plant has been operating successfully. When the 

Great Salt Lake Mineral and Chemical Corporation 

project was started, Dow Chemical Company contracted 

to buy 90,000 tonnes per year of bischofite 

(MgCl2 -6H2O). In 1970, with the magnesium plant 

nearly complete, Dow cancelled the contract. The partially completed plant is now in standby status. Ninety 

thousand tonnes per year of bischofite would represent 

about 8,020 tonnes of magnesium and a potential 

lithium production of 41 tonnes.

Thus, if all the magnesium-production facilities on 

Great Salt Lake should become operative, the lake could 

provide feed for lithium plants capable of producing 

241 tonnes of lithium per year. Of the lithium resources 

in Utah, Great Salt Lake brines probably could be most 

easily developed.

SUBSURFACE BRINES

Subsurface brines considered to be possible sources of 

lithium in Utah include (1) subsurface brines of Bonneville Salt Flats in the Great Salt Lake Desert, (2) subsurface brines of Sevier Lake, (3) oil-field brines, and (4) 

brine that may be produced incidental to geothermal 

development.

SUBSURFACE BRINES OF THE BONNEVILLE SALT FLATS

The high-potash, shallow subsurface brines in the 

western part of the Great Salt Lake Desert were first 

discussed by Nolan (1927). Later studies include those 

of Turk (1973) and Lindenberg (1974).

Turk (1973) discussed the hydrology of the Bonneville Salt Flats, the part of the desert now being 

exploited for potassium and magnesium salts by Kaiser 

Chemicals. He described a shallow brine aquifer, which 

provides brine for potassium and magnesium chloride 

production, and a deep brine aquifer at depths greater 

than about 325 metres. Lindenberg (1974) provided 

additional geochemical data on the shallow brines, 

which he sampled over a considerably larger area than 

that described by Turk (1973). Typical analyses of the

shallow brines are given in table 25.

Turk (1973, p. 17) predicted that the current production rate from the shallow brine aquifer can be maintained for 25-40 years before the brine quality deteriorates from slightly less than 1 percent KC1 to 0.5 percent 

KC1. Assuming the same proportional decline, lithium 

would decrease from about 0.03 g/1 to 0.015 g/1. If the 

decrease were linear, the average lithium content during this time period would be 0.0225 g/1. The assumption of linear decline in brine quality is not valid, as 

Turk (1973, p. 17) noted, but was made by us to simplify 

calculations. Turk assumed a discharge of 700 acre-feet 

(8.6xl05 m3 ) per year. This represents some 19 tonnes 

of lithium per year. On the basis of a field life of 25—40 

years, a potential production of 475-760 tonnes of 

lithium would be reasonable.

Lindenberg's study (1974) increased the known area 

of shallow brine by 2.8 times, so the estimated potential 

production of lithium should be increased to between 

1,300 and 2,000 tonnes.

The deep brine aquifer is penetrated by 13 wells. Typical analyses of the brine from two wells are given in 

table 26. Turk noted that by using the deep brine for

TABLE 25.—Analyses of shallow aquifer brines, Great Salt Lake Desert, 

in grams per liter

[N.D., not determined]

Nolan 

(1927, p. 39)

Turk 

(1973)'

Lindenberg 

(1974)2 Overall 3

ciSO4 = 

C03 =

Na+ 

K+

Ca++ _ 

Sr + + _ 

Mg + + _ 

SiO, ___ HC03 - 

A1+ + +

NO3 -

Total dissolved solids ______

Specific gravity

96.15 

.00 

.00 

4.08 

.00 

.00 

57.30 

2.94 

.002 

1.51 

.00 

1.91 

N.D. 

N.D. 

N.D 

N.D. 

N.D. 

164.7 

@180°C

1.11

@ 25°C 

N.D.

139.63

.038 

N.D. 

4.24 

.00 

.023 

76.7 

4.43 

.003 

1.25 

.057 

1.73 

0087 

.041 

.0018 

.0013 

.0048 

228.28

4 1.150

6 1.145 

7.1

@ 25°C 

not detected: 

Fe, Mn, 

As, PO4

122.37 

N.D. 

N.D.

5.75 

N.D. 

N.D. 

74.71

3.49 

.003

1.39 

N.D.

1.84 

N.D. 

N.D. 

N.D. 

N.D. 

N.D. 

209.55

M.140 

6 1.136 

N.D.

119.38 

N.D. 

N.D.

5.69 

N.D. 

N.D. 

69.57

3.62 

.003

1.38 

N.D.

1.83 

N.D. 

N.D. 

N.D. 

N.D. 

N.D. 

N.D.

N.D. 

N.D.

'Average of 15 analyses given in Turk (1973, p. 13). 

2 Average ol 65 analyses given in Lindenberg (1974, p. 22-28).

Arithmetic mean of first three columns.

^Extrapolated from table, specific gravity \ersus total dissolved solids, given in Levorsen 

(1958, p. 663).

Interpolated from table, specific gravity versus total dissolved solids, given in Levorsen 

(1958, p. 663).

"From graph, total dissolved solids versus specific gravity, given in Whelan (1973, p. 19).

TABLE 26.—Chemical analyses of brine from deep brine aquifer in parts per

million 

[Analyses by Kaiser Chemicals, San Leandro, California; from Turk, 1973, p. 9]

Well 

number Mg SO4

DBW8 . 

DBW13.

1,600

1,500

1,400

1,400

41,400

46,000

1,800

2,000

6,000

6,200

70,000

72,800
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 77

recharge, the life of the project could be extended some 

30-40 percent, indicating a total potential lithium production from the Great Salt Lake Desert of 1,700-2,700 

tonnes. The deep brines are also a possible geothermal 

resource (Whelan and Petersen, 1975).

SEVIER LAKE

Lithium-bearing brines are found at shallow depths in 

the sediments of Sevier Lake, a playa lake in southwestern Utah (Whelan, 1969). The mean of 10 brine 

analyses, all samples from sites in the southern half of 

the playa, is given in table 27.

Assuming that the hydrologic characteristics of Sevier 

Lake sediments are similar to those of the Great Salt 

Lake Desert sediments and calculating the possible 

production for relative sampled areas and brine concentrations, one would obtain a potential of about 450- 

540 tonnes lithium. Because all of the sampled points 

are in the south half of the lake, the resource may be 

double the value given. At present, there is no development of saline industries on Sevier Lake.

OILFIELD BRINES

Another possible source of lithium in Utah is oilfield 

brines. The mean of 58 available lithium analyses of 

Utah oilfield brines is 7.1 mg/1 lithium, with a standard 

deviation of 14.1 mg/1. Oil production in Utah during 

1974 was about 39,400,000 bbl, with a water production 

of about 107,500,000 bbl. Thus, some 17 tonnes of 

lithium are brought to the surface each year in oilfield 

brines. Because of the low lithium content of the brines 

and the fact that brines are produced in varying quantities from scattered fields. Production of lithium from 

most oilfield brines in the near future is doubtful.

Certain oilfield brines, however, are of interest and 

should possibly be investigated further. A sodium 

chloride-type brine from a well (SE^NWK sec. 22, T. 3 

N., R. 24 E., Salt Lake Basin and Meridian) in the Clay 

Basin field contained 85 mg/1 lithium and 50,200 mg/1 

total dissolved solids. This field is reported to have no 

water production.

TABLE 27.—Mean analysis of 10 shallow subsurface brines, southern half of 

Sevier Lake, Utah

Value in 

grams per liter

Cl- ________________________________ 92.40

Mg++ _______________ ________________ 3.44

Ca++ ______________________________ .60

Na+ ________________________________ 64.37

K+ ____________________________________ 2.54

SO4 = -_________ — _________________ 21.66

Br- ._________________________________ .054

Li + __________.___________________ .0225

Boron ________________________________ 035

Total dissolved solids (g/1) _______________ 185.14

Specific gravity ____________________ 1.126

A well (SE^NE^ sec. 19, T. 43 S., R. 22 E.) in the 

Rabbit Ears field produced a sodium chloride-type brine 

containing 72,830 mg/1 total dissolved solids and 58 mg/1 

lithium. This is a one-well field which, in 1974, produced 3,413 bbl of oil and 60,390 bbl of water.

One deep well (SE&SE& sec. 21, T. 7 S., R. 24 E.) in 

the Red Wash field of Uintah County produced a 

sodium-calcium chloride brine containing 144,104 mg/1 

total dissolved solids and 39 mg/1 lithium. This was a dry 

hole, but it indicates that potential for lithium-bearing 

brines may exist at depth in this field.

GEOTHERMAL BRINES

Brine produced from hot-water geothermal systems 

has been considered as a potential lithium resource. 

Thirty-five analyses of hot-spring water in Utah (Mundorff, 1970, p. 12-19) give a mean lithium content of 

2.33 ppm lithium. The highest reported lithium value 

for a Utah hot spring is 2.7 ppm from Roosevelt Hot 

Springs, near Milford, Utah (White and others, 1963). 

White (oral commun., 1976) noted that this same 

lithium analysis was incorrectly reported as 0.27 ppm by 

Mundorff (1970, p. 17).

Most of the hot-spring analyses indicate little potential 

for lithium production as a byproduct of future geothermal development. However, using an estimated potential energy production of 33 MWe-centuries from 

the Roosevelt Known Geothermal Resource Area 

(Nathenson and Muffler, 1975, p. 110) and assuming 

that all the water produced contains 27 ppm lithium, 

about 40,000 tonnes of lithium could be brought to the 

surface in this area.

The possibility that lithium-bearing clays exist in the 

hydrothermally altered rocks associated with geothermal resources should not be overlooked.

VOLCANIC ROCKS

Mineralized rhyolitic crystal-lithic tuffs are mined for 

beryllium in the Spor Mountain district northwest of 

Delta, Utah. The ore-grade tuffs contain anomalous 

amounts of lithium. Lindsey, Ganow, and Mountjoy 

(1973) discussed the area and reported 75 ppm lithium 

in unmineralized vitric tuff and 55 ppm lithium in unmineralized zeolitic tuffs. They described hydrothermally altered argillic tuffs containing 105 ppm beryllium and 230 ppm lithium. Hydrothermally altered 

feldspathic tuffs contained an average of 14 ppm beryllium and 315 ppm lithium. J. A. Whelan (written commun., 1962) reported that a sample from the Hogsback 

ore body contained 1.25 percent beryllium oxide and 

0.10 percent Li2O (420 ppm lithium). A section of the 

Rainbow open pit that averaged 0.19 percent BeO also 

averaged 4,231 ppm lithium (Park, 1968, p. 93-94).

Williams (1963, p. 58) reported 3,175,000 tonnes of
78 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

blocked-out beryllium ore, with an anticipated tonnage 

greatly in excess of 4,500,000 tonnes. Thus, the lithium 

resource of ores of the Spor Mountain beryllium district 

is probably between 1,400 and 18,000 tonnes of lithium. 

At present, about 90,000 tonnes of beryllium ore are 

processed yearly, carrying between 35 and 350 tonnes of 

lithium.

Similar rhyolitic tuffaceous beryllium-bearing rocks 

occur in the Honeycomb Hills, west of the Spor Mountain beryllium deposits. An average beryllium value of 

three analyses (Park, 1968, p. 72) from this area is 0.24 

percent beryllium oxide. Unfortunately, the tuffs were 

not analyzed for lithium. Bullock (1967, p. 167) reported spodumene from these tuffs.

The beryllium occurrences of Utah and other silicic 

volcanic rocks should be prospected for lithium. Other 

beryllium occurrences besides Spor Mountain and the 

Honeycomb Hills that might contain anamalous 

amounts of lithium are found in the Deep Creek Mountains (pegmatitic), Granite Peak (pegmatitic), Sheeprock 

Mountains (beryl disseminated in granite), and Mineral 

Range (skarns).

MISCELLANEOUS LITHIUM MINERAL 

OCCURRENCES IN UTAH

Lithiophorite, a wad containing about 1 percent Li2O, 

has been reported by Bullock (1967, p. 137) from the 

following localities: Seven Mile Canyon and Shinarump 

Nos. 1-3 claims, Grand County; Marysvale district, 

Buddy, Bullion Monarch, Freedom No. 1, and Prospector No. 1 and 3 mines, Piute County. He also reported 

(p. 163) that the lithium iron manganese phosphate, 

sicklerite, occurs in the Tintic district, Juab County.

Dyni (1973) reported a trioctahedral smectite from 

the Roan Cliffs, Uinta Basin, that might be similar to the 

lithium-bearing montmorillonite, hectorite.

These reported occurrences of lithium minerals have 

yet to be evaluated.

CONCLUSIONS

The known lithium resources of Utah include Great 

Salt Lake brines, subsurface brines of the Great Salt 

Lake Desert and Sevier (dry) Lake, and the beryllium 

ores of Spor Mountain. Probable recoverable tonnages 

of the resources are given in table 28. Production could 

be started with minimum delay by adding lithiumrecovery plants to the brine-processing plants on Great 

Salt Lake and the Great Salt Lake Desert and to the 

beryllium mill of Brush-Wellman, near Delta, Utah. 

Probable annual outputs from additions to these plants 

are given in table 28.

TABLE 28.—Estimated recoverable lithium resources of Utah and estimated 

annual recovery possible by adding lithium-recovery plants to existing facilities

[Leaders (____-_) indicate no existing facilities]

Source

Probable

recoverable

resource

(tonnes)

Probable annual

production 

obtainable using

additions to

existing plants

(tonnes)

Great Salt Lake brines _______

Great Salt Lake Desert brines. 

Sevier Lake brines ___________

Geothermal brines____--_-__

Beryllium ores _____________

Approximate total _____

260,000

1,000-3,000

500

0-40,000 

1,000-20,000 

262,500-283,500

110-240 

10

35-350 

158-600

REFERENCES CITED

Bullock, K. C., 1967, Minerals of Utah: Utah Geol. and Mineral. Survey Bull. 76, 237 p.

Dyni, J. R., 1973, Trioctahedral smectite in the Green River Formation, Duchesne County, Utah: U.S. Geol. Survey open-file rept., 

25 p.

Levorsen, A. I., 1958, Geology of petroleum: San Francisco, W. H. 

Freeman and Company, 703 p.

Lindenberg, G. J., 1974, Factors contributing to the variance in the 

brines of the Great Salt Lake Desert and the Great Salt Lake: Utah 

Univ., M.S. thesis, 70 p.

Lindsey, D. A., Ganow, H., and Mountjoy, W., 1973, Hydrothermal 

alteration associated with beryllium deposits at Spor Mountain, 

Utah: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 818-A, 20 p.

Mundorff, J. C., 1970, Major thermal springs of Utah: Utah Geol. and 

Mineral. Survey Water-Resources Bull. 13, 60 p.

Nathenson, Manuel, and Muffler, L. J. P., 1975, Geothermal resources 

in hydrothermal convection systems and conduction-dominated 

areas, in White, D. F., and Williams, D. L., Assessment of geothermal resources of the United States—1975: U.S. Geol. Survey 

Circ. 726, p. 104-121.

Nolan, T. B., 1927, Potash brines in the Great Salt Lake Desert, Utah: 

U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 795-B, p. 29-44.

Park, G. M., 1968, Some geochemical and geochronologic studies of 

the beryllium deposits in western Utah: Utah Univ. M.S. thesis, 

105 p.

Turk, L. J., 1973, Hydrogeology of the Bonneville Salt Flats, Utah: 

Utah Geol. and Mineral Survey Water-Resources Bull. 19, 81 p.

Vine, J. D., 1975, Lithium in sediments and brines—how, why, and 

where to search: U.S. Geol. Survey Jour. Research, v. 3, no. 4, p. 

479-485.

Whelan, J. A., 1969, Subsurface brines and soluble salts of subsurface 

sediments, Sevier Lake, Millard County, Utah: Utah Geol. and 

Mineral. Survey Spec. Studies 30, 13 p.

———1973, Great Salt Lake, Utah—Chemical and physical variations 

of the brines, 1966-1972: Utah Geol. and Mineral Survey 

Water-Resources Bull. 17, 24 p.

Whelan, J. A., and Petersen, C. A., 1975, Great Salt Lake, UtahChemical and physical variations of the brine, water-year 1973: 

Utah Geol. and Mineral Survey Water-Resources Bull. 20, 29 p. 

White, D. E., Hem, J. D., and Waring, G. A., 1963, Chemical composition of subsurface waters: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 440-F, 

67 p.

Williams, Norman C., 1963, Beryllium deposits, Spor Mountain, Utah, 

in Guidebook to the geology of Utah, No. 17, Beryllium and 

uranium mineralization in western Juab County, Utah: Utah 

Geol. Soc., p. 36-59.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

PRELIMINARY DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF A PROCESS 

FOR THE EXTRACTION OF LITHIUM FROM SEAWATER1

By MEYER STEINBERG and Vi-DuoNG DANG, 

DEPARTMENT OF APPLIED SCIENCE, BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY, UPTON, NY

79

ABSTRACT

The U.S. demand for lithium by the industrial sector is estimated to 

increase from 2.7xl06 kg (3,000 short tons) in 1968 to 1.2xl07 kg 

(13,200 tons) in the year 2000. Projections of the demand for lithium 

by a fusion power economy are subject to uncertainties in the future 

power demands of the United States and the wide range of requirements for various designs of controlled thermonuclear reactors 

(CTR). For a one million MWe CTR (D-T fuel cycle) economy, growing into the beginning of the next century (the years 2000 to 2030), the 

cumulative demand for lithium is estimated to range from 

(0.55~4.7)xl07 to l.OxlO9 kg ((0.6~5.1)xl04 to 106 tons). The present estimates of the available U.S. supply are 6.9xl08 kg (7.6xl05 

tons) of lithium from mineral resources and 4.0xl09 kg (4.4xl06 

tons) of lithium from concentrated natural brines. With this kind of 

demand approaching supply, there is concern for lithium availability 

in a growing CTR (D-T fuel cycle) economy. There is, however, a vast 

supply of lithium in seawater. Although the concentration of lithium 

in seawater is dilute (170 ppb), the total quantity available is large— 

estimated to be 2.5xl014 kg (2.8xlOn tons)—thus insuring an unlimited resource for a long-term fusion economy. These estimates provide the incentive for devising an economical process for the extraction of lithium from the sea.

A preliminary process design for the extraction of lithium from 

seawater is presented on the basis of the literature data. The essential 

features of the process are that seawater is first evaporated by solar 

energy to increase the concentration of lithium and to decrease the 

concentration of other cations in the bittern which then passes into a 

Dowex-502 ion exchange bed for cation adsorption. Lithium ions are 

then eluted with dilute hydrochloric acid, forming an aqueous lithium 

chloride which is subsequently concentrated. Lithium metal is then 

formed by electrolysis of lithium chloride. The energy requirement 

for lithium extraction varies between 0.08 and 2.46 K\Vh(e)/g for a 

range of production rates varying between 104 and 108 kg/yr. This 

energy requirement is relatively small when compared to the energy 

produced from the use of lithium in a CTR having a value of 3,400 

kWh(e)/g Li. Production cost of the process is estimated to be in the 

range of 2.2 to 3.2 cents/g Li.

To obtain a more definitive basis for the process design, it is recommended that a thorough phase equilibria study of the solid-liquid 

crystallization processes of seawater be conducted. Uncertainties exist 

in the operation of large solar ponds for concentrating large quantities 

of seawater. A continued thorough search for a highly selective adsorbent or extractant for Li from low concentration aqueous solutions 

should be made. Investigation of other physical separation processes 

such as the use of membranes should be investigated.

INTRODUCTION

The lithium industry was a small industry before

'This work was performed under the auspices of the Controlled Thermonuclear Reactor 

Division (CTR) of the U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration.

2 Any use of trade names is for descriptive purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey.

World War II. During the war, it was necessary to develop a hydrogen storage means for the warships to lift 

equipment by balloon in case of emergency. Lithium 

hydride was developed for that purpose. A small 

amount of lithium hydride can react with seawater to 

release a large quantity of hydrogen (Hader and others, 

1951). After the war, lithium requirement for nuclear 

purposes stimulated the production of lithium for some 

years during 1954—1960. Excess lithium produced in 

those years required more commercial end use after the 

need for lithium by the Atomic Energy Commission 

(AEG) decreased in 1960.

Commerical uses of lithium and its compounds are in 

the following categories (Cummings, 1968; Shreve, 

1967). Lithium itself is mainly used for ceramics, glass, 

and multipurpose greases. Other commercial uses of 

lithium and its compounds are for automotive, metallurgy, air conditioning, batteries, and so forth. Besides 

the commercial use of lithium, it is anticipated that 

lithium can be used as blanket material in the fusion 

reactor. Lithium has been proposed for the blanket 

material of the first wall of a fusion reactor (Controlled 

Thermonuclear Research Division, 1973) because its 

nuclear properties are ideal, its thermal conductivity is 

high, it is a desirable coolant, and above all, it is tritium 

breeding material. A major difficulty with lithium as a 

controlled thermonuclear reactor (CTR) coolant is its 

high electrical conductivity which leads to excessive 

pressure drop and pumping power in circulating it as 

coolant in the vicinity of the strong magnetic field of the 

plasma. To overcome this difficulty, Sze and Stewart 

(1974) proposed a method of electrical insulation. Other 

alternative methods (El-Wakil, 1971) are the use of 

lithium compounds which may be one of the following 

four materials: (1) molten salts such as LiF-BeF2 eutectic 

called flibe, (2) lithium nitrates along with other nitrates, 

(3) mixtures of liquid metals and molten salts such as 

lithium and flibe, and (4) LiAl compound (Lazareth and 

others, 1975).

Use of lithium for blanket or coolant material can be 

viewed from an energy point of view (Holdren, 1971). 

The basic deuterium-tritium reaction will release a neutron, an alpha particle, and an energy of 17.6 MeV carried by the neutron and alpha particle. Deuterium is 

available in seawater but natural tritium is scarce. Bom-
80 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

barded by a neutron, lithium can be used as a breeder 

for tritium in the fusion reactor. Because of this characteristic, lithium becomes one of the unique elements in 

the fusion reactions. The energy value of one gram of 

lithium can be increased by increasing the breeding 

ratio (tritons produced/tritons consumed) or increasing 

the amount of energy per fusion. Lee (1969) estimated 

that the effective energy content of natural Li ranges 

from about 8.5xlO3 kWh (normal) per gram to 2.7x104 

kWh (thermal) per gram of natural lithium. Natural 

lithium consists of 7.5 percent Li6 and 92.5 percent Li7 .

SUPPLY AND DEMAND OF LITHIUM

Production of lithium for various commercial end 

uses has been described previously. Fusion power 

should be available at the turn of the century. Natural 

lithium demand for fusion reactors varies depending on 

the reactor type as is shown in table 29. For a solid 

lithium blanket, the quantity required is about 5.5—46.8 

kg/MWe of natural lithium or 0.46-3.9 kg/MWe of 90 

percent enriched in Li6 depending on the first wall load 

and thermal conversion efficiency. For a liquid lithium 

blanket, the quantity required may be as high as about 

1,000 kg/MWe. It should be noted that the minimum 

activity solid blanket is 90 percent enriched in Li6, while 

the liquid coolant blanket is natural lithium (7.5 percent 

Li6 ). In the following, all the quantities of lithium expressed are in terms of the amount of natural lithium. 

The total lithium demand consists of both use in the 

blanket inventory and burning on a continuing basis as 

to form tritium. Tritium is thus part of the fuel cycle. 

With the present state of knowledge of the technology, 

an order of magnitude estimate rather than exact values 

can only be made at this time. Figure 33 shows the 

production and demand of lithium as a function of time. 

This chart indicates the slow growth of the industry 

prior to World War II and shows the influence of wartime demands, especially in the peak production year of 

1944. Projection of future production for conventional 

use is obtained by a linear regression based on the production rate of previous years. Production of lithium in 

1968 was about 3,000 short tons (2.7xl06 kg, Cummings, 1968). With an annual increase in the rate of 

about 5 percent, the lithium production in 2000 is estimated to be 1.2 x 107 kg/year. When the requirement of

TABLE 29.—Lithium requirement per megawatt for various kinds affusion 

reactors inventory

BNL

Reactor ORNLa LLL DT* minimum 

type —————— ORMAK3 Tokamak3 0Pinch a laser mirror activityb

Lithium 

required 

per megawatt 

(kg/MW) ------ 804 377 325 182 5.5-46.8

Controlled Thermonuclear Research Division (1973). 

"Powell.J. R. (1975).

10"

10

Q

Z 

< 

5 

UJ 1

Q 10

(r

o

o

O

I I06 

rr

10

RANGE OF 

CUMULATIVE 

DEMAND FOR 

CTR REACTOR^

MINIMUM 

ANNUAL 

DEMAND 

FOR CTR 

REACTOR

PROJECTIONS:

• LITHIUM DEMAND FOR THE ~ 

CONVENTIONAL INDUSTRY :

• CUMULATIVE LITHIUM DEMAND ! 

FOR THE CONVENTIONAL INDUSTRY 

PLUS FUSION REACTORS

MINIMUM ANNUAL LITHIUM DEMAND 

FOR FUSION REACTORS PLUS : 

CONVENTIONAL INDUSTRY :

1930 1950 1970 1990 2010 

YEARS

2030 2050

FIGURE 33.—Lithium production rate and demand projections.

fusion power in the United States reaches about 106 

MWe beyond 2030, the quantity of natural lithium inventory required ranges from about 0.55X 107~4.7x 107 

kg (Powell, 1975) for enriched solid CTR blankets to as 

high as 109 kg for liquid lithium coolant blankets. 

Superimposing these quantities on the previous one for 

commercial use, the total quantity of lithium required 

lies between 4.3xl07 and 109 kg beyond the year 2030 

(the Energy Advisory Panel, 1973). Figure 33 gives the 

general trend of lithium production and demand for 

various time periods. Future projections of these curves 

may change with respect to the time scale, but the shape 

of the curve should remain the same.

Conventional lithium sources are minerals and brines. 

In the United States most of the lithium minerals come 

from Kings Mountain, North Carolina. Mainly 

spodumene and some amblygonite are mined in North 

Carolina. South Dakota also has some reserves which 

consist of spodumene, amblygonite, and lepidolite. 

Elemental composition of these minerals is shown in 

table 30. Spodumene has the highest lithium composition as compared to the other minerals listed in the table, and more than half of the Free World's output of 

lithium oxide came from this source in 1963. Estimation
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 81

of the total quantity of resources from these materials is 

about 6.89X10 8 kg, as can be seen in table 30.

In order to produce more lithium and to reduce mining operations which rely on relatively expensive mining 

and conventional hydrometallurgical processing, brine 

has been investigated for an alternative source for 

lithium. Lithium has been found in brines in several 

places such as Silver Peak, Nevada; Great Salt Lake, 

Utah; Searles Lake, California; and Bonneville, Utah. 

Of these locations, lithium concentration is highest in 

Silver Peak, Nevada, as can be seen in table 30 (Brennan, 1966). Commercial production has been carried 

out in Nevada, Utah, and California. Estimates of the 

content of two of the richest lithium brines are 3.45x 109 

kg in Silver Peak, Nevada, and 5.91 x 10 8 kg in the Great 

Salt Lake in Utah, as is shown in table 30.

The total estimated supply of lithium from brine and 

mineral reserves is thus about 4.73X109 kg, which 

comes close to the maximum cummulative quantity demanded for fusion reactors after 2030, estimated to be 

as high as 109 kg. If there is any additional large demand for lithium, such as for lithium sulfur batteries 

and for Li7 as water conditioner in fission reactors, the 

reserves will not be sufficient to sustain a long term fusion economy. To remedy this situation, a large new 

lithium source of supply should be explored in conjunction with a reduction effusion reactor lithium demand.

In this report, seawater is examined as an alternate 

large source for Li. The concentration of lithium in seawater has been determined to be 0.17 ppm (Riley and 

Tongudai, 1964; Riley and Skirrow, 1965; Chow and 

Goldberg, 1962). Although the lithium concentration in 

the sea is very dilute, its quantity is tremendous— 

estimated to be about 2.5xl014 kg. If annual requirement for lithium is a maximum of 4.32X 106 kg/yr after 

2030 (Powell, 1975) for solid blanket or even about 

twenty times larger than the above quantity for liquid 

blanket, the supply of lithium from the sea can last a 

million years or more. Thus the presence of an unlimited fuel resource as promised for a deuterium economy 

becomes possible. Obviously this is possible only if the 

technology for extraction of lithium from seawater becomes economically feasible.

The objective of the present paper is to outline a 

process for the extraction of lithium from seawater and 

to determine in a preliminary manner the mass, energy 

balance, and economics of such a process.

PROCESS CONCEPT FOR EXTRACTION OF 

LITHIUM FROM SEAWATER

Regardless of which process scheme is considered, the 

minimum theoretical energy requirement for extraction 

of lithium from seawater can be determined from the 

equation of minimum free energy change, AF =RTln 

(yN), where AF is computed to be 0.07 kWh (thermal)/ 

gmLi; AF is the difference in free energy, R is the thermodynamic gas constant, / is absolute temperature in 

degrees Kelvin, and yN is the activity of the dilute 

species.

Several possible routes for lithium extraction were 

considered mainly based on a study of the literature. 

The various processes considered for the concentration 

of dilute species included adsorption, solvent extraction, 

ion exchange, evaporation, precipitation, and electrochemical separation. Ideally, it would be most advantageous to have a specific selective adsorbent for lithium. 

Although this is technically possible our literature survey did not reveal such an agent. As a result, preliminary calculations indicated that an extraction process 

involving concentration by solar evaporation followed 

by ion exchange and finally electrolytic separation may 

be a reasonable process approach. This process has been 

determined to be a more economical one than a process 

using solar energy alone for salt separation. The plant 

can be located either by the seashore or on an offshore 

island. The ion exchange beds may be built in the strait 

so that power required to pump seawater to the beds 

may be eliminated.

TABLE 30.—Mineral contents and sources of lithium

[weight percent]

Mineral

Silver Peak, 

Nevada 3

Great Salt Lake, 

Utah 3 Sea water b Spodumene c' d * Petalite c ' d* Lepidolitec' d* Amblygonitec ' d*

Silicon____ _______________________________

Chloride- ______ .. ._ __ __ _.__ ...

Total lithium estimated (kg) __ _ ___

_______ 7.5

_— — .06

_______ 1.0

— _— 11.7

7.0

.8

.03 04

.27

2.5X1014

0.36

.60

34

2.80

29.7

13.9

QK

0.68

36.2

8.81

6.89x10"

0.50

23.63

13 30

.29

0.88

.85

* All the metals are in oxide forms. Another major element in amblygonite is phosphorus.

jj Brennan (1966).

b Riley and Skirrow (1965, p. 164).

c, Cummings (1968).

d Mellor (f946, p. 425).
82 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

Extraction of sodium chloride and magnesium from 

seawater by solar evaporation has been practiced on a 

commercial scale for many years (Shrier, 1952; 

Schambra, 1945). Extraction of uranium from seawater 

by an ion exchange method was proposed by Davies and 

others (1964). The concentration of lithium in seawater 

lies between that of sodium and uranium. The application of solar evaporation alone can hardly produce pure 

lithium without subsequent chemical treatment, because 

of its dilute concentration. Application of ion exchange 

beds alone will require a large quantity of ion exchange 

resins and therefore become uneconomical. Hence, a 

method of combination of solar evaporation and ion 

exchange is proposed for extraction of lithium from the 

sea. The separation and quantitative determination of 

lithium in seawater have been carried out by several 

investigators (Chow and Goldberg, 1962; Riley and 

Tongudai, 1964; Leont'eva and Vol'khin, 1973) using 

ion exchange methods. Table 31 lists a survey of these 

methods. Strelow and others (1974) separated lithium 

from sodium, beryllium, and many other elements by 

eluting lithium with 1 molar nitric acid in 80 percent 

methanol from a column of sulphonated polystyrene 

cation-exchange resin. This method is similar to that of 

Riley and Tongudai (1964) and may be used for separation of lithium from seawater. The proposed large-scale 

engineering process design is based on the laboratory 

results of Riley and Tongudai (1964).

A schematic flow diagram of the process is shown in 

figure 34. Seawater flows in the solar pond by tidal 

waves. Ponds can be built according to the topography 

of the seashore. The concentration ponds should be 

built at a higher elevation and the crystallization pond 

will be built at a lower elevation so that concentrated 

brine can flow from the concentration pond to crystallization pond by gravity. In the concentration areas, water

is evaporated successively to different concentrations of 

lithium in ponds of various sizes. In the process of fractional crystallization of seawater, sodium chloride, calcium sulfate, and magnesium chloride will precipitate 

first because of their much higher concentration and 

thus will reach their solubility limit first. Assuming the 

salts precipitated out in the order with calcium sulfate 

first, followed by sodium chloride and magnesium 

chloride, it is found that when the seawater is concentrated to 106 parts of original seawater by evaporation, 

then lithium chloride will begin to precipitate. The solar 

pond systems can be designed to be big enough so that 

two parts in 106 parts of water is left after solar evaporation. In this manner, the size and capital investment of 

the ion exchange bed can be greatly reduced.

The concentrated lithium brine is passed into the precleaned ion exchange bed of Dowex 50-X16 (polymer 

beads of polystyrene crosslinked with 16 percent 

polyvinylbenzene). The characteristic of the Dowex 

resin is selective for exchange of its hydrogen ion with 

the cations in the seawater in the order of potassium, 

sodium, and lithium followed by magnesium. After 

lithium ions are adsorbed, the remaining seawater will 

be concentrated in a smaller solar pond to concentrate 

the chloride ions in solution to a stronger hydrochloric 

acid. One can design the size of the bed to be big enough 

so that it can be operated 24 hours before the bed is 

saturated. In order to maintain continuous operations, a 

second bed is needed so that while one bed is functioning for the adsorption mode, the other bed can operate 

in the elution mode. Lithium ions are first eluted from 

the pregnant bed with 0.2-0.5 normal hydrochloric 

acid. The eluted lithium chloride solution from the bed 

can flow in the evaporator to obtain concentrated 

lithium chloride or recycle back to the bed in order to 

elute more lithium ions. The lithium chloride then flows

TABLE 31.—Literature on separation and determination of lithium from seawater

Ocean or sea

Li 

concentration

(Mg/D Method of separation

Method of 

determination

(1) Marchand (1899) .. ... . .

(2) Thomas and Thompson (1933) __ - ..

(3) Goldschmidt and others (1933)

(4) Strock (1936) __ . ___ _ .

(5) Bardet and others (1937) .

(7) Chow and Goldbert (1962) ......

(8) Kappanna and others (1962) . .. . _.

(9) Riley and Tongudai (1964) .... .

(10) Leont'eva and Vol'khin (1973)

coastal waters). 

Pacific. .. .... .

Indian (coastal waters)

Hieh mineral solution

200 

100

72 

140 

200

170 

173 

160

183 

11.000

Precipitate Ca and Mg as carbonates, NaCl 

precipitated with alcohol or HC1. Residual 

Mg precipitated. Filtrate evaporated to 

dryness and residue extracted with alcohol.

Li separated from NaCl by amyl-alcohol extraction. Other elements removed by repeated precipitation and evaporation 

Concentrated by evaporation and elements 

removed by precipitation. 

Sample enriched with 6 Li. Li separated by 

ion exchange and eluted with HC1. 

Li + residual Mg precipitated as phosphate 

and weighed. Mg determined titrimetrically with EDTA. 

Sample enriched with Li. Li separated by 

ion exchange and then eluted with HC1. 

ISM-1 ion-sieve cation exchange.

Gravimetric as Li3 PO4 . 

Visual flame spectrophotometry.

Spectrographic on sea 

salts. 

Spectrographic on dry 

salts. 

Gravimetric as Li2 SO4 .

Gravimetric. 

Isotope dilution. 

Gravimetric.

Flame photometry. 

Do.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

0.2-0.5N_____ HCI

83

SEA

WATER

2.74X10'* g/hi

TURBINE

FIGURE 34.—Schematic flow diagram for extraction of lithium from seawater.

into an electrolyzer where lithium is electrolyzed. Hydrogen and chlorine from the electrolyzer react in a 

burner to form hydrogen chloride which is then dissolved in water from the evaporator to form dilute hydrochloric acid. The dilute hydrochloric acid is recycled 

back to the ion exchange bed to elute lithium ions. 

Other cations such as sodium, potassium ions, and so 

forth will be eluted by concentrated hydrochloric acid 

(8 TV) from the ion exchange bed after lithium ions are 

eluted out by dilute hydrochloric acid and before fresh 

seawater is passed in the bed. The eluted effluent is then 

passed back to the sea.

Evaporators used are triple-effect backward-feed 

evaporators. The assumed steam economy (total water 

evaporated/total steam supplied) is three. Boiling point 

elevation in each evaporator is neglected. Electrolyzer 

design follows closely the one described by Hader and 

others (1951) for electrolysis of lithium chloride.

PROCESS DESIGN AND ECONOMIC ANALYSIS3

In the present design calculations, W gm/hr of lithium 

is taken as the production unit throughout and all the 

design quantities are based on this variable. Once W is

3 The following discussion of the engineering design for a method of extracting lithium 

from seawater employs English units as the fundamental data for discussion. It involves land 

area in acres and square miles, equipment size and capacity in standard American sizes, and 

costs in dollars and cents. Conversion to metric units is not practical. Editor.

defined, all other quantities may be computed.

The first major unit to design is the solar pond system. 

The rate of evaporation of water by solar energy is an 

important issue here. From a simple energy balance, 

one can take the heat required for evaporation to be 

supplied by solar radiation according to the following 

equation:

M\=BAt, (1)

where A is latent heat of water taken to be 1,000 Btu/lb; 

B is the daily average solar energy received on the 

ground that varies from a few hundred to 2,500 Btu/ft2 

(Lof, 1966; Pancharatnam, 1972); t is the time interval 

during which the seawater receives solar energy for 

evaporation;^ is the pond area in ft2 ; andM is the mass 

of water evaporated in pounds. Validity of this equation 

can be seen from data of Silver Peak (Brennan, 1966) 

which shows that 107 Ib/yr of lithium carbonate is produced in a pond of 910 acres. Daily solar energy radiation received on the ground is taken to be 1,500 Btu/ft2 . 

In order to obtain the number of active days of evaporation from about May to September each year (the period 

where abundant sunshine is received on ground in the 

West Coast), a correction factor of 0.5 is needed to validate the results of Silver Peak (Brennan, 1966) in using 

equation (1) which is a simple and good approximation 

for large complex solar pond systems. Hence, one can
84 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

then apply equation (1) for solar pond design for extraction of W gm/hr of lithium from seawater having an 

initial lithium concentration of 170 ppb. If we select a 

plant location on the Southwest coast of the country with 

hourly solar energy intensity of 187.5 Btu/hr ft2 and 

time of evaporation to be 8,000 hr/yr, we can calculate 

the pond area to be 0.288 x 105W ft2 in order to evaporate 2.36xl010 W g/yr of seawater. For a production 

rate of lithium of 106 kg/yr which is sufficient for one 

1,000 MWe fusion reactor of ORMAK or one hundred 

1,000 MWe fusion reactors of Brookhaven National 

Laboratory (BNL) minimum activity blanket, the area of 

solar pond required is about 155 square miles. Utilization of waste heat of about 3x 109 Btu/hr from a 1,000 

MWe fusion reactor for part of the heat supply for solar 

evaporation can also be considered. With the present 

design, it is found that using the waste heat for solar 

evaporation can only be reduced by about 0.6 square 

miles, or about 0.3 percent of the land calculated without using waste heat.

The concentration of cations initially in the seawater 

which will precipitate in a salt form such as sodium 

chloride, calcium sulfate, magnesium carbonate, potassium chloride, and so forth, is about 0.0351 g/g seawater. When two parts of the initial 106 parts of seawater is 

left from evaporation (lithium chloride will begin to 

precipitate when 1 part of the initial 106 parts of seawater is left), 12.6 W g/hr of bittern flows into the ion 

exchange bed for cation adsorptions. More than 99.9 

percent of CaSO4 , NaCl, MgCl2 , and KC1 is precipitated 

in the crystallization ponds. The flow rate of bitterns 

that contain cations is 0.568 W g-equivalent/hr. The 

capacity of Dowex-50 is 4.32 meg/g and the design of 

the ion exchange bed is for a 24-hour operation period 

before switching over to another bed. Then the total 

amount of resin required is 6,320 W g. The density of 

the resin is 0.802 g/cm3 , so the volume of each bed is 

4.14X103 (WIN) cm3 , where N is the number of beds. 

The ratio of height to diameter of the bed is taken to be 

15 (Dow Chemical Company, 1958; Chow and 

Goldberg, 1962; Riley and Tongudai, 1964), so height 

and diameter of each bed are 93.5 (WV/V) 1/3 cm and 6.23 

(W/N) 1/* cm, respectively.

According to Riley and Tonguadi (1964), 500 ml of 

0.5 normal HCL is used to elute 1.17 mg of lithium. 

Theoretically one equivalent of hydrogen ion can displace one equivalent of lithium so the hydrochloric acid 

can recycle 1,176 times to elute lithium in the bed before 

it passes into the evaporator to drive off water from 

aqueous LiCl. The circulation load of hydrochloric acid 

is 1.5 W gal/min. Riley and Tonguadi reported that one 

liter of 4 N HC1 is used to elute other cations such as 

sodium, potassium, and so forth from the bed. In the 

present operation, the concentrated hydrochloric acid

required is less than that used by Riley and Tonguadi 

because more than 99.9 percent of the cations are precipitated. With this reduction of cations in the bittern, 

25.6 W g/hr of 47V hydrochloric acid is needed.

When all the hydrogen ions in 0.27V hydrochloric acid 

are displaced by lithium ions in the ion exchange bed, 

LiCl of 8.48 g/1 flows into the evaporator at a rate of 746 

W cm3/hr.

To obtain a solid lithium chloride in the evaporator, 

99.152 percent of the water has to be evaporated. The 

evaporator type is a triple effect backward feed with a 

steam economy of three. Process steam at 140 psi and 

353°F is used to supply heat of evaporation of water. 

Using a heat transfer coefficient of 500 Btu/hr ft2 °F, one 

can estimate the heat transfer area of the evaporator to 

be 4.62xlO~3 W square feet.

The electrolyzer used is similar to the one described 

by Hader and others (1951) except larger in scale. A cell 

with dimensions of 14 ft by 21 ft by 10.5 ft is used and its 

capacity is 161 Ib/hr. Fourteen graphite anodes, 1.25 ft 

in diameter and 21 ft long, are supported from above 

the cell and extend downward into the electrolyte bath. 

The cathode is made of steel. Operating conditions 

would be the same as in a conventional cell (Hader and 

others, 1951). Table 32 shows a summary of the dimensions and number of major units. The area of the solar 

pond is a significant factor in the present process. Table 

33 shows the areas of ponds required for various production rates of lithium based on equation (1).

An important aspect of the process is the energy requirement. Mechanical energy is required to transport 

bittern and hydrochloric acid between the ion exchange 

bed and other pieces of equipment. The mechanical 

energy equation for fluid transport in the present system is

g A U2 2fLu

— ^h + -—- + -L- + Ws=Q, (2) 

gc 2gc gcD

where the first term is for potential energy, the second 

term is for kinetic energy, the third term is frictional 

losses in the pipe line, with Fanning friction factor/, 

length of pipe L, diameter of pipe D and the fourth term 

is the pumping power required with the pumping efficiency 80 percent. Writing the velocity term in terms of 

the mass flow rate of liquid and the diameter of pipe, 

one can rewrite equation (2) as follows:

8G2 32LG2 +Ws=0. (3)

g gcp 2 2D4 gcp2 2D$

By substituting the mass flow rate for bittern (3.5x 10~3 

W Ib/hr), 0.57V HC1 (6.3 W Ib/hr), 47V HC1 (5.64x10-2 

W Ib/hr), height of ion exchange bed and length of 

transporting line which is taken 7.1 times of the bed 

height, one can obtain the pumping power required in
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 

TABLE 32.—Extraction of lithium from seawater—summary of dimensions and numbers of major pieces of equipment

85

Equipment Ion exchange bed Pumps

Dimensions Height (A) = 3.07 (W7JV) 1/3 ; 7,000 gal/min 1 

diameter (D)=A/15.

Number of units (N) JV-(153.5//03 _V~2.14x 10~4W

Values are given for N=17 when 27 

W = 1.25xl05 g/hr. A =60 ft 

D= 4 ft 

N = 5 when 

A =90 ft 

D= 6 ft

TABLE 33. — Extraction of lithium from seawater. Solar pond area as a function of lithium production rate

rate (kg/yr) (square miles)

104 1 55

105 ________________________________ __ ___ 15.5

106 ____ _ ___ __ ___ ___ _ _ _ 155

Note: for higher production rate, one can have plants located in several sites so that the 

requirement for solar pond area will not be concentrated in one location.

terms of kWh(e)/lb Li as 

0,35x10-9^ , j 35xlo 4/H 061x10 u W2h

D4 D5 '

The thermal energy required in the evaporation is 73.1 

kwh(thermal)/lb Li. With 80 percent cell efficiency, 

energy required in the electrolyzer is 8.15 kWh(e)/lb Li;

so, total energy required for extraction of lithium from 

seawater by the present process in terms of kWh(e)/lb Li 

is then

U. 3D X 1U ,f7 . „ fr v-irv— 4 / i f\ pi^rv P1s,-in~ll YVal . qi-i qf\

D4 D5

Table 34 shows a summary of energy requirements 

calculated from the above expression for various lithium 

production rates, pipe sizes for liquid transport, and 

heights of ion exchange bed. When the lithium production rate is less than 105 kg/yr, the energy requirement 

for the present process is mainly for thermal energy in 

the evaporation and electrical energy for the electrolyzer. At a higher production rate, pumping energy 

becomes more important. When the lithium production 

rate is less than 106 kg/yr, energy requirement for 

lithium extraction is less than 0.2 kWh(e)/g Li. Energy 

requirement increases with increase in lithium production rate and the height of the ion exchange bed mainly 

due to increase in pumping power for liquid transport 

in the pipe line. However, increased pipe size will deEvaporator Electrolyzer Solar pond

"otal area=4.62x 10~3W ft2 21 ft by 14 ft by 10.5 ft Area= -^

W JV=3 N= ,. "fi1 155 mi2 or

454X151 12.4 mixl2.4 mi

645 ft2 each 2

TABLE 34. — Summary of energy requirements for lithium extraction from 

seawater at various lithium production rates, pipe size for liquid transport, 

and height of ion exchange bed

Lithium

rate Diameter of pipe exchange bed Li Production*

(kg/yr) (D(ft) ) (A(ft) ) kWh(e)/gd (kWh(e)/lb)

104 1 60 0.082 (37.39)

1 90 0.082 (37.39) 

2 60 0.082 (37.39) 

105 1 60 0.083 (37.46) 

1 90 0.165 (37.50) 

2 60 0.082 (37.39) 

106 1 60 0.098 (44.46) 

1 90 0.106 (48.00) 

2 60 0.083 (37.61)

107 1 60 1.642 (745.39) 

1 90 2.422 (1,099.39) 

2 60 0.131 (59.52) 

108 2.5 60 1.667 (761.5) 

2.5 90 2.460 (1,123.6) 

3 60 0.719 (328.4)

*Energy requirements include pumping energy, evaporator energy, and energy for electrolysis.

crease energy requirements, as can be seen in a decrease

from 1.667 to 0.719 kWh(e)/g for a pipe size increase 

from 2.5 to 3.0 foot diameter at lithium production rates 

of 108kg/yr and bed height of 60 feet. Even using the 

most energy intensive case in our study (2.46 kWh(e)/g) 

for production of lithium of 10 8kg/yr which is sufficient 

to build 124 ORMAK or 104BNL minimum activity 

blanket fusion reactors of 1,000 MW(e), one can see that 

the present process is still an energy efficient one compared to the minimum natural lithium energy content 

estimated by Lee (1969) for fusion reactor as 3,400 

kWh(e)/g Li. 

A preliminary economic assignment of the process 

has also been studied. A solar pond is made of a dike 

surrounding an area holding seawater and can be constructed at a negligible cost compared to the other major 

items such as equipment and ion exchange beds. The 

cost of ion exchange resins was obtained from Dow
86 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

Chemical Company (1974, written commun.). The cost 

of the pump is obtained from Peters and Timmerhaus 

(1968, p. 466). The cost of the electrolyzer is evaluated 

from its basic material cost such as steel and graphite. 

The cost of the evaporator and burner for HC1 is obtained from Popper (1970, p. 145 and p. 87). Table 35 

lists the capital investment of the present process for 

extraction of lithium from seawater in terms of W g/hr 

of lithium production rate in 1970 dollars. Results of the 

capital investment for three different lithium production rates (104-106 kg/yr) are exhibited in table 36. Table 

37 gives the production cost of the process. The cost of 

steam is reasonably taken to be 0.249 cents/1,000 g 

($1.15/1,000 Ib) (Peters and Timmerhaus, 1968, p. 772) 

or 0.07 cents/g Li, and a small cost is taken for HC1 in 

the recycling elution process. Table 36 and figure 35 

shows the lithium production cost versus lithium production rate. The production costs range from 2.2 cents 

to 3.2 cents/g. It is seen that the production cost (1974 

value) is competitive with the cost of lithium at 2 cents/g 

(Holdren, 1971. The costs are somewhat higher than 

the selling price of lithium at 2 cents/g (Holdren, 1971). 

In terms of use in fusion reactors the per kWh(e) cost is 

no more than 0.01 mill/k\Vh(e), which thus insures a 

negligible cost. Of main importance is the resource 

availability which is insured by the sea.

CONCLUSION

A process for the separation of lithium from seawater 

is designed based on solar evaporation and ion exchange sorption/desorption followed by electrolytic recovery for metal. The preliminary analysis shows that 

the process appears to be technically feasible. Uncertainties exist in the practical operation of large ponds. The

energy requirement for lithium extraction by this process can be as low as 0.082 to as high as 2.46 kWh(e)/g Li 

depending on lithium production rate. Compared to the 

equivalent minimum nuclear energy content of natural 

lithium of 3,400 kWh(e)/g, the energy requirement for 

this process is relatively small. A preliminary economic 

analysis shows that the production cost of lithium for the 

present process is in the range of 2.2 to 3.2 cents/g (1974 

values) which is slightly above present selling price of 

about 2.0 cents/g from conventional mineral resources. The point is that it should be possible to insure 

an unlimited resource for lithium for the long term fusion economy at a reasonable cost. To remove the uncertainties in the process technology, it is recommended 

that a phase study of the salts in the sea be undertaken 

to determine the liquid-solid equilibrium during solar 

evaporation. It is further recommended that a laboratory search for a highly selective absorbent or adsorbent 

for extraction of lithium from seawater be undertaken 

on a continuing experimental effort so as to insure the 

technology when it will be needed.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authors wish to acknowledge the assistance of 

Robert K. Jordan, consultant from Pittsburgh, Pa., for 

discussions and suggestions concerning the process data 

presented in this paper.

REFERENCES

Bardet, J., Tchakirian, A., and Lagrange, R., 1937, Dosage du lithium 

daus 1'eau de mere: C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, v. 204, p. 443-45.

Brennan, P. J., 1966, Nevada brine supports a big new lithium plant: 

Chem. Eng., August, 15, 1966, p. 86.

Chow, T. J., and Goldberg, E. D., 1962, Mass spectrometric determiTABLE 35.—Capital investment for a plant for the extraction of lithium from seawater in terms of W gm/hr lithium production rate

(7)

(8)

Capital cost ($)

(1)

(2) 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

(6)

Resin beds __ _ _ _ ___ .___ 

Pumps . ---- __ _ -.. .... . ______ ------- - - 

Evaporator -_ _ -

Electrolyzer _ _ ___ 

Burner - ..... _ _ ..________. . -- _ _ - _ --___ ----- _- _ _ - -

Land for solar pond, 4.6 percent of item (l)a -- ____ ---------- ---- 

Piping, 29 percent of item (l)a __ _ ____ .... _ _ _____ __ 

Service facilities, 56 percent of item (l) a ... - ------ ------ ---- 

Unlisted equipment and miscellaneous, 10 percent of aboveb-------- ______ _____ ___ 

Installation of equipment, 35 percent of above3 ----------- ----------- ...

._- _ - - __ 70W

. .... ____ . _ 0.3W

3.23W + 

20.4W + 

_ ---_ 39.4W + 

13W + 

45.5W +

184.6W0- 85

8.49W.O- 85 + 

53.5W°-85 + 

103.4W0.85 + 

34.2W0.85 + 

119.7W°.85 +

221.9W0' 489 

— — — _-_ — ___ 2.1W0- 8

102H^ + 0 IH'O-S 

64 4H7 + 0 6W^'^ 

124.3W0.- 489 + L2W0- 8 

41.1<1«Q + 0.4WO-8 

143 9H7 + 1 4H^*^

Subtotal (lines 1-6) ___________________

Site preparations, buildings, 20 percent of above** ___ 

Electrical and instrumentation, 20 percent of aboveb

191.9W + 503.9W0- 85

38.3W + 

38.3W +

Subtotal (lines 1-8) 268.5W + 705.9W0- 85

605.8WO.489 + 5.8W0- 8

121 2WO*489 ^. ] ^w

121.2WO.489 + l.'2W°' 8

848.2W0.489 + 8.2W<>.8

Total, two times0 to include engineering 

construction overhead and contingency 537W + 1411.8W°.85 + 1696.4W0.489 + 16.4W0- 8

aPeters and Timmerhaus (1968, p. 104). 

bHarrington and others (1966, p. 36). 

•-Page (1963, p. 124-127).
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 87

TABLE 36.—Capital investment for plants for the extraction of lithium from seawater

[Capacity range =104-106 kg/yr plants (1974 dollars)]

Item

(3) Piping _______________________________________________

Subtotal _

(9) Engineering, construction overhead, and contingency ____ _ __

10'kg/yr

0.09 

.00 

.00 

.00 

.07 

.00 

.04 

.09 

.03 

.11 

.09 

.09

0.60 

.60

Capital cost ($106 )

105 kg/yr

0.88 

.01 

.00 

.00 

.46 

.06 

.39 

.76 

.26 

.90 

.74 

.74

5.13 

5.13

106 kg/yr

8.75 

.04 

.02 

.04 

3.31 

.56 

3.52 

6.80 

2.31 

8.07 

6.68 

6.68

46.78 

46.78

104 kg/yr

7.2 

.2 

.0 

.0 

5.4 

.5 

3.7 

7.2 

2.5 

8.9 

7.2 

7.2

50.0 

50.0

Percentage of total

105 kg/yr

8.4 

.1 

.0 

.0 

4.5 

.6 

3.8 

7.3 

2.5 

8.6 

7.1 

7.1

50.0 

50.0

106 kg/yr

9.4 

.0- 

.0 

.0 

3.5 

.6 

3.8 

7.3 

2.5 

8.6 

7.1 

7.1

50.0 

50.0

1.21 10.43

TABLE 37.—Production cost for extraction of lithium from seawater in terms of W gl/hr lithium production rate (1974 dollars)

Items

Lithium 

production 

rate

Yearly charge, 13 percent3

Electrical energy cost (for pumping and 

electrolysis), 1.5 cents kWhe

Steam cost, 0.249 cents/1,000 g _ _

Chemical (HC1) _

Maintenance, labor and so forth, 

10 percentb __ _

Total _ _ _____ ...

Production cost 

(cents/m I

10 4 kg/yr

__ _ .___ ______ __ _ __________________ .03

. ___ _ _ _ _____ .07

._._ .66+i.73W-°- 15 + 2.08W-°- 51 .02W~°-2 131

Cents/m Li

10 5 kg/yr

1.42 -

.03 

.07 

.00 

.07

1.10

2.69

106 kg/yr

1.25

.04 

.07 

.00 

.07

.96

2.34

10 7 ikg/yr

1.12

.05 

.07 

.00 

.07

.87

2.18

10 4 kg/yr

54.0

.9 

2.6 

.0 

2.2

41.6

100.0

Percentage of total

10 5 kg/yr

53.4

1.1 

2.6 

.0 

2.6

41.4

100.0

10 6 kg/yr

53.2

1.7 

3.0 

.0 

3.0

40.8

100.0

10 7 kg/yr

51.4

2.31 

3.21 

.00 

3.21

39.9

a|Hamngton and others (1966, p. 37-). 

bfKunin (1958, p. 396).

2.8

2.0

I04

icr 10 10

LITHIUM PRODUCTION RATE (Kg/yr.)

FIGURE 35.—Lithium production cost versus lithium production rate.

nation of lithium in seawater: Jour. Marine Research, v. 20, no. 3, 

p. 163-67.

Cummings, A. M., 1968, Lithium, in Mineral Facts and Problems 

[1970 ed.]: Staff of Bureau of Mines, p. 1073-81.

Controlled Thermonuclear Research Division, 1973, Fusion power; an 

assessment of ultimate potential: WASH-1239, 44 p. plus appendix.

Davies, R. V., Kennedy, J., Mcllroy, R. W., Spence, R., and Hill, K. M., 

1964, Extraction of uranium from seawater: Nature, v. 203, 

no. 4950, p. 1110-15.

Dow Chemical Company, 1958, Dowex; ion exchange: Dow Chemical 

Company.

El-Wakil, M. M., 1971, Nuclear energy conversion: Intext Educational 

Publishers, p. 545.

Energy Advisory Panel, 1973, An assessment of new options, in 

Energy Research and Development: AET-9 November, p. 217.

Goldschmidt, V. M., Berman, H., Hanptman, H., and Peters, U., 

1933, Zur geochemie des alkalimetalle: Nach. Ges. Wiss. Gottingen, Maths. Phys. Kl IV (N.S.) 2, p. 235-38.

Hader, R. N., Nielsen, R. L., and Herre, M. G., 1951, Lithium and its 

compounds: Indus, and Eng. Chemistry, v. 43, no. 12, p. 263-46.

Harrington, F. E., and Salmon, R., Unger, W. E., Brown, K. B., Coleman, C. F., and Grouse, D. J., 1966, Cost commentary on a proposed method for recovery of uranium from seawater: ORNL 

Central Files Number 66-2-57.

Holdren, J. P., 1971, Adequacy of lithium supplies as a fusion energy 

source: Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, UCID-15953.

Ishibashi, M., and Kurata, K., 1939, Determination of lithium in seawater and bittern: Jour. Chem. Soc. Japan, v. 60, p. 1109-11.

Kappanna, A. N., Gadre, G. T., Bhavnagary, H. M., and Joshi, J. M., 

1962, Minor constituents of seawater: Current Science (India), 

v. 31, p. 273.
88 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

Kunin, R., 1958, Ion exchange resins [2d ed.]: John Wiley and Sons.

Lazareth, O. W., Powell, J. R., Benenati, R., Fillo, J., Majeski, S., 

Sheehan, T. V., 1975, Minimum activity aluminum reference design: Trans. Am. Nuc. Soc., v. 21, 1975, p. 51-3.

Lee, J. D., 1969, Tritium breeding and energy generation in liquid 

lithium blankets: Proc. BNES Conf. on Nuclear Fusion Reactors, 

p. 471.

Leont'eva, G. V., Vol'khin, V. V., 1973, Determination of the lithium 

content of solutions with high mineral contents by means of 

ISM-1 cation exchange: Zhur. Anal. Kimii, v. 28, no. 6, p. 1209- 

11.

Lof, G. O. G., 1966, Solar distillation, in Spregler, K. S., ed., Principles 

of Desalination: Academic Press, p. 152-55.

Marchand, E., 1899, Des eaux potables en general: Mem. Acad. Med. 

(Paris), v. 19, p. 121-318.

Mellor, J. W., 1946, A comprehensive treatise on inorganic and 

theoretical chemistry: v. II, p. 425.

Page, J. S., 1963, Estimators manual for equipment and installation 

cost.

Pancharatnam, S., 1972, Transient behavior of a solar pond and prediction of evaporation rates: Indus, and Eng. Chem. Process Des. 

Develop, v. 11, no. 2, p. 287-92 and v. 11, no. 4, p. 626-30.

Peters, M. S., and Timmerhaus, K. D., 1968, Plant design and economics for chemical engineers: [2d Ed.]j McGraw-Hill Book Co.

Popper, H., 1970, Modern cost-engineering techniques: McGraw-Hill

Book Co. 

Powell, J. R., 1975, Beryllium and lithium resource requirements for

solid blanket designs for fusion reactor: BNL 20299. 

Riley, J. P., and Skirrow, G., 1965, Chemical oceanography: London

Academic Press, p. 164. 

Riley, J. P., and Tongudai, M., 1964, The lithium content of seawater:

Deep-Sea Research, v. 11, p. 563-68. 

Schambra, W. P., 1945, The Dow magnesium process at Freeport,

Texas: Trans. AIChE 41, p. 35-51. 

Shreve, R. N., 1967, Chemical process industries: New York,

McGraw-Hill, 358 p.

Shrier, E., 1952, Passing the salt: Chem. Eng., Oct. 1952, p. 138. 

Strelow, F. W. E., Weinert, C. H. S. W., and Van Der Walt, T. N.,

1974, Separation of lithium from sodium, beryllium, and other

elements by cation-exchange chromatography in nitric acidmethanol: Anal. Chem. Acta, v. 71, p. 123-32. 

Strock, L. W., 1936, Zur geochemie des lithiu: Nach. Ges. Wiss. Gottingen. Math. Phys. Kl. IV (NS) 1, p. 171-204. 

Sze, D., and Stewart, W. E., 1974, Use of electrical insulation in lithium

cooled fusion reactor blankets: Proceedings of the First Topical

Meeting on the Technology of Controlled Nuclear Fusion,

CONF-74-4-2-P1, p. 652. 

Thomas, B. D., and Thompson, T. G., 1933, Lithium in seawater:

Science 77, p. 547-48.

LITHIUM BRINES ASSOCIATED WITH 

NONMARINE EVAPORITES

By RICHARD K. GLANZMAN and A. L. MEIER, 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, DENVER, CO

Lithium is enriched in brines resulting from the evaporation of ground and surface water in the arid regions 

in the western United States. Most of the world's total 

supply of lithium is in the continental crust (Ronov and 

others, 1970). Chemical and mass weathering constantly 

redistribute lithium on the continental surfaces where 

runoff in the form of both ground and surface water 

from the continental highlands transports lithium to valleys from which there is no surface drainage (closed basins), and continuous evaportation of the water results 

in brines and the precipitation of the less soluble salts. 

Lithium salts are very soluble; the ions of the salts tend 

to remain in the brine and are among the last salts to 

precipitate. This process was in operation during late 

Tertiary and Quaternary time in the semi-arid to arid 

regions of western Utah. The geologic histories of Lake 

Bonneville in the Pleistocene and the Great Salt Lake in 

more recent times illustrate this process. The drainage 

basin of Lake Bonneville, therefore, was investigated to 

determine the areal distribution and enrichment of 

lithium resulting from the evaporation process.

The location, areal extent, and major physiographic 

subdivisions of the Lake Bonneville drainage basin are 

shown in figure 36. Lake Bonneville was the largest of 

the Pleistocene Great Basin Lakes with approximately 

140,000 km2 (54,000 mi2 ) of drainage basin. Paleozoic 

marine limestones and dolomites in many of the present 

mountain ranges formed islands in Lake Bonneville. 

Weathering of these limestones and dolomites undoubtedly contributed much of the carbonate deposited in the 

remnant terraces and benches of the lake as the lake 

water evaporated. Evaporation first exposed Sevier 

Lake play a, then the Great Salt Lake Desert; finally, the 

once great lake dwindled to the remnant brine of the 

Great Salt Lake of today.

The tectonic setting of the eastern Basin and Range 

province in Utah is shown in figure 37. The north-south 

fault zone known as the Wasatch line nearly bisects the 

state. The highlands immediately east of this fault zone 

form the east boundary of Lake Bonneville and the ancestral drainage basins. The east-west trending mineral 

belts that were created by the Oligocene-Miocene-
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 89

114°

IDAHO 

NEVADA 1 UTAH

GREAT 

SALT LAKE/^^;^1;;':;^1

DESERT fe

40° -

39° -

38

50 MILES

0 50 KILOMETRES

FIGURE 36.—The location, areal extent, and major physiographic subdivisions of the Lake Bonneville drainage basin.

Pliocene and earlier tectonic activity form not only a 

structural setting but also contain elements normally associated with lithium. The southern mineral belt (Callaghan, 1973) includes the Marysvale mining district in 

the area where the belt crosses the Wasatch line. 

Lithiophorite, a lithium-manganese mineral, is reported 

to occur in this district (Bullock, 1967). The northern 

belt is the Nevada-Utah beryllium belt (Shawe, 1966) 

containing both beryllium and tungsten mineral deposits. Lithium is generally associated with both eleWasatch Line

:::::::::::::j Maximum extent of 

Lake Bonneville

Northern mineral bel 

Southern mineral bel

FIGURE 37.—The tectonic setting of the eastern Basin and Range 

province in Utah.

ments. It has been known for many years that lithium is 

enriched in the Spor Mountain beryllium district (Shawe 

and others, 1964; Starkey and Mountjoy, 1973; and 

Lindsey and others, 1973). Lake Bonneville (outlined in 

fig. 36) was not the first large lake in Utah.

Large lakes have occurred in Utah at least as early as 

Eocene time with the Green River Lake (Hunt, 1956) in 

the Uinta Basin (fig. 38a). The Lake Bonneville drainage basin was a land mass with streams draining across

(Hunt, 1956) (Heylmun, 1965) 

EOCENE MIOCENE-PLIOCENE

a b

EXPLANATION 

Residual lake in late Eocene time

FIGURE 38.—The pre-Bonneville lake and lake-playa distribution in Utah.
90 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

the Wasatch line into the Green River Lake. These environmental conditions should have effectively leached 

any near-surface evaporites along the Wasatch line into 

the Green River Lake. The lake evaporated to the residual lake in late Eocene time and to dryness in the 

Oligocene. Tectonic activity along the Wasatch line during the Oligocene and early Miocene resulted in a lowering of the western part of Utah and the formation of a 

progressively larger lake or series of lakes and playas 

from the northwest corner of Utah to the extent shown 

in figure 38b (Heylmun, 1965). Identification of any 

evaporites formed in these western lake sediments will 

depend on drilling because of burial by Lake Bonneville 

sediments. According to Stokes (1973) and Axelrod 

(1957), during Oligocene-Miocene time the eastern 

Basin and Range physiographic province had a humid 

climate which caused deep weathering and supported 

deciduous hardwood forests. The Pliocene to early 

Pleistocene climate, however, was one of increasing aridityWater associated with volcanic rocks of Oligocene 

through Pliocene age within the mineral belts transported lithium into Tertiary drainage basins. Because 

lithium is a very soluble element, water and brine are the 

most indicative sampling media for lithium exploration. 

A sampling program was conducted following a literature search for all available lithium data in the eastern 

Basin and Range physiographic province (essentially 

Mundorff, 1970; Young and Carpenter, 1965; Nolan, 

1927; Turk, 1973; Lindenberg, 1974; and White and 

others, 1963).

The combination of tectonism with the formation of 

closed basins and of a climatic sequence of increasing 

aridity before Lake Bonneville gives favorable conditions for the concentration of lithium. The specific areas 

of enrichment depend on a structural basin to form the 

trap and a supply of lithium to be transported into the 

trap. Two areas within the drainage basin appear to 

satisfy both conditions—the Sevier-Black Rock desert 

area and the northern Great Salt Lake Desert area.

The results of the sampling program in combination 

with other available data for the area between the north 

and south mineral belts are shown in figure 39. In general, a sample containing more than 1 mg/1 (milligram 

per litre) lithium may indicate an area suitable for 

further study; more than 10 mg/1 in a potable or brackish water certainly is suitable. The lithium concentration 

in samples along the upper Sevier River valley from 

Kingston to just below Salina ranges from 2 to 8 mg/1. 

Marine evaporites near Redmond increase the total dissolved solids but contribute little or no lithium. The 

Sevier River drains into the Sevier Desert. At the present time, the course of the Sevier River would carry 

water through the Sevier Desert to Sevier Lake Playa.

LITHIUM 

CONCENTRATION

<l (mg/1) 

1-10 (mg/1) 

10-40 (mg/1)

30-50 (mg/1) 

50-100 (mg/1)

r

DEEP • .' 

CREEK HONEY- SPOR 

MTNS COMB MTN

Redmond 

Meadow ./Sollno

FIGURE 39.—Lithium concentration in water and brine in the Lake 

Bonneville drainage basin.

Surface water, however, seldom reaches the playa. Near 

surface brine (within upper 6 ft, approximately 2 m) 

contains 10 to 40 mg/1 lithium (Whelan, 1969). The 

lithium concentration with depth is unknown.

The northern mineral belt formed a highland from 

which water containing lithium drained both to the 

south into the Sevier Desert and to the north into the 

Great Salt Lake Desert. The mineral deposits within this 

belt probably contributed as much if not more lithium to 

the Sevier Desert than those in the southern belt. Rock 

and sediment samples from the area of beryllium prospects in the Sheeprock Mountains contain 50-300 ppm 

(parts per million) lithium; beryllium deposits at Spor 

Mountain 200-1500 ppm; a beryllium prospect in the 

Honeycomb Hills 100-1000 ppm; and the tungstenberyllium deposits in the Deep Creek Range 50-500 

ppm. Water, in leaching lithium from these sources and
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 91

the aforementioned sources, deposited at least 1,800 m 

(6,000 ft) of Tertiary and Quaternary sediments in the 

Sevier Desert because Gulf Oil No. 1 Gronning Well in 

sec. 24, T. 16 S., R. 8 W., 13 km (approx. 8 mi) northwest of Delta, Utah, showed this thickness (Heylmun, 

1965). Lithium-bearing clay and (or) brine enriched in 

lithium in the upper Tertiary rocks of the Sevier Desert 

would appear to be an excellent exploration drilling 

target.

A line of sample localities with lithium concentrations 

greater than 1 mg/1 crosses the area diagonally from the 

southwest corner in the Escalante Desert to the northeast corner in Utah Valley marking the Wasatch line. 

Thermal springs are the major sources of these higher 

lithium concentrations. Water from Roosevelt thermal 

spring contained the highest lithium concentration of 

any spring sampled with 27 mg/1. Water from Roosevelt 

as well as Thermo hot springs (1.4 mg/1), hot springs 

near Meadow and Hatton (3.7 mg/1) all ultimately discharge to the north into the Sevier Desert. These 

sources and the upper Sevier River valley, however, are 

not the only sources of lithium draining into the Sevier 

Desert.

During the time of Lake Bonneville and for an undetermined part of the time of ancestral Lake Bonneville, 

water crossed the northern mineral belt into the Great 

Salt Lake Desert through the "Old River Bed" described 

by Gilbert (1890). Anomalous lithium concentrations 

are quite evident north of Spor Mountain, and they extend into the Great Salt Lake Desert (fig. 39). The thermal spring at the defunct Wilson Resort, which is approximately 1.61 km (1 mi) from the nearest outcrop, 

Fish Springs Range, produces water that contains 2.1 

mg/1 lithium. Near surface brine in the Great Salt Lake 

Desert containing 30-50 mg/1 lithium surrounds the 

Bonneville Salt Flats near Wendover, Utah. The Bonneville Salt Flats area and a smaller area in Pilot Creek 

Valley contain near-surface brine with 50-100 mg/1 

lithium. Whelan and Petersen (1974) have shown that 

an abnormally high geothermal gradient may exist in 

the Bonneville Salt Flats area. The lithium concentration in both areas compares very favorably with the 

Great Salt Lake brine which ranges in concentration 

from 20 to 65 mg/1.

A comparison of near-surface brines in the Lake 

Bonneville drainage basin and the Great Salt Lake illustrates the process of enriching lithium through evaporation. Brine in Sevier Lake playa, first isolated by the 

evaporation of Lake Bonneville, contains 20-40 mg/1 

lithium; Bonneville Salt Flats and Pilot Creek Valley, 

50-100 mg/1; and Great Salt Lake, even with fresh water 

inflows, contains 20-65 mg/1. Great Salt Lake is a good 

example of how little time is required for evaporative 

processes. An approximate 35 percent increase in

lithium concentration in brine in the north arm of the 

lake has occurred since the construction of the causeway 

in 1959. Eardley (1970), in his discussion of the salt balance in Great Salt Lake, suggested the existence of earlier saline lakes in the Lake Bonneville drainage basin. 

He further suggested that somewhere in the basin there 

is a buried deposit enriched in lithium, boron, and 

potassium. Such a deposit may be a result of late Tertiary volcanic events along the Wasatch line and in the 

two mineral belts with the formation of lithium enriched 

brine and clay in several parts of the drainage basin.

Gravity profiles in the northern Great Salt Lake Desert (Cook and others, 1964) indicate a horst and graben 

structure beneath the playa (fig. 40). Grabens 1.22 km 

(4,000 ft) deep extend beneath the Bonneville Salt Flats, 

extend beneath Pilot Creek Valley north to the Raft 

River Mountains, and extend beneath the playa west of 

and parallel to the Newfoundland Mountains. Southern 

Pacific No. 1 Lemay Well, in sec. 29, T. 7 N., R. 14 W., at 

Lemay siding and north of the graben structure near 

the Newfoundland Mountains drilled through 93 m 

(305 ft) of brown limestone at a depth of 422 m (1,385 

ft) that Heylmun (1965) assigned to an upper Miocenelower Pliocene sequence. Paleozoic rocks were reached 

at a depth of 643 m (2,108 ft). The possibility that the

II2 C

100 Ml

100 KM

110°

WASATCH LINE

EXPLANATION 

NFG Newfoundland Graben

......... "oid River 8ed"of Gilbert (1890)

—— — Mineral belts

FIGURE 40.—Location of the Sevier Desert, Black Rock Desert, and the 

gravity-defined grabens in the northern Great Salt Lake Desert.
92 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

upper Tertiary section formed on a shoreline or in an 

ancestral Lake Bonneville that occupied these graben 

structures is speculative because the subsurface data 

currently available is meager. The existence, however, 

of such a lake or lakes appears to be very possible. These 

graben structures, like the Sevier Desert, appear to be 

good drilling prospects for lithium.

Summary

The enrichment of lithium by evaporation during the 

formation of nonmarine brines in Utah probably began 

with upper Tertiary lakes and playas, continued with 

Pleistocene Lake Bonneville and is continuing in the 

Great Salt Lake Desert and Great Salt Lake. The existence of the older lakes and playas is based on late Tertiary geologic history of flora and sedimentation, on the 

interpretation of near-surface geochemical data, on the 

interpretation of gravity profiles, on salt balance studies, 

and on data from a dozen oil wells drilled several years 

ago. Drilling of oil wells in the near future in the Great 

Salt Lake will add much more information on which to 

base the existence, and possibly the locations, of these 

pre-Lake Bonneville lakes. Lithium-enriched brine and 

clay may be encountered by drilling in the Sevier Desert, 

Bonneville Salt Flats, Pilot Creek Valley, and the 

gravity-defined graben west of the Newfoundland 

Mountains formed as a result of the evaporation process 

in late Tertiary and early Pleistocene time.

References Cited

Axelrod, D. I., 1957, Late Tertiary floras and the Sierra Nevadan 

uplift [Calif.-Nev.]: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 68, no. 1, p. 

19-45.

Bullock, K. C., 1967, Minerals of Utah: Utah Geol. and Mineral Survey Bull. 76, 237 p.

Callaghan, Eugene, 1973, Mineral resource potential of Piute County, 

Utah and adjoining area: Utah Geol. and Mineral Survey Bull. 

102, 135 p.

Cook, K. L., Halverson, M. O., Stepp, J. L., and Berg, J. W., Jr., 1964, 

Regional gravity survey of the northern Great Salt Lake Desert 

and adjacent areas in Utah, Nevada, and Idaho: Geol. Soc. 

America Bull., v. 75, no. 8, p. 715-740.

Eardley, A. J., 1970, Salt economy of Great Salt Lake, in Rau, J. L., and 

Dellwig, L. G., eds., Third symposium on salt, Volume 1: Northern Ohio Geol. Soc., p. 78-105.

Gilbert, G. K., 1890, Lake Bonneville: U.S. Geol. Survey Monograph 

No. 1, 438 p.

Heylmun, E. B., 1965, Reconnaissance of the Tertiary sedimentary 

rocks in western Utah: Utah Geol. and Mineral Survey Bull. 75, 

38 p.

Hunt, C. B., 1956, Cenozoic geology of the Colorado Plateau: U.S. 

Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 279, 99 p.

Lindenberg, G. J., 1974, Factors contributing to the variance in the 

brines of the Great Salt Lake Desert and the Great Salt Lake: 

University of Utah, M.S. thesis, 70 p.

.Lindsey, D. A., Ganow, Harold, and Mountjoy, Wayne, 1973, Hydrothermal alteration associated with beryllium deposits at Spor 

Mountain, Utah: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 818-A, 20 p.

Mundorff, J. C., 1970, Major thermal springs of Utah: Utah Geol. and 

Mineral Survey Water-Resources Bull. 13, 60 p.

Nolan, T. B., 1927, Potash brines of the Great Salt Lake Desert, Utah: 

U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 795-B, p. 25-44.

Ronov, A. B., Migdisov, A. A., Vosresenskaya, N. T., and Korzina, G. 

A., 1970, Geochemistry of lithium in the sedimentary cycle: 

Geochemistry Internal., v. 7, no. 1, p. 75-102.

Shawe, D. R., 1966, Arizona-New Mexico and Nevada-Utah beryllium belts: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 550-C, p. C206-C213.

Shawe, D. R., Mountjoy, Wayne, and Duke, Walter, 1964, Lithium 

associated with beryllium in rhyolitic tuff at Spor Mountain, western Juab County, in Geological Survey Research 1964: U.S. Geol. 

Survey Survey Prof. Paper 501-C, p. C86-C87.

Starkey, H. C., and Mountjoy, Wayne, 1973, Identification of a 

lithium-bearing smectite from Spor Mountain, Utah: U.S. Geol. 

Survey, Jour. Research, v. 1, no. 4, p. 415-419.

Stokes, W. L., 1973, Geologic and climatic inferences from surficial 

deposits of the Colorado Plateau and Great Basin: Brigham 

Young Univ. Geology Studies, v. 20, pt. 1, p. 11-26.

Turk, L. J., 1973, Hydrogeology of the Bonneville Salt Flats, Utah: 

Utah Geol. and Mineral Survey Water-Resources Bull. 19, 81 p.

Whelan, J. A., 1969, Subsurface brines and soluble salts of subsurface 

sediments, Sevier Lake, Millard County, Utah: Utah Geol. and 

Mineral Survey, Spec. Studies 30, 13 p.

Whelan, J. A., and Petersen, C. A., 1974, Bonneville Salt Flats—a 

possible geothermal area?: Utah Geology, v. 1, no. 1, p. 71-82.

White, D. E., Hem, J. D., and Waring, G. A., 1963, Chemical composition of subsurface waters, in Data of geochemistry : U.S. Geol. 

Survey Prof. Paper 440-F, 67 p.

Young, R. A., and Carpenter, C. H., 1965, Ground-water conditions 

and storage in the central Sevier Valley, Utah: U.S. Geol. Survey 

Water-Supply Paper 1787, 95 p.

ORIGIN OF LITHIUM AND OTHER COMPONENTS IN THE 

SEARLES LAKE EVAPORITES, CALIFORNIA

By GEORGE I. SMITH, 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, MENLO PARK, CA

ABSTRACT 

The lithium and many of the other valuable components in the salt

layers of Searles Lake came from thermal springs in the Long Valley 

area. However, about two-thirds of the sodium, chlorine, and bromine 

were apparently derived from atmospherically transported sea salts
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 93

and by solution of older salt deposits. About one-quarter of the boron 

may have been derived from thermal springs in the Coso Range, and 

about 15 percent of the sulfate may have come from solution of gypsum in older lake beds. The components were transported by the 

Owens River and its pluvial-stage downstream extension via Owens 

and China Lakes to Searles Lake. Most of the potassium, sulfate, and 

boron that entered the Owens River reached the salt layers in Searles 

Lake, but about 95 percent of the lithium was removed prior to crystallization of the salts, and 50 to more than 99 percent of certain other 

components are not accounted for.

The time required to account for the valuable salts in Searles Lake 

that came from springs in Long Valley is only about 10 percent of the 

time that the thermal springs are likely to have been active. Either one 

or more large deposits remains undiscovered (unlikely), or the springs 

have had their present chemical characteristics for only the last 30,000 

to 40,000 years.

INTRODUCTION

Searles Lake lies near the middle of Searles Valley in 

the southwest corner of the Great Basin, an area where 

the surface drainage of all basins flows toward a centra 1 

lake or playa rather than to the sea. At present, Searles 

Valley and most of the other valleys within the Great 

Basin contain playa (dry) lakes or salt flats in their centers; a few valleys contain permanent lakes but most of 

them are near the east and west edges of the province 

where they receive drainage from the bordering high 

mountain ranges.

During the pluvial periods of the Pleistocene, however, most valleys in the Great Basin contained large 

bodies of water as a result of increased precipitation and 

runoff and decreased evaporation. Several of these 

lakes were interconnected to form chains; the evaporation that occurred in each lake caused progressive increases in the downstream concentrations of dissolved 

solids. Searles Lake was a lake in one of these chains. It 

was the third (and sometimes fourth) in a chain that 

included as many as six lakes during the most intensely 

pluvial periods of the Pleistocene (fig. 41). Owens River, 

which drains the east side of the southern Sierra 

Nevada, was the source of most of the water that flowed 

into this chain of lakes; although, during some periods, 

Mono Lake and tributaries to that basin added their 

waters to those of Owens River. Owens River flowed into 

Owens Lake, spilled out of that lake into China Lake, 

then into Searles Lake; during the peaks of most pluvial 

episodes, Searles Lake overflowed into Panamint Lake, 

and, at times, that lake overflowed into Death Valley. 

This sequence is shown diagrammatically in cross section in figure 42.

The number of lakes in the chain and the depth of 

water in the last lake were a function of the amount of 

runoff versus the cumulative evaporation from their 

combined surfaces. Using probable evaporation rates 

and measured lake areas, calculations show that when

VALLEY 

CALDERAHot Creek

Long Valley 

Reservoir : 

(Lake Crow ley) \

EXPLANATION

• Present playas

• and lakes

Pleistocene lakes

50 KILOMETRES

FIGURE 41.—Index map showing relations between present lakes and 

rivers, and between those features during pluvial maxima of the 

Pleistocene. Locations of the Long Valley caldera (from Bailey and 

others, 1976), Long Valley Reservoir (Lake Crowley), Coso Hot 

Springs, and Airport Lake also shown.

Searles Lake received water from upstream sources, 

Owens River had to flow at a rate approximately four 

times more than that of the present. For Searles Lake to 

overflow, Owens River and other sources had to contribute about seven times more than the present river flow. 

Water overflowing from Mono Lake was included in 

these volumes part of the time, but present runoff patterns suggest that less than 20 percent of the total flow

SIERRA\;-» 

NEVADA;. .;,-:.;,•:•;,-.':'. i.osi m

657 m 493 m 317 m

-86 m

FIGURE 42.—Diagram showing relation between Pleistocene lakes in 

the chain that includes Searles Lake; Mono Lake is omitted. Elevations of the present valley floors (and spillways) are shown in 

parentheses. From Gale (1914).
94 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

was added by that basin. When the pluvial periods of the 

Pleistocene ended, major concentrations of salts that 

were trapped in the basins crystallized as layers on the 

valley floor. Drilling has shown that no layers of salts 

accumulated in the upper several hundred metres of 

Owens Lake and China Lake, that only halite and gypsum accumulated in Panamint Lake, and that major 

quantities of rare elements and salts accumulated only in 

Searles Lake (Smith and Pratt, 1957).

Searles Lake now is a nearly dry salt flat with a surface 

area of approximately 100 km2 . Two distinct salt bodies 

lie within 50 m of the surface; these are informally 

named the Upper Salt and the Lower Salt. The volume 

of the Upper Salt body is approximately 1 km3 and the 

volume of the Lower Salt is about half that amount. Two 

chemical plants are operated by the Kerr-McGee Chemical Corp. on the west side of Searles Lake, one at Westend and one at Trona. One or both of them extract 

sodium carbonate and sulfate, potassium chloride and 

sulfate, lithium carbonate, sodium borate, phosphoric 

acid, and bromine from the interstitial brines pumped 

from the Upper Salt and Lower Salt. The brine which is 

pumped from the interstitial fluids in the Upper Salt 

body contains approximately 80 ppm Li, and this is processed by the plant at Trona. Brine from the peripheral 

parts of the body contain 10-70 ppm Li. Lithium is precipitated from the brine as LigNaPC^ and converted to 

Li2CO3 . The value of all components produced annually 

by the two plants is in excess of $30 million. Total production from the deposit since 1926 exceeds $1 billion.

GEOLOGIC HISTORY OF SEARLES LAKE

The sequence of muds and salts now found beneath 

the surface of Searles Lake is shown in figure 43. The 

mud layers are mostly composed of calcium, magnesium, and sodium carbonate minerals, but clastic and 

organic components are also present. The salt layers, 

which represent the economically valuable part of the 

deposit, are composed of a large number of minerals, 

which are given in table 38. No minerals in the salt layers 

contain lithium, and all production of lithium (as well as 

of bromine and phosphate) comes from components 

that are present only in dissolved form.

The history of the fluctuations of Searles Lake during 

the last 150,000 years is shown in figure 44. Most of the 

time is represented by mud layers, and only small parts 

of the total time are represented by salts. The climatic 

history represented by this curve is representative of 

other parts of the Great Basin, and most of the hundred 

or more closed basins of this area can be considered to 

have had enlarged lakes for about 100,000 of the last 

150,000 years. During the intervening dry periods, 

saline layers were deposited in some basins.

UNIT

Overburden Mud

Upper Solt

Parting Mud

Lower Salt

Bottom Mud

Mixed Layer

DEPTH 5 (metres)

10- 

20-

30-

40- 

50- 

60-

-70= 

275-

LITHOL06Y

m

r^-ji

wwv

'WWV

Hife

Interbedded mud and

Salines

Mud

Interbedded salines 

and mud

Mud, thin beds of 

salines

Interbedded salines 

and mud, grading 

down to mud

GEOLOGIC 

AGE

Late Holocene

Early Holocene

Late Wisconsin

Middle Wisconsin

Early Wisconsin

— 130,000± —— 

Sangamon(?) and

C-14 AGE

— 6000 t—

— 10,500 —

— 24,000 —

— 33,000 —

FIGURE 43.—Generalized subsurface stratigraphy of upper Quaternary units in Searles Lake. Patterns represent marl ("mud") layers; 

clear areas represent salts. The names of the units are informal 

terms used locally; the indicated geologic ages are based on correlations with glacial deposits in the central parts of North America.

TABLE 38.—List of minerals found in the saline layers of Searles Lake and of 

their compositions

Aphthitalite __________________ K3 Na(SO4 ) 2

Borax __________________ Na2 B4O7 -10H2O

Burkeite ________________._ 2Na2 SO4 -Na2CO3

Halite __________________ NaCl

Hanksite __________-______ 9Na2SO4 -2Na2 CO3 -KCl

Mirabilite _________________.__ Na2 SO4 -10H2O

Nahcolite _________________ NaHCO3

Northupite _________.______ Na2 CO3 -MgCO3 -NaCl

Sulfohalite ________________ 2Na_SO4 -NaCl-NaF

Teepleite ________________-__ Na2 B2 O4 -2NaCl-4H2O

Thenardite ________________ Na2 SO4

Tincalconite_______________ Na2 B4O7 -5H2 O

Trona _______.___________ Na2 CO3 -NaHCO3 -2H2O

Tychite _________________ 2Na2 CO3 -2MgCO3 -Na2 SO4

.Level of lake during averfla

§ 600

0 20 40 60 80 100 150 

YEARS (xlO3 ) BEFORE PRESENT

FIGURE 44.—Diagram showing the fluctuations in Searles Lake during 

the last 150,000 years.

Since the original deposition of the salts and brines in 

Searles Lake, dilution by surface water has reduced the 

concentration of the original brine. The total volume of 

brine has apparently remained the same, so some of the 

original components that were concentrated in the 

brine—like lithium—were lost. The displaced brine presumably migrated toward Panamint and Death
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 95

Valleys—both of which have floors at lower 

elevations—but this has not been confirmed. Evidence 

of dilution is found in three forms: (1) Large crystal 

cavities are numerous in certain horizons of the salt 

layers, and such features are rarely (if ever) formed during natural crystallization of salt layers; cavities of these 

sizes virtually require the removal of some original 

components (Smith and Haines, 1964, fig. 8). (2) The 

phase chemistry applicable to these saline bodies shows 

that the present brine compositions are those produced 

by partial solution of existing solids and not those produced as bitterns at the close of normal crystallization 

(G. I. Smith, unpub. data, 1976). (3) Data from the 

deuterium-hydrogen ratios in the salts and brines show 

that about half of the water in the present brines has 

been derived from local rainwater and runoff ( G. I. 

Smith, Sadao Matsuo, and Irving Friedman, unpub. 

data, 1976). The hydrogen-deuterium ratio in the parent brine is represented by the ratio of these isotopes in 

the primary mineral borax (Matsuo and others, 1972), 

but the present brines in Searles Lake have values that 

are intermediate between the values indicated by borax 

(approximately 0 permil relative to SMOW, Standard 

Mean Ocean Water) and the values found in presentday rains and runoff in the valley, which average about 

— 80 permil SMOW. The replacement of original brine 

with local surface waters has resulted in a proportional 

loss and lower concentrations of components found only 

in the original brines, but components found in both 

minerals and brines (potassium, borates, chlorides, carbonates, sulfates, etc.) have concentrations that are only 

slightly lower, because the lost quantities were mostly 

replaced by partial solution of the crystal body.

SOURCES OF COMPONENTS IN THE BRINES

The components in the salts and brines of the Searles 

Lake deposit were apparently derived from at least 

three sources: the atmosphere, rocks, and thermal 

springs. Much or most of the carbonate probably came 

from atmospheric CO2 which was dissolved in the river

and lake waters. About 20 percent of the sodium 

chloride and other seawater components were probably 

carried into the Owens Valley by air masses moved inland from the sea (Holser, 1970, table 3). Some of the 

sodium, potassium, and magnesium, and the balance of 

the carbonate were derived from the solution of those 

components in rocks that crop out within the drainage 

area of the extended chain of lakes; and evidence described later shows that halite and gypsum were also 

dissolved and contributed Cl and SO4 to the total. The 

substances that make Searles Lake a valuable resource 

and virtually unique, however, were mostly derived 

from hot springs that lie at the head of the Owens River 

drainage. Lithium was among these components.

Figure 41 shows the location of the Long Valley caldera, which is now an area containing geysers, thermal 

springs, and saline marshes. Analyses of the waters issuing from these areas are cited by the California Department of Water Resources (1967), Mariner and Willey 

(1976), Eccles (1976), and from an unpublished administrative report by L. V. Wilcox (1946) that is based 

on work done cooperatively by the U.S. Salinity Laboratory (U.S. Department of Agriculture) and the Los 

Angeles Department of Water and Power. This report is 

published here with the written permission of both 

agencies. The first line of evidence that this source contributed many of the uncommon elements now found in 

Searles Lake is provided by the abundance of these elements in such waters. Table 39 lists the concentration of 

selected ions, and table 40 lists the concentrations and 

monthly tonnages of chloride and boron contained in 

the measured discharge above and below a major thermal spring in the area, as well as in the Owens River. 

Table 39 also lists the ratios between certain elements 

that will be related to the dissolved components in the 

Owens River and Searles Lake. These data make it clear 

that the quantities of the unusual components are large 

enough, given geologic units of time, for major deposits 

to form.

A second line of evidence that the thermal springs in 

the Long Valley area contributed most of the uncomTABLE 39.—Concentrations of selected components in waters from Long Valley area and ratios of selected ions

[All values in mg/1; leaders (----) indicate no data]

Station 

(listed in order of 

downstream position)

Casa Diablo hot spring1 _. _ __. _

Mammoth Creek, below Casa Diablo;

Little Hot Creek1 ....

Hot Creek, below most springs;

Concentrations

Na

.__— 390

___ .. 6.6

______ 83

— — 24

K

45

1.3 

24 

30

7.0 

2.8 

4

SCu

130

6.8 

100 

96

26 

11 

13

Cl

280

.5 

225 

200

43 

11 

18

F

12

.1 

9.6

8.4

1.8 

.6 

.6

B

15

.05 

10.5 

10.6

2.0 

.47 

.66

As

2.2 

.01 

"74

.20 

.05 

.03

Li

2.8

2.3

2.8

Vis

Na/K

8.7

5.1 

16.7 

13.7

11.9 

8.6 

8.5

Cl/B

18.7

10.0 

21.4 

18.9

21.5 

23.4 

27.3

Ratios

Cl/SC-4

2.2

.07 

2.2 

2.1

1.6 

1.0 

1.4

K/B

3.0

26 

2.3

2.8

3.5 

6.0 

6.1

B/Li

5.4

4.6

3.8

5.1

F/Li

4.3

«" 

3.0

47o"

'Mariner and Willey, 1976, table 1.

"Eccles, 1976, table 9.

'California Department of Water Resources, 1967, appendices E and F; Li values obtained by spectrographic analysis, average of six analyses, 1957-64.
96 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

TABLE 40.—Monthly boron and chlorine contents of Hot Creek and Owens River

[Data from Wilcox, 1946, tables 1 and 8. Data expressed as parts per million (ppm) and tonnes per month (t/mo)]

'Station 2

Date

1933:

1934:

May———— —————————

S/X ———————-___ —————— _ ———— ————————— _

Discharge

(t/moXlO6 )

__ __ -. 1.98

— — _ 1.75

1 54

2 13

2 35

— — - 1.24

1 93

39

— ——— .20

Boron

ppm

0.37 

.42 

.39 

.40 

.39

.34 

.34 

.49 

.39 

.43 

.40 

.04 

.10

t/mo

0.89 

.83 

.68 

.63 

.60

.72 

.66 

1.2 

.92 

.53 

.77 

.20 

.26

Chlorine

ppm

0.33 

.32 

.38 

.29 

.33

.29 

.33 

.28 

.29 

.29 

.31 

.03 

.10

t/mo

0.80 

.63 

.67 

.46 

.51

.62 

.65 

.66 

.69 

.36 

.60 

.13 

.21

Discharge 

(t/moxl06 )

3.15 

2.65 

2.51 

2.37 

2.42

3.03 

2.83 

3.17 

2.85 

2.06 

2.70 

.37 

.14

2Station 4

Boron

ppm

2.34 

2.57 

2.86 

2.98 

2.88

2.47 

2.53 

2.35 

2.31 

3.38 

2.66 

.34 

.13

t/mo

7.37 

6.81 

7.18 

7.06 

6.97

7.48 

7.16 

7.45 

6.58 

6.96 

7.10 

.29 

.04

Owens River at 

Chlorine Aqueduct Intake 3

(t/mo)

ppm

1.52 

1.72 

1.81 

1.90 

1.81

1.67 

1.77 

1.46 

1.55 

2.11 

1.73 

.19 

.11

t/mo

4.79 

4.56 

4.54 

4.50 

4.38

5.06 

5.01 

4.63 

4.42 

4.35 

4.62 

.25 

.05

17.54 

9.82 

5.17 

36.34 

27.12

25.05 

34.86 

24.87 

25.92 

11.11 

21.78 

10.54 

.48

'Hot Creek, in canyon, approximately 200 m upstream from thermal springs (lat 37°39.8'N., long 117°49.5'W.) 

2 Hot Creek, about 200 m downstream from thermal springs. ,gs 

3 At Aberdeen (lat 36°58.5'N., long 118°12.6' W), about 60 km north-northwest of Owens Lake; waters include all sources of boron in northern Owens Valley.

mon elements comes from the apparent balance between the tonnages of certain elements contributed by 

the springs of this area to the Owens River each year, 

and the tonnages of those components now found in the 

Upper Salt of Searles Lake, which represents a known 

number of years. Discrepancies arise in the balance between several other elements, but they are in expected 

directions.

The balance between the source and the salt body 

requires two assumptions. One is that the present 

Owens River carries approximately the same tonnages 

of these components each year as it did during pluvial 

periods of the Pleistocene, even though the volumes of 

water increased greatly during those periods; data supporting this proposal are given in a later section. The 

second assumption is that virtually all the dissolved solids carried by the Owens River during the last 50,000 

years are now found as salts in either Owens or Searles 

Lake. Dissolved solids carried during that period must 

be in one or more of the downstream basins, yet China 

Lake contains no salt layers and Owens Lake contains 

salts only in the 1-3-m surface layer formed during this 

century. Searles Lake overflowed into Panamint Valley 

part of this time (fig. 44); and the dissolved solids that 

reached Searles Lake must have been in waters that 

overflowed into Panamint Valley. However, no known 

sodium borate or sodium carbonate minerals are found 

in that valley, and the brines apparently do not contain 

abnormal amounts of potassium, bromine, lithium, or 

tungsten (Smith and Pratt, 1957). The lack of uncommon elements in Panamint Valley suggests that the 

quantities of salts lost during those periods of overflow 

were small. It appears, therefore, that Searles Lake contains the vast bulk of the materials that were contributed 

by the Owens River during this time. A period extending from 24,000 years ago to the present is chosen because that represents the period during which the Parting Mud, Upper Salt, and Overburden Mud (fig. 43) 

accumulated; the salts and brines of the Upper Salt contain most of the uncommon elements.

Analyses of the present Owens River water are listed 

in table 41. The data in the first column summarize, 

over a 17-year period (1929-45), a large number of 

analyses for boron and chlorine and a smaller number 

of analyses for other components. These analyses were 

accompanied by discharge data, thus allowing calculation of absolute quantities of those substances over the 

same period of time. The first 11 years of that period 

also predate the completion of the Long Valley Dam 

and the Mono Basin Tunnel; those structures make interpretations of seasonal variations in more recent 

chemical data more difficult. The data in the second 

column mostly represent one sample of water collected 

from the inlet to Haiwee Reservoir, but the values for

TABLE 41.—Dissolved solids in waters of the Owens River or its equivalent

[Values in mg/1; leaders (----) indicate no data]

Component

Owens River at 

aqueduct intake,

range includes 

years from

1928 to 1946'

Los Angeles 

aqueduct at

Haiwee 

Reservoir*

Los Angeles 

aqueduct 

average 

for 19753

Na - 

K —. 

Ca .. 

Mg .. 

CO3 _. 

HC03 

SO, -. 

Cl—. 

B __. 

F __. 

Li-.-. 

PO4 - 

As_. 

Br__.

23-100 

7-13

21-42 

5-33

15-72 

11-93 

.3-2.4 

.5-1.0

26

3.4

10

130

17

14

.11, .08 

.4

I —-.._____--- —

W.___-._-__-. 

pH — .... ——— .... 

Total dissolved solids

7.6-8.4 

187-691

8.4

221

29

2.9

23

5.1

105

23

12

.33

.53

.02

.02

.04

.07

8.18

181

'Wilcox, 1946, table 1; sample point is at Aberdeen, about 45 km southeast pf Bishop.

2 Friedman, Smith, and Hardcastle (1976). All components except Li and PO< found in 

water sampled in Tune 1965 at point where aqueduct enters Reservoir, about 135 km south of 

Bishop; Li and PCU determined from water collected at point where California Highway 136 

crosses the Owens River.

3Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, Sanitary Engineering Division records; 

sample point where aqueduct empties into Van Norman Reservoir, San Fernando, Calif.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 97

lithium and phosphate are for two water samples collected in 1969 at the point where the Owens River entered Owens Lake during a year when Owens River 

runoff exceeded the capacity of the aqueduct. Two values for lithium are listed—0.11 and 0.08 mg/1 suggesting 

an average of approximately 0.1 mg/1 at the time those 

samples were collected. The data in the third column 

represent the average composition of the water in the 

Owens Valley aqueduct, during 1975, as it flowed into 

Van Norman reservoir in Los Angeles. Waters carried 

by the Los Angeles aqueduct are presumed to be the 

compositional equivalent of the Owens River.

Table 42 gives a sample calculation of the amounts of 

seven components, whose concentrations and abundances are known for Owens River, Owens Lake, and 

Searles Lake. The amounts of potassium, sulfate, and 

boron in the two salt lakes are quite close to the amounts 

calculated to have been carried by Owens River in 

24,000 years. The amounts of sodium and chlorine in 

the two -lakes are too large, and the amounts of carbonate and lithium are too small. Similar calculations can 

be made for bromine, phosphate, arsenic, iodine, 

tungsten, and fluorine by assuming that the quantities of 

those elements now trapped in Owens Lake form a 

minor part of the total. With the exception of fluorine, 

these elements are found in Searles Lake only in the 

brine phase, which makes calculations of their abundance more reliable.

The balance between the quantities of these components carried by the Ownes River over a period of 

24,000 years and the amounts now present in the Upper 

Salt of Searles Lake is plotted in figure 45. The values 

from table 42 are used for those seven components; the 

values for other components in the Owens River are 

calculated from table 41, and in Searles Lake, from data 

cited by Smith (1973, tables 14 and 15). The amounts of 

components now found in the Lower Salt of Searles 

Lake (fig. 43), compared to the amounts that would be

1000-r100--

10--

I 10 100 1000 

QUANTITY CONTRIBUTED BY OWENS RIVER (METRIC TONNES)

FIGURE 45.—Diagram showing the relations between tonnages of 

selected components carried by the present Owens River in 24,000 

years versus tonnages in the Upper Salt of Searles Lake (circles), and 

the tonnages carried by the river in 8,000 years versus tonnages in 

the Lower Salt (X). Plotted on three-cycle log scale; quantities expressed as tonnes multiplied by indicated exponent. Diagonal line 

indicates 1:1 relation. Multiple points connected by lines represent 

independent determination.

contributed by 8,000 years of flow by the present Owens 

River, are also plotted; these are discussed later. Points 

that lie on the diagonal line represent perfect agreement 

between the predicted and observed amounts. Points 

above the line represent a greater amount of that component in Searles Lake than predicted, and points below 

the line represent a deficiency or loss. The two points 

for chlorine represent the two values derived for the 

Owens River in table 42; the four points for boron repTABLE 42.—Comparison of amount of selected components carried by Owens River in 24,000 years with amount now in Owens Lake

and Upper Salt of Searles Lake 

[Quantities expressed as parts per million (ppm) and tonnes (t)]

Component

Na ——__-__ __ ...

K_ .. _________

Total CO, ___ _ __.

SO4

CI - _- - - -_ _ __

B --- _ _ __ _ ___ _

Li ________

Present concentration 

in Owens River 1 

(ppm)

26

3.4

137

17

""'.11

Amount carried 

annually2 by 

Owens River (X 103 t)

10 9

57 5

5.9

•7.8 

32 6 .23

f\AC

Amount carried 

by Owens River in 

24,000 years (x 106 t)

34

187

5.5

Amount now in 

Upper Salt, 

Searles Lake (x 106 t)3

462

00

163

192

AAO

1 9

7 6.4 5.06

Amount in 

Owens Lake in 

1912 (x 106 t)4

54

15

Total amount now 

found in Searles and 

Owens Lakes (x 106 t)

516

31

193

~8~7~

7.2

'Friedman, Smith, and Hardcastle (1976) except value for B.

2Average annual flow of river, 4.2xl014 g/yr (calculated for period before irrigation in Owens Valley, using data of Gale, 1914, p. 254-261).

'Values from Smith (1973, table 15), except as indicated.

Recalculated from Gale (1914, p. 259); he incorrectly calculated quantities in this report, but he corrected them m later reports.

'Calculation assumes average values of 60 ppm Li in brine and 20 ppm in salts.

*Data from Wilcox (1946); value for concentration, from his table 12, is mean for the years 1929-45 at the inlet to the aqueduct near Aberdeen. Values of amounts of Cl and B carried

annually compiled by methods described in footnote 3, this chapter. 

7D. V. Haines, unpub. data, 1956.
98 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

resent the two values for that substance in the river and 

two independently determined values for the lake 

(Smith, 1973, p. 112), plotted in the four possible combinations. The spread among them probably indicates 

about the level of uncertainty in the data.

As shown in figure 45, the predicted and observed 

quantities of boron, sulfate, and potassium in the Upper 

Salt are close to the diagonal line that indicates equality. 

The quantity of potassium in Searles and Owens Lakes 

is about 90 percent of that predicted. This close balance 

results in part from compensating errors, because some 

potassium must have been added downstream, where 

additional drainage from bedrock sources joined the 

system, and some potassium is normally lost from 

natural solutions owing to adsorption by clay. The quantity of boron now found in the two lakes may be a few 

percent less or 60 percent more than predicted, depending on which combination of the estimates listed in table 

42 is used; the "best" values (5.5 versus 7.2x 106 tonnes) 

suggest that the lake contains about 30 percent more 

boron than predicted. An even greater discrepancy may 

exist because additional quantities of boron are contained in ulexite that occurs in small quantities in lake 

sediments exposed around the edges of Searles Valley, 

and boron also may be adsorbed by clays. Some increase 

in the amount of boron flowing from the Long Valley 

area may have occurred during pluvial periods, and 

some boron was probably contributed to China Lake 

and downstream basins by the Quaternary volcanic 

rocks in the Coso Range (fig. 41) and the Coso Hot 

Springs, 1 which lie along the north side of China Lake. 

The observed quantity of sulfate in the Upper Salt of 

Searles Lake is about 20 percent greater than predicted, 

suggesting that greater quantities of sulfate were contributed during pluvial periods by drainage from upper 

Cenozoic lake beds in Owens Valley and from the gypsiferous sediments and fault gouge zones of the Slate 

Range that forms the east edge of Searles Valley.

In the upper salt, only about 15 percent of the predicted amount of carbonate and 5 percent of the lithium 

are accounted for. Large quantities of carbonate are 

known to have been precipitated in Owens and China 

Lakes as calcite in calcareous silt and clay (Smith and 

Pratt, 1957), and the large quantities of calcite, aragonite, dolomite, gaylussite, and pirssonite in the mud 

layers in Searles Lake account for major additional

'During pluvial periods, the Coso Hot Springs (lat 36°2.8'N., long 117°46.2'W.) probably 

flowed with the waters draining south via Coso Wash to Airport (dry) Lake. Those waters 

probably contained large amounts of boron (Austin and others, 1971, table 6). Airport Lake is 

now separated from China Lake by a gravel divide about 15 m above the lake surface, but 

shorelines showed that it overflowed during pluvial periods into China Lake (Duffield and 

Bacon, 1976). That uncommon amounts of boron reached Airport Lake is shown by observations made in 1955 by R. E. von Huene and D. V. Haines of the sediments exposed in a trench 

in the lake floor (lat 35°54.4'N., long 117°43.7'|W.). They noted concentrations of ulexite in 

three layers that had thicknesses ranging from 0.1 to 0.7 m and were at depths of approximately 1, 2, and 4 m. Four analyses (by H. Kramer) of bulk samples from the ulexite-rich 

horizons averaged 0.5 percent B and 75 ppm Li.

quantities. Some of the carbonate lost during transit was 

probably restored as the lakes and streams dissolved atmospheric CO2, but because of the slowness of this 

process and the rising pH of the lake waters, the original 

quantities were never fully replaced. The amount of 

lithium now found in Searles Lake indicates even more 

loss. The calculations assumed the following: (1) an average of 30 ppm Li in the salts of the Upper Salt (the 

average of 54 unpublished analyses of water-soluble 

lithium in cores GS-1, GS-4, and GS-10, obtained and 

described by the Geological Survey (Haines, 1959)); (2) 

an average of 60 ppm Li in the brine (intermediate between the richest (80 ppm) brines, from the center of 

the deposit, and the brines present around the edge 

(10-40 ppm)); (3) a brine:salt ratio of 40:60; (4) salt and 

brine densities of 2.1 and 1.3; and (5) the volume of the 

Upper Salt to be l.OSx 109 m3 . Reasonable variations in 

these assumptions are possible, but none alter the fact 

that much of the lithium in the Owens River disappeared before the salts in Searles Lake were crystallized.

The amounts of sodium and chlorine now in Searles 

Lake are two to three times greater than the present 

Owens River seems likely to have supplied. The excess 

of sodium in the Upper Salt is somewhat less, because 

major quantities reacted after burial to form gaylussite 

and pirssonite in the interbedded mud layers. The excess of chlorine was noted by Holser (1970). It tends to 

confirm his suggestion, based on both the absolute 

amounts of chlorine and the Cl/Br ratios in the Upper 

Salt of Searles Lake, that Searles received chlorine and 

bromine from erosion of older lake beds as well as from 

springs and atmospheric sources. The erosion of older 

lake beds also accounts for excess sodium. Lake beds are 

included in the Waucoba (of Hopper, 1947) and Coso 

(of Schultz, 1937) Formations, of late Cenozoic age. 

These areas drain into Owens Valley, and although little 

surface runoff from these areas occurs under present 

climatic conditions, substantially greater amounts probably occurred during pluvial maxima. According to the 

data plotted in figure 45, the Cl/Br ratio of the Owens 

River is 710 (or 935), and the ratio in the Upper Salt of 

Searles Lake is 975; Holser (1970), using slightly different data and assumptions, estimated these ratios as 520 

(his table 4) and 860 (his table 2). All estimates of Cl/Br 

ratios for the Owens River and Searles Lake lie between 

that of sea water (about 200) and that of primary marine 

evaporites (greater than 1,000). As noted by Holser (p. 

308-9, table 4), neither thermal springs nor atmospheric 

salts normally contribute these elements in this ratio, 

and contributions from recycled salts (ultimately of 

marine origin) seem required.

The other components plotted in figure 45, like 

lithium, suggest loss during transport between the 

Owens River and Searles Lake. Losses range from one-
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 99

half order to two orders of magnitude. The postdepositional dilution and loss of brine from Searles 

basin might account for the observed deficiency of 

phosphate, but it is inadequate to account for deficiencies of the others. Nothing is known about the concentrations of phosphate, arsenic, iodine, tungsten, and 

fluorine in the clastic sediments of Owens, China, or 

Searles Lakes, but those deposits seem most likely to 

contain the missing elements if they were adsorbed by 

clays or fixed by biological processes during transport.

The losses of fluorine are most notable. The quantity 

plotted in figure 45 for the Owens River is calculated 

from the lower value (0.5 ppm) listed in table 41, and 

use of the larger value would have further increased the 

apparent loss. Table 43 lists several analyses for fluorine 

and other selected components in waters from the 

Owens River and Hot Creek (Wilcox, 1946). It also lists 

the ratio of the chemical activity product (AP) to the 

equilibrium constant (KT) for the mineral fluorite in solutions having the indicated compositions and estimated 

temperatures. These data were provided by E. A. Jenne, 

who used the computer program described by 

Nordstrom and Jenne (1976).

An AP/KT ratio of 1 indicates fluorite saturation 

under equilibrium conditions. Although the ratios of 

waters at the Aqueduct Intake are only 3-5 percent of 

saturation, evaporative concentration of 20-30 times 

(assuming no other changes) would theoretically precipitate fluorite. Owens River water (ca. 200 ppm), concentrated by a factor of 30 times, would have a salinity of 

about 0.6 percent, more than an order of magnitude 

below levels that produce salts. If the lost fluorine was 

precipitated as fluorite during transport, it would be 

upstream from any highly saline lakes. Therefore, large 

quantities of disseminated fluorite may be present in the

upper 50 to 100 m of muds beneath the surfaces of 

Owens and China Lakes.

Figure 45 also shows the balance between the quantities of major components in the Lower Salt of Searles 

Lake (Smith, 1973, table 11) and the amounts contributed by the present Owens River over a period of 8,000 

years. That period was chosen because it produced the 

best balance between the boron, potassium, and sulfate, 

which were apparently transported during the final 

24,000 years with the least gain or loss.

The pattern of Lower Salt components is strikingly 

similar to the pattern determined for the Upper Salt.2 

Potassium and sulfate are again very close to the 

diagonal line, indicative of equality; boron is a little 

above it; sodium and chloride are substantially above it, 

with the excess of chloride being greater than that of 

sodium; and carbonate is substantially below it (although less so than for the Upper Salt). The detailed 

similarity of this Lower Salt pattern to that of the Upper 

Salt adds substantial weight to the likelihood that the 

source of the dissolved solids was the same for both 

units, the Owens River.

A major problem, however, is that the quantity of 

time required to introduce the components in these two 

salt units—about 32,000 years—is substantially less than

2 A very similar pattern also emerges when the amounts of components carried by the 

Owens River in 2,000 years are plotted against the amounts now found in Owens Lake (table 

42, columns 3 and 6). The amounts of sulfate and potassium are almost on the diagonal line, 

boron is slightly above it, sodium and chlorine are substantially above it (suggesting that 

outcropping halite beds were being dissolved), and carbonate is well below it. Inasmuch as no 

deeper beds of salts exist in the upper part of Owens Lake, the exposed salts in Owens Lake 

appear to be the residue of about 2,000 years of evaporative concentration, and the salts 

contributed prior to that time were apparently carried downstream. Gale (1914, p. 264) and 

Antevs (1936, 1938) calculated the quantities of sodium and chlorine in Owens Lake and, 

from those data, concluded that the time since the last overflow (for saline deposition) was 

nearer 4,000 years. The evidence in the present paper indicates that sulfate and potassium are 

more reliable components for this purpose and suggests that the age of 2,000 years is more 

nearly correct.

TABLE 43.—Analyses for calcium, fluorine, and other elements in waters from Owens River and Hot Creek, and the ratio of the 

chemical activity product (AP) ofCa++ and F~ in these waters to the equilibrium constant for fluorite (KT)

[Analytical data from Wilcox, 1946, tables 1 and 8, values in parts per million; AP/Ky ratios computed by E. A. Jenne using procedures described by Nordstrom

and Jenne (1976). Leaders(__) indicate no data]

Station

Station 2 Hot Creek2 .. ...

Station 4 Hot Creek3 .

Year

.. _ 1935

1945 

..... 1933

1933 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1934

__ 19'33

1933 

1934

1934 

1934

Date

10/29 

10/4

10/-3 

11/6 

3/16 

4/9 

5/7 

9/17

io/¥

11/6 

3/16

5/7 

9/17

Sampling 

discharge (g/d x 18'°)

80.4 

7.1

5.6 

5.3 

6.9 

6.5 

7.6 

4.1

88J 

7.9 

9.8

10.0 

6.9

Chemical analyses 

(ppm)

PH

7.9 

7.9

7.7 

7.7 

8.1 

7.9 

7.8 

7.7

6T7 

6.9 

7.2

6.9

7.4

Ca

21.2 

33.3

12.2 

14.0 

13.4 

13.0 

13.6 

11.6

13.2 

16.2 

14.2

18.2 

12.2

Mg

6.2 

28.1

7.9 

10.7 

9.7 

7.1 

8.5 

7.7

7.3 

7.7 

9.7

8.9 

5.3

Na

47.59 

79.08

34.48 

25.75 

29.43 

27.82 

16.55 

32.41

125.06 

118.16 

100.92

93.10 

132.41

K

11.34

4.30 

11.73

'6.65

12.12 

12.12

SO4

18.73 

29.30

12.97 

15.85 

19.69 

11.05 

9.61 

9.61

27.38 

33.14 

40.83

15.85 

35.06

Cl

25.53 

58.50

13.48 

10.28 

10.28 

11.70 

9.93 

10.28

64.18 

67.38 

59.22

51.77 

74.82

B

0.80 

1.48

.39 

.40 

.34 

.34 

.49 

.43

2.86 

2.98 

2.47

2.35 

3.38

F

0.6 

.6

.4 

.5 

.2 

.2 

.4 

.2

2.6 

3.0 

2.2

2.4 

3.2

C°

(esti 10°)

20 

20 

25 

10 

8 

7 

7 

9 

15 

20 

10 

8 

7 

17 

7 

9 

19

AP/KT 

(fluorite, CaF2> 

(l=saturation 

under equilibrium 

conditions)

0.035 

.045 

.038 

.01 

.025 

.004 

.004 

.016 

.0027 

.0023 

.52 

.90 

.44 

.31 

.71 

.75 

.54

'At aqueduct intake. 

'Station 2 is upstream jpstream fromn the major thermal springs in canyon, but downstream from Casa Diablo hot spring and other thermal areas. 

'Station 4 is downstream from major thermal springs.
100 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

the age of the volcanic rocks involved in the Long Valley 

caldera. Minimum reasonable estimates of the time at 

which the associated thermal springs are likely to have 

been initiated are in excess of 100,000 years, and the 

best estimates are nearer 300,000 (Bailey and others, 

1976). The 32,000 years of spring discharge that can be 

accounted for by the deposits in Searles Lake leaves 

about eight times that amount unaccounted for. It 

seems unlikely that existing subsurface data could have 

overlooked one or more deposits of this size, although 

obviously it is not impossible. Alternative explanations 

that would provide for a smaller mineral discharge from 

the caldera area during its first 270,000 years of cooling 

and much more intense discharge thereafter seem 

worth exploring.

The third line of evidence indicating that streams discharging from the Long Valley area carried most of the 

valuable components now found in Searles Lake comes 

from the similarity in the ratios of spring-derived elements in various parts of the Owens River (table 44). 

Changes occur, but they are mostly small or occur for 

reasons that can be demonstrated or are plausible. Between Hot Creek and Lake Crowley, as a result of mixing with waters from the upper Owens River and Mono 

Basin, the Na/K and C1/SO4 ratios are reduced by almost 

half because of the low ratios (5.9 and 0.33) in those 

waters (Eccles, 1976). The K/B ratio increases because of 

mixing with waters having ratios near 8. The Cl/B ratio 

increases for reasons that are unclear because the added 

water has a ratio near 17; possibly some Cl is added by 

drainage from other tributaries. Ratios for B/Li and F/Li 

increase slightly, possibly because some Li is adsorbed by 

the muds of Lake Crowley.

Between Lake Crowley and Haiwee Reservoir (10 km 

south of Owens Lake), the Na/K ratio stays nearly the 

same while the C1/SO4 ratio decreases, possibly because 

gypsum is being dissolved from the upper Cenozoic lake 

deposits that lie east of this segment of the river. The 

constant Na/K ratio, combined with small increases in 

the Cl/B and K/B ratios, suggests that proportional 

amounts of Na, Cl, and K are added without proportional amounts of B. This, combined with the fact that

TABLE 44.—Comparison of ratios of selected ions in waters from Long Valley 

area, Owens River, and Searles Lake

Ratio

Na/K....... ..

Cl/SO* ........

Cl/B . . .

K/B .........

B/Li ... ..

F/Li ___ -

Hot Creek 

gorge 1

16.7

2.2

21.4

2 3

4.6

Lake Crowley 1

8.5

1.4

27.3

5.1

Owens River 

and/(or) 

L.A. aqueduct2

7.6, 10.0

.8, .5

36.4

8.8

3.0

4.8

Searles Lake 

Upper Salt3

16.5

2.3

56.7

3.5

132

.24

•Data from table 39.

2 Data from table 41, columns 2 and 3; both ratios listed where possible.

3Data from table 42, and Smith (1973, and unpub. data, 1976).

the F/Li ratio stays about the same while the B/Li ratio 

decreases, suggests the enroute addition of small 

amounts of Li and F from springs.

Data plotted in figure 45 suggests that most of the 

boron, sulfate, and potassium in the lower Owens River 

reached Searles Lake. Changes in the ratios that include 

these elements are explained using this assumption. Increases between the Owens River and Searles Lake in 

the Na/K, C1/SO4, and Cl/B ratios thus suggest that additional sources of NaCl were draining into the river during pluvial periods; this explanation is consistent with 

the surplus of Na, Cl, and Br indicated by figure 45 and 

discussed previously. The decrease in the K/B ratio is 

consistent with the earlier conclusion that a little K was 

lost and that some B was added, but that the changes in 

relative total amounts were not large.

The notably large increase in the B/Li ratio indicates a 

major loss of Li. The change in ratios suggests that 

about 98 percent of the amount introduced into the first 

lake of the once-connected chain was lost during transit. 

(The data in table 42 and fig. 45 suggest that 95 percent 

was lost.) The decrease in the F/Li shows that even more 

F than Li was lost and that only about 0.1 percent of the 

F originally contributed by the Owens River reached 

Searles Lake. (Fig. 45 suggests that about 0.3 percent of 

the F reached the salt lake.)

PRESENT RELATION BETWEEN RUNOFF 

AND BORON AND CHLORINE CONTENTS

The conclusions of this paper depend in part on the 

likelihood that the annual tonnages of components derived from thermal springs remained nearly constant 

during times when flow in the Owens River exceeded 

that of the present by as much as an order of magnitude 

(Smith, 1976). The evidence of this constancy comes 

from the low to negative correlation between discharge 

of both the Owens River and Hot Creek and from the 

relative long-term constancy in the tonnages of boron 

and chlorine contained by them.

Table 45 lists the annual discharge of the Owens River 

and the tonnages of boron and chlorine dissolved in it 

during the period 1929-45. During the 17 years of sampling (about 350 samples), the daily discharge varied by 

a factor of about 32; the concentration of boron in water 

samples varied by a factor of 7, and the estimated boron 

tonnage per day varied by a factor of almost 40. The 

tonnages of boron and chlorine carried during a full 

year, however, varied much less. During the 17-year 

period, the quantity of boron3 varied from 150 t/yr to

"These values for annual quantities were derived by plotting each of the samples listed by 

Wilcox(1946, table 1) at the appropriate point on the horizontal axis of 365-day graph paper, 

with the vertical axis representing the tons per day on that day. The points were then connected with straight lines, and the area beneath the curve was integrated mechanically using a 

planimeter. The total area was then converted to total tonnes per year.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 101

TABLE 45—Annual discharge and tonnages of boron and chlorine in Owens 

River, 1929-45

[Data from Wilcox, 1946, tables I and 12; sample point at aqueduct intake near Aberdeen; 

quantities in metric tonnes (t) and parts per million (ppm)]

Year

1929 .___ ---__ ---„

1930 .-.... —— __ — —

1931 _ - __ . .. __ ._

1932 ---__ _--_-. __ .-

1933 __--- . _ _ - -

1934 ___ — _-_ ________

1935 —— — ___ ——— —

1936 __-- . _ .. -----

1937 ------- - .. ---_

1938 ——— — ——— - ——

1939 --------- _ ----

1940 -_ -.-....

1941 -... _ _ , ....

1942 .. ....... __ _

1943 --- -.._ -. -. ._

1944 - ........ __ _

1945 __...

Standard deviation^) _ __

Six _——.._ —— --- —— _-

Discharge 

(t/yrxl08 )

1.78

2.78

2.68

2.77

2.94

2.45

3.02

2.61

3.21

3.82

3.26

2.71

2.83

3.18

3 24

2 97

.50 

.17

Average 

concentration 

of boron 

(ppm)

0.77

.57

.62

.98

1.12

.93

.76

.78

.84

.72

.72

.76

.78

.63

.63

.78

.67

.77

.14 

.18

Total 

boron

(t/vr)

146

166

178

264

274

261

236

227

327

279

232

208

212

244

202

206

46 

.20

Total 

chlorine

(t/yr)

4,870

6,040

5,990

8,330

9,470

8,000

7,360

8,890

11,700

9,510

7,320

'6,670

2 6,950

8,030

9,140

6,810

7,970

7,830

1,630

'Waters from Mono Basin added to Owens River after April 1940.

'Lone Valley Dam completed April 1941; Long Valley Reservoir (Lake Crowley) averages 

seasonal variations in later years.

330 t/yr, averaged 230 t/yr, and had a standard deviation of 40 t/yr, or about 20 percent of the average. This 

compares favorably with data compiled by Goudey 

(1936) who estimated an annual average of 228 tonnes 

of boron for the years 1928-36 at the San Fernando 

Powerhouse (at the south end of the aqueduct) and an 

average boron concentration of 0.71 ppm. During the 

same period, the annual quantity of chlorine in the river 

varied from 4,900 t/yr to 11,700 t/yr, averaged 7,800 

t/yr, and had a standard deviation of 1,600 t/yr, again 

about 20 percent of the average.

Variations in the tonnages of boron and chlorine 

from year to year (table 45) were as much as 50 percent 

of the average, but their pattern of variations is similar 

(correlation coefficient=0.92). The relations between 

the annual quantities of boron and chlorine in a given 

year and total annual discharge for that year, though, 

are not especially close. Correlation coefficients for 

boron and chlorine versus discharge are both near 0.55. 

After 1941, all the water from the Long Valley area was 

stored temporarily in the Long Valley Reservoir (Lake 

Crowley), and most of the seasonal inequalities in dissolved solids were removed. (The Mono Basin Tunnel, put 

in service in April 1940, does not appear to have introduced significant amounts of additional boron and 

chlorine; the average amounts of boron and chlorine 

during the years 1940-45 are 223 and 7,595 metric tons, 

somewhat less than the 1929-39 averages of 235 and 

7,930 tons.) The remaining annual variation of 15 percent (between 1942 and 1945) suggests that some boron 

was still being added erratically from sources 

downstream from the reservoir.

The data in table 40 (which shows the monthly 

amounts of boron and chlorine in Hot Creek) suggest 

that the amount of boron added by the largest set of

thermal springs in the Long Valley caldera area is almost uninfluenced by seasonal variation in runoff, although the chlorine may be slightly affected. Sets of 

samples taken along Hot Creek (table 40) show that waters issuing from spings that flow into the creek, between 

Station 2 and Station 4 (of Wilcox, 1946), contribute 

about 30 percent of the water and most of the boron and 

chlorine in the creek. Variations in the total discharge of 

the creek change the element concentrations but do not 

greatly change the tonnages being carried by it. Table 

40 lists the average boron and chlorine concentration 

for 10 months (spread over a 12-month period) in waters from above and below the thermal springs, and the 

estimated tonnages carried each month by the creek 

past each station. It also lists the tonnages of boron carried by the Owens River where it enters the Los Angeles 

Aqueduct Intake 90 km to the south. About 33 percent 

of the boron that entered the aqueduct came from Hot 

Creek, and about 89 percent of that portion came from 

the interval between Stations 2 and 4 which includes the 

termal springs.

The standard deviations in the monthly runoff and 

tonnages of boron and chlorine in waters from above 

the springs (Station 2) are 20, 26, and 21 percent of the 

mean values, and the correlation coefficients between 

these tonnages and discharge are 0.83 and 0.90. This 

means that the relatively minor sources upstream from 

this point that contribute these elements are responsive 

to runoff. (Tonnages in the Owens River vary monthly 

by larger amounts, and the standard deviation is nearly 

half the mean value, suggesting that many of the other 

sources that contribute boron are also seasonal and (or) 

responsive to discharge.) Variations in the monthly tonnages in the waters at Station 4, just below the 

springs—even including the variations that affected the 

upstream waters at Station 2—are less than 5 percent 

during the sampled year, and correlation coefficients 

between total discharge and tonnages of boron and 

chlorine passing Station 2 are subtracted from the 

amounts passing Station 4 are near 0.50. However, 

when the tonnages of boron and chloride passing Station 2 are subtracted from the amounts passing Station 4 

(which represents the combined thermal-spring discharge and the flow passing Station 2), the remaining 

quantities represent the amounts coming from the 

springs themselves. When these quantities are plotted 

against stream discharge at Station 4, boron has a correlation coefficient of —0.42 and chlorine a coefficient of 

0.26. The negative coefficient for boron is probably a 

result of the fact that the amounts of boron passing 

Station 2 were proportional to discharge, and when this 

was subtracted from the relatively constant amounts 

(x=6.5 t/mo,5=0.38) issuing from the thermal springs, a 

negative correlation results. The very low coefficient for
102 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

chlorine was partly due to the same effect, but the large 

difference between the numbers for boron and chlorine 

suggests that although there is no correlation between 

discharge and the tonnage of boron from the main 

thermal springs, there may be some correlation between discharge and tonnage of chlorine.

The primary source of almost all the boron in the 

Owens River is presumably from thermal springs similar 

to those immediately upstream from Station 4, and this 

relation suggests that seasonal variations in the tonnages 

of primary boron are minimal. On this basis and on the 

basis of relatively small variations in annual amounts, it 

seems reasonable to suggest that increases in boron output of these thermal springs during pluvial periods were 

small. Lithium and the other components contributed 

by these springs are assumed to have also been introduced to the tributary streams at nearly consistent rates. 

CONCLUSIONS

The data presented here suggest that most of the 

lithium and other unusual components in the Upper 

Salt and Lower Salt of Searles Lake came from thermal 

springs in the Long Valley area, but that more than 95 

percent of that lithium was lost before reaching Searles 

Valley. If losses of lithium had been reduced to 80 percent, the concentration of lithium in Searles Lake brines 

would be about 300 ppm—approximately the concentration in the brines in Clayton Valley, Nev., which are 

exploited solely for lithium. In prospecting for lithium 

brines that can become resources, therefore, finding an 

adequate source of lithium in spring waters clearly is 

only the first step. Important but unanswered questions 

remain as to what geologic environments are most likely 

to transport a relatively large percentage of that lithium 

from the point where it reaches the surface to an area 

where it can be concentrated.

Most of the boron, sulfate, and potassium in the 

Owens River reached Searles Valley, but high percentages of most other components were lost enroute. 

About one-third of the sodium, chlorine, and bromine 

came from springs in the Long Valley area, but about 

two-thirds of these substances were derived from sea 

salts carried by the atmosphere and by erosion of 

Cenozoic lake deposits in downstream areas.

Economic deposits of lithium-rich clays or brines 

might exist in Owens and China Lakes, where the missing lithium is most likely to have been trapped; but it 

seems more likely that the clays in Owens and China 

Lakes adsorbed the lithium so now the lithium is in a 

form that is not economic. The amount of fluorine that 

is contributed by the Owens River annually (140 t/yr) 

and the large amount that was lost suggest strongly that 

it precipitated as fluorite in the same basins, possibly in 

significant concentrations.

A problem arises in reconciling the small amount of

time apparently needed to accumulate the valuable salts 

now found in Searles Valley—about 32,000 years—to 

the time the thermal springs in Long Valley are likely to 

have been active. Either large deposits of salts remain 

undiscovered or only the later stages of spring activity 

contributed unusual elements to the Owens River.

REFERENCES CITED

Antevs, E. V., 1936, Pluvial and postpluvial fluctuations of climate in 

the southwest: Carnegie Inst. Washington Year Book 35, p. 322- 

323.

————1938, Postpluvial climatic variations in the Southwest: Am.

Meteorol. Soc. Bull., v. 19, no. 5, p. 190-193. 

Austin, C. F., Austin, W. H., Jr., and Leonard, G. W., 1971, Geothermal science and technology, a national program: Naval Weapons

Center, China Lake, Calif. Tech. Ser. 45-029-72, 95 p. 

Bailey, R. A., Dalrymple, G B., and Lanphere, M. A., 1976, Volcanism,

structure, and geochronology of Long Valley Caldera, Mono

County, California: Jour. Geophys. Research, v. 81, no. 5,

p. 725-744. 

California Department of Water Resources, 1967, Investigation of

geothermal waters in the Long Valley area, Mono County,

California: California Dept. Water Resources Rept., July 1967,

141 p. 

Duffield, W. A., and Bacon, C. R., 1976, Preliminary geologic map of

the Coso rhyolite domes and adjacent areas, Inyo County,

California: U.S. Geol. Survey open-file rept. 76-238. 

Eccles, L. A., 1976, Sources of arsenic in streams tributary to Lake

Crowley, California: U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Resources Inv.

WRI 76-36. 

Friedman, Irving, Smith, G. I., and Hardcastle, K. G., 1976, Studies of

Quaternary saline lakes—II. Isotope and compositional changes

during desiccation of the brines in Owens Lake, Calif., 1969-71:

Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 40, no. 5, p. 501-511. 

Gale, H. S., 1914, Salines in the Owens, Searles, and Panamint basins,

southeastern California: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 580, p. 251-323. 

Goudey, R. F., 1936, Solving boron problems in Los Angeles water

supply: Western Construction News, Sept. 1936, p. 295-297. 

Haines, D. V., 1959, Core logs from Searles Lake, San Bernardino

County, California: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1045-E, p. 139-317. 

Holser, W. T., 1970, Bromide geochemistry of some non-marine salt

deposits in the southern Great Basin: Mineralog. Soc. America

Spec. PaperS, p. 307-319. 

Hopper, R. H., 1947, Geologic section from the Sierra Nevada to

Death Valley, California: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 58, no. 5,

p. 393-432. 

Mariner, R. H., and Willey, L. M., 1976, Geochemistry of thermal

waters in Long Valley, Mono County, California: Jour. Geophys.

Research, v. 81, no. 5, p. 792-800. 

Matsuo, Sadao, Friedman, Irving, and Smith, G. I., 1972, Studies of

Quaternary saline lakes-I, Hydrogen isotope fractionation in

saline minerals: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 36, no. 4,

p. 427-435. 

Nordstrom, D. K., and Jenne, E. A., 1976, Fluorite solubility equilibria

in selected geothermal waters: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta (in

press). 

Schultz, J. R., 1937, A late Cenozoic vertebrate fauna from the Coso

Mountains, Inyo County, California: California: Carnegie Inst.

Washington Pub. 487, p. 75-109. 

Smith, G. I., 1973, Subsurface stratigraphy and composition of saline

bodies, Searles Lake, California—A preliminary report: U.S.

Geol. Survey open-file rept., 122 p.

————1976, Paleoclimatic record in the late Quaternary sediments of 

Searles Lake, California, U.S.A., in Horie, S., ed., Internal, sym-
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 103

posium on global-scale paleolimnology and paleoclimate: Kyoto 

Univ., Kyoto, Japan (in press).

Smith, G. I., and Friedman, Irving, 1975, Chemical sedimentation and 

diagenesis of Pleistocene evaporites in Searles Lake, California, 

U.S.A., in Theme 2—Les divers aspects geochimiques de la 

sedimentation continentale: Congres International de Sedimentologie, IXme , Nice, 1975, p. 137-140.

Smith, G. I., and Haines, D. V., 1964, Character and distribution of

nonclastic minerals in the Searles Lake evaporite deposit, California: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1181-P, 58 p.

Smith, G. I., and Pratt, W. P., 1957, Core logs from Owens, China, 

Searles, and Panamint basins, California: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 

1045-A, 62 p.

Wilcox, L. V., 1946, Boron in the Los Angeles (Owens River) 

aqueduct: U.S. Dept. Agr. Bureau of Plant Industry Research 

Rept. 78, 66 p.

USE OF LITHIUM AND CHLORIDE CONCENTRATIONS IN 

GROUND WATER FOR LITHIUM EXPLORATION

By COLE L. SMITH, U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, DENVER, CO

ABSTRACT

The use of spring-water composition in geochemical exploration for 

lithium-rich brines was investigated. In arid regions, the ratio of metal 

ion to chloride ion versus chloride ion yields least-squares straight lines 

having characteristic slopes. The concentration of chloride ron in 

spring waters is used as a general indicator of the extent of evaporative 

concentration of the spring waters. The slopes of the straight lines are 

related to the solubility of secondary minerals that have formed in the 

vadose zone. The kinetics of dissolution of these secondary minerals 

control the amount of a particular ion that reaches the ground-water 

table. In the case of lithium, hot springs were chosen as the water type 

whose chemical composition would be the most useful in exploring for 

subsurface brines. Their deep circulation allows some mixing with 

fossil ground water and (or) brines. Deviations from the characteristic 

slopes of the graphs indicate that chemical processes other than those 

occurring in the vadose zone have influenced the chemical composition of the spring waters. Lithium-rich brines, such as the Salton Sea 

geothermal system, Clayton Valley, Nev., and Great Salt Lake, have 

associated hot springs with anomalous compositions.

INTRODUCTION

Since lithium-rich brines were first produced in 1938 

at Searles Lake, Calif., lithium from brines has contributed an increasingly larger percentage of the total 

lithium production of the United States. At the present 

time, about one-third of the total production is from 

brine deposits (J. D. Vine, oral commun., 1975). Brine 

areas from which lithium is currently being produced or 

could potentially be produced are located in arid regions of the Western United States. Brines currently in 

production are located at Searles Lake, Calif., and 

Clayton Valley, Nev. Brines that potentially could produce lithium are located at Great Salt Lake, Utah, and in 

the Imperial Valley geothermal system in California.

DISCUSSION

This study was conducted to evaluate a near-surface 

geochemical-exploration technique as a means of locating lithium-rich brines. There is an obvious advantage 

to using samples that can be collected at or near the 

surface as opposed to samples that must be collected 

using more expensive exploration techniques, such as 

drilling. Because hot springs contain water that has been 

deeply circulated and consequently has had the opportunity to mix with fossil waters including brines, they 

were chosen as the sampling media. Also, the chemistry 

of hot springs has proven useful in estimating reservoir 

temperature in geothermal exploration, and relatively 

large amounts of data have been published on their 

compositions. The hot-springs data used in this paper 

have been previously published by Mariner, Rapp, Willey, and Presser (1974a), White (1968), Sanders and 

Miles (1974), Kunasz (1970), and Willey, O'Neil, and 

Rapp (1974). The data used in this report were restricted largely to hot springs in the arid regions of 

California, Oregon, Nevada, and Arizona; limited data 

from Utah were also included.

Lithium data are presented in the graphical form of 

the logarithm of the lithium- to chloride-concentration 

ratio times 100 versus the logarithm of the chloride concentration (fig. 46). Chloride ion was chosen as an indicator of the extent of evaporative concentration of the 

ground water for five reasons: (1) Usually the major 

source of chloride in ground water is atmospheric precipitaiton. (2) When ground water is evaporatively concentrated, chloride is one of the last ions to precipitate 

and to form a secondary solid phase. It is also one of the 

first ions to go back into solution on subsequent wetting 

of the precipitated phase. (3) Because the chloride ion 

possesses a single negative charge, it is unlikely to be the 

ion exchanged in the sediments. (4) Chloride ion usually 

makes up a large percentage of the total dissolved solids 

of ground water. (5) It is a relatively easy and inexpensive ion to analyze. By dividing the concentration of the
104 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

1.0

-2.0

o 

o

ou o

oft, o

°° 0° * 

o o o

o o 

o 

o

o o ~

o °o 

o

o o

o o 

o o o0o °

0 £ V °

o

00

00

OQO o 0 °.4b

•1.0 1.0 2.0

LOG Cl

3.0 4.0 50

FIGURE 46.—Variation diagram showing the lithium: chloride ratio versus chloride in brines and in waters from hot springs. Squares represent some of the dilute hot springs having high lithium-to-chloride ratios that are not associated with known high-lithium brines. Triangles represent hot springs associated with economic or potentially economic lithium-rich brines. Diamonds represent economic or 

potentially economic lithium-rich brines. Data points in area 1 are located near Mono Lake, Calif.; 2, Steamboat Springs, Nev.; 3, 

Clayton Valley, Nev., hot spring; 3', Clayton Valley, Nev. brine; 4a, Ogden hot spring; 4b, Utah hot spring near the Great Salt Lake; 4', 

Great Salt Lake brine; 5, Sportsman Mud hot spring in Imperial Valley, Calif.; 5', Imperial Valley geothermal brine.

metal ion by the chloride ion and plotting this value 

against the chloride concentration, the behavior of the 

metal ion on evaporative concentration of the gound 

water can be demonstrated. If the metal ion, relative to 

chloride, is not removed from or added to solution upon 

evaporative concentration of the ground water, the ratio 

remains the same and the slope of a straight line fitted 

through the data points is zero. If the concentration of 

the metal ion remains relatively constant while the concentration of chloride increases, then the slope of a 

straight line through the data points is a minus one. This 

situation might occur if (1) dissolution of salt beds adds 

chloride without adding the other ion or (2) the concentration of the other ion is controlled by forming a 

solid phase below the ground-water table. For example, 

at pH's less than about 9.2, silica concentration has an 

upper limit of 120 ppm independent of evaporative 

concentration of the water because amorphous silica 

forms when the concentration exceeds this value.

Another process that would cause a slope of a minus one 

is the formation of secondary minerals in the vadose 

zone. When the metal ion forms a relatively insoluble 

secondary phase in the vadose zone, sufficient rainfall 

can cause chloride to be carried to the ground-water 

table while the metal ion remains in the vadose zone. In 

the case of lithium, some but not all of this ion is immobilized relative to chloride, and a straight line fitted 

to the logarithm of the data produces a slope between 

zero and minus one. Logarithms are used because the 

chloride concentration of spring waters will vary from 

about 1 ppm to over 100,000 ppm; and the slope of the 

data—not the correlation between lithium and 

chloride—is the important quantity. This type of display 

allows the identification of anomalous concentrations of 

lithium because background values can be characterized. Even though hot springs are deeply circulated 

waters, near-surface processes can have a strong influence on the chemistry of these waters. Most hot springs
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 105

are heated, local meteoric waters of surface origin 

(Craig and others, 1956; Craig, 1963). In the arid Western United States, evaporation often plays a dominant 

role in controlling both ground-water and hot-spring 

chemistry.

The known lithium-rich brines, with the exception of 

the brine present at Searles Lake, are characterized by 

associated hot springs having high chloride concentrations and relatively high lithium-to-chloride ratios. The 

hot spring associated with the Clayton Valley brine is 

clearly the most anomalous of the group. Utah and 

Ogden hot springs, which are near the Great Salt Lake, 

are possibly mixed with a subsurface lithium-rich brine. 

The association of the Sportsman Mud hot spring with 

the Imperial Valley geothermal brine has been postulated by White (1968). Additional dilute hot springs 

have anomalous ratios but are associated with no known 

brines containing lithium of economic importance. 

These include hot springs at Steamboat Springs, in 

Nevada, and near Mono Lake, Calif.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the known lithium-rich brine deposits have 

associated hot springs whose lithium-to-chloride ratio is 

above background. Characteristically, these springs 

have chloride concentrations over 400 ppm. The ratio

of lithium to chloride is of less importance than the behavior of the ratio upon evaporative concentration of 

the ground water.

REFERENCES CITIED

Craig, Harmon, 1963, The isotopic geochemistry of water and carbon 

in geothermal areas, in Nuclear geology on geothermal areas, 

Spoleto 1963: Pisa, Consiglio nazionale delle ricerche, 

Laboratorio de geologia nucleare, p. 17-53 [1968].

Craig, Harmon, Boato, Giovanni, and White, D. E., 1956, Isotopic 

geochemistry of thermal waters [Chap.] 5 of Nuclear processes in 

geologic settings: Natl. Research Council, Comm. Nuclear Sci., 

Nuclear Sci. Ser. Rept., no. 19, p. 29-38.

Kunasz, I. A., 1970, Geology and geochemistry of the lithium deposit 

in Clayton Valley, Esmeralda County, Nevada: Pennsylvania State 

Univ. Ph.D. thesis, 128 p.

Mariner, R. H., Rapp, J. B., Willey, L. M., and Presser, T. S., 1974a, 

The chemical composition and estimated minimum thermal reservoir temperatures of the principal hot springs of northern and 

central Nevada: U.S. Geol. Survey open-file rept., 32 p.

————1974b, The chemical composition and estimated minimum 

thermal reservoir temperatures of selected hot springs in Oregon: 

U.S. Geol. Survey open-file rept., 27 p.

Sanders, J. W., and Miles, M. J., 1974, Mineral content of selected 

geothermal waters: Univ. Nevada System, Center for Water Resources Research Project Rept. no. 26, 37 p.

White, D. E., 1968, Environments of generation of some base-metal 

ore deposits: Econ. Geology, v. 63, no. 4, p. 301-335.

Willey, L. M., O'Neil, J. R., and Rapp, J. B., 1974, Chemistry of thermal waters in Long Valley, Mono County, California: U.S. Geol. 

Survey open-file rept., 19 p.

THE INFLUENCE OF DRAINAGE BASIN AREA UPON THE 

DISTRIBUTION OF LITHIUM IN PLAYA SEDIMENTS

By JOSEPH R. DAVIS, U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, DENVER, CO

ABSTRACT

Sediment samples were collected from 41 playas in the Basin and 

Range province of the United States and were analyzed for lithium. 

The influence of drainage basin size upon the distribution of lithium 

was examined statistically in order to explain a portion of the variance 

observed in the lithium values. The present-day drainage basin area 

shows no correlation with lithium concentration, but modifying the 

drainage basin area to simulate Pleistocene overflow of pluvial lakes or 

hydrologic underflow produces significant correlation between drainage area and lithium. The linear relationship assumed in this correlation explains about 20 percent of the total variance in the lithium 

distribution observed in the suite of playa samples.

INTRODUCTION

Brines associated with nonmarine evaporite sequences in desert basins currently constitute the only

nonpegmatite resource of lithium in the United States. 

Very little is known about the behavior of lithium in the 

sedimentary cycle or about the relationship between the 

lithium content of the desert basins sediments and the 

occurrence of economically exploitable lithiumcontaining brines. Whereas playas represent the topographic low points of desert basins, they therefore 

should receive the ions weathered from the bedrock and 

transported by surface and ground waters. Therefore, 

though other factors are certainly involved, it is conceivable that a relationship exists between the area of the 

drainage basin and the amount of lithium transported 

to the playa. The primary objective of this report is to 

examine the relationship between areal factors and the 

distribution of lithium in playa sediments.
106 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

METHODS

A geochemical reconnaissance of over forty structural 

basins in the western part of the Basin and Range province was conducted by Robert Bohannon, Cole Smith, 

James Vine and the author in 1973-75 in order to study 

the distribution of lithium in the surficial sediments of 

these basins. Sediment samples were taken from hand 

dug pits and auger holes which penetrated the playa 

surface to maximum depths of about two metres. An 

effort was made to sample the central part of the playas, 

but access was often United to the edge of the playa. 

Samples which contained visible and sand size material 

or large quantities of evaporite minerals were not included in the sample suite which is summarized in table 

46. All analyses were determined by atomic adsorption.

DISTRIBUTION OF LITHIUM 

IN PLAYA SEDIMENTS

The distributions of most trace-elements are thought 

to approximate the lognormal distribution (Till, 1974, 

p. 43). Analytical values are therefore often transformed to logarithms in order to normalize the distribution and to improve the efficiency of the estimates of 

population parameters such as the mean (/-i) and standard deviation (a). Although the frequency distribution 

of the 156 lithium analyses summarized in table 46 is 

skewed to the right and displays a large amount of variaTABLE 46.—Lithium distribution in selected basins of internal drainage

Area

Abert and Summer Lakes _ 

Alkali Spring ___ __ ___ _.

Alvord Lake _ _ __

Amargosa River _ _ __

Big Smoky, North Valley ___ __

Big Smoky, South Valley __ _ _

Buffalo Valley . __ _

Christmas and Silver Lakes ___

Clayton Valley __ _ __. ._

Columbus Salt Marsh _. __ __

Death Valley _____ _ _ _ _ _

Diamond Valley ___ ___ „ _

Dixie Valley —— ————— ._ —— __

Edwards Creek Valley. _. _ _ __

Eureka Valley . .. __ _ __

Fish Lake Valley ___ _ _ __

Gabbs Vallev .___ __ _ ________

Goshute Lake __ _____ . _

Granite Springs Valley

Grass Valley _ __ __ __

Harney Lake ______ _ _ _ ___ ___

Jakes Valley . __ ____ ____ __ __

Kumiva Valley _

Lahontan Valley ._ ___ _

Lake Valley __ ___ __ ___ ___ ___

Long Valley _ _______ __

Monitor Valley __ ____ ___

Newark Lake __ _ __

Owens Lake (dry) __ _ _ ___

Panamint Valley .. __ ___

Railroad Valley ____ _____

Ralston Valley _ ... ___ __

Rhodes Salt Marsh _ _____ __

Ruby Valley . _____ __ ...

Saline Valley _ __ _ _ _

Smith Creek Valley __ .... _____

Soda Spring Valley __ .. ___ __

Spring Valley _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _

Steptoe Valley ____ _ __ __

Stonewall Flat .. .. _. __ __

Tikaboo Valley _ .__ __ __

County and state

Lake Co Ore _ .... 

Esmeralda Co., Nev

Harney Co., Ore

Nye Co., Nev _

. do_ .

Esmeralda Co., Nev

Lander Co., Nev

Lake Co., Ore .. ..

Esmeralda Co., Nev__

—— do— ——— ———

Inyo Co., Calif _

Eureka Co., Nev ____

Churchill Co., Nev „

Lander Co., Nev __

Inyo Co., Calif _ _

Esmeralda Co., Nev

Mineral Co., Nev ...

Elko Co., Nev _ ....

Pershing Co., Nev _.

Eureka Co., Nev

Harney Co., Ore _ _

White Pine Co., Nev

Pershing Co., Nev __

Churchill Co., Nev —

White Pine Co., Nev

Mono Co., Calif _ _

Nye Co., Nev _ ....

White Pine Co., Nev

Inyo Co., Calif ___ _

._ -do _ ___

Nye Co., Nev-- ---

-.- do _-_ --_.

Mineral Co., Nev - -

Elko Co., Nev ___ _

Inyo Co., Calif _____

Lander Co., Nev ...

Mineral Co., Nev -_-

White Pine Co., Nev

——do—— —————

Nye Co., Nev__

Clark Co., Nev __ __

Number

of

samples

3 

2

—— 1

3

4

8

.___ 3

__ _ 1

.___ 5

__- 2

-.-_ 7

____ 4

-___ 3

__ _ 5

5

7

__ _ 3

_ __ 4

_ _ 3

____ 5-

4

1 —— 3

__„ 15

__-. 1

4

3

_ __ 6

__ _ 4

1

-__. 3

6

I

4

— _ 3

4

4

_-._ 7

__ 1 —— 2

3

Li,

mean

(ppm)

60 

64

12

267

139

100

92

33

147

150

207

56

62

58

162

213

36

25

102

208

43

60

56

107

16

250

60

70

48

190

88

60

31

64

33

61

32

37

43

65

40

Li,

range

(ppm)

29-80 

63-64

230-310

130-155

42-160

37-170

73-220

100-200

87-500

46-69

35-87

50-85

68-280

63-460

28-40

15-62

75-150

150-270

36-50

52-59

44-200

__

40-460

40-75

61-85

34-66

63-120

25-76

55-80

32-36

49-85

29-37

10-57

64-65

38-42

tion, the hypothesis that the natural logarithms of the 

analyses are normally distributed is rejected when the 

chi-square (x2) test is employed (x2 (0-05,11)= 19.76). In 

this case lithium is considered to display a pseudolognormal distribution. Although Link and Koch (1975) 

have discussed some of the consequences of making the 

lognormal transformation on pseudolognormal populations, the analytical values were transformed into 

natural logarithms in order to facilitate graphic display 

of the data and to present some of the statistical tests 

discussed. The reader should be cognizant of the possible bias introduced by this transformation.

Figure 47 illustrates the frequency distribution of the 

156 playa samples, and figure 48 is a similar diagram of 

the 41 playa mean values. The range in lithium values 

for the 156 playa samples is 10-460 ppm; the arithmetic 

mean is 99 ppm; and the mean of the natural logarithms 

is 74 ppm (table 47). These estimates of the population 

mean as well as estimates of the standard deviation are 

frequently used in geochemical exploration to define 

anomalous values; there is 97.7 percent probability that 

a random sample from a normally distributed population will be less than /-1+20-. Table 48 lists several estimates of this value.

Caution should be exercised in using this type of geochemical reconnaissance as an exploration tool. In addition to the bias introduced by the departure from a 

normal distribution, a large degree of variation was 

probably introduced by the lack of control over the location of the sample site and the mineralogical composition of the individual samples. Furthermore, there is as 

yet no clear understanding of the relationship between 

the lithium content in playa sediments and the concentration of lithium in subsurface brines. However, the 

facility with which sediment samples can be collected 

from playa surfaces relative to the difficulty of sampling

30 i25

20

15

10

n=!56

2.4 3.2 4.0 4.8 

LN LITHIUM (PPM)

5.6 6.4

FIGURE 47.—Frequency histogram of the lithium concentration of 156 

playa samples.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 107

o

z

UJ 

D 

O 

UJ<r

u_

35

30

25

20

15

10

5 

n

i—

-

-

—

1 —— 1

CVJ

n

IX

n = 41

|

1

2.4 3.2 4.0 4.8 

LN LITHIUM (PPM)

5.6

FIGURE 48.—Frequency histogram of the mean values of the lithium

samples.

TABLE 47.—Population statistics of lithium analyses

£

Sample

population

156 playa samples.- __

X.

irithmetic

mean

(ppm)

99

90

S,

arithmetic

standard

deviation

(ppm)

86

76

*ln,

mean of natural

logarithms

4.31

(74 ppm)

4.24

(69 ppm)

Sin.

standard

deviation of

natural logarithms

0.75

.73

TABLE 48.—Statistical estimates of a lithium anomaly

Sample 

population X;n +2S/n

156 playa samples __ 

41 playa mean values

271 ppm 

242 ppm

5.81 (334 ppm) 

5.70 (299 ppm)

interstitial brines somewhat compensates for the disadvantages of the method.

AREAL FACTORS INFLUENCING THE 

DISTRIBUTION OF LITHIUM

The suite of sediment samples collected in the reconnaissance was examined statistically in order to better 

understand the distribution of lithium in closed basin 

sediments. If the size of the drainage basin is an important factor in determining the amount of lithium introduced into the playa by weathering of the bedrock, 

there may be some relationship between drainage basin 

area and the lithium concentration in the playa sediments and interstitial waters. To assess this relationship, 

the natural logarithm of the area of each basin was plotted against the natural logarithm of the mean lithium 

value for that playa (fig. 49), and Pearson's productmoment coefficient of linear correlation was calculated. 

The value r= -0.1788 indicates no significant correlation at the 95 percent confidence level (Till, 1974, p. 

83-87).

The lack of a significant correlation in the relationship 

between lithium and drainage area does not necessarily 

preclude the importance of areal factors in the distribution of lithium. Many of the playa basins studied had 

different drainage areas during Pleistocene pluvial 

periods; some basins had pluvial lakes which spilled into 

adjacent basins. The expanded drainage area of basins 

which received pluvial overflow could be a significant 

factor in the accumulation of the unusual concentrations of soluble salts found in some of these basins. 

When the drainage basin areas were modified to allow 

for pluvial spillover (Snyder and others, 1964) and plotted against the mean lithium values (fig. 50), the correlation coefficient, r=0.3493, indicates significant correlation at the 95 percent confidence level; however r2 =0.12 

indicates that only 12 percent of the total variance observed in the lithium distribution is explained by the

6 r

0_ 

0_

r=-0.1788

n = 4l

j_____i_____i_____i

6 78 9 10 II 12 

LN BASIN AREA (KM 2)

FIGURE 49.—Plot of lithium values versus drainage basin area.
108 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

CL 

CL

r = 0.35

n = 24 

a = 0.05

7 8 9 10 

LN BASIN AREA (KM2 )

12

FIGURE 50.—Lithium versus drainage basin area. Area simulates pluvial spillover.

linear relationship between lithium concentration and 

area.

In expanding the concept of areal influence on 

lithium distribution, groundwater movement can also be 

considered. Some data are available which indicate probable hydrologic underflow in many of the basins studied 

in this reconnaissance (Hunt and others, 1966; Walker 

and Eakin, 1963; Rush and others, 1971). When the 

drainage basin areas were modified to simulate 

suggested hydrologic underflow and plotted against 

lithium concentration, the correlation coefficient increased to r=0.48 (fig. 51). The coefficient r2 = 0.23 for 

this improved correlation indicates that 23 percent of 

the variance in lithium concentration can be accounted 

for by the linear relationship between area and lithium 

concentration.

This rudimentary study was based upon the assumption that drainage basin size is the only factor influencing the weathering of bedrock and the subsequent 

transportation of ions to the playa. The significant correlation between drainage basin area and lithium concentration in the playa suggests that weathering of 

bedrock does indeed contribute lithium to the playa sedCL 

CL

78 9 10 II 

LN BASIN AREA (KM 2)

12

FIGURE 51.—Lithium versus drainage basin area. Area simulates hydrologic underflow.

iments. The importance of bedrock weathering as a 

lithium source might be clarified by considering other 

factors which could influence the amount of lithium 

reaching the playa; the chemical composition of the 

bedrock, as well as factors which influence weathering 

such as relief, slope, climate and vegetation, and factors 

influencing surface flow such as flow frequency, runoff, 

infiltration, and evaporation may significantly affect the 

amount of lithium reaching the playa. When the role of 

these factors are more thoroughly understood, it will be 

possible to evaluate more accurately the importance of 

regional sources of lithium which are not related to 

drainage basin morphology or process.

REFERENCES CITED

Hunt, C. B., Robinson, T. W., Bowles, W. A., and Washburn, A. L., 

1966, Hydrologic basin, Death Valley, California: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 494-B, 138 p.

Link, R. F., and Koch, G. S., Jr., 1975, Some consequences of applying 

lognormal theory to pseudolognormal distributions: Jour. Internal. Assoc. Math. Geology, v. 7, no. 2, p. 117-128.

Rush. F. E., Scott, B. R., Van Denburgh, A. S., and Vasey, B. J., 1971, 

Water resources and inter-basin flows, Map S-12 in Water for
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 109

Nevada—Hydrologic Atlas: Carson City, Nevada, Nevada Div. 

Water Resources.

Snyder, C. T., Hardman, George, and Zdenek, F. F., 1964, Pleistocene 

lakes in the Great Basin: U.S. Geol. Survey Misc. Geol. Inv. Map 

1-416.

Till, Roger, 1974, Statistical methods for the earth scientist: New York,

John Wiley & Sons, 154 p. 

Walker, G. E., and Eakin, T. E., 1963, Geology and ground water of

Amargosa Desert, Nevada-California: Nevada Dept. Conserv. and

Nat. Resources, Ground-Water Resources—Reconn. Ser. Rept.

14, 58 p.

THE TECTONIC AND SEDIMENTOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT

OF LITHIUM OCCURRENCES IN THE MUDDY

MOUNTAINS, CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA

By ROBERT G. BOHANNON, U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, DENVER, CO

ABSTRACT

In the vicinity of the Muddy Mountains of southern Nevada, the 

Horse Spring Formation of Miocene age and the Muddy Creek Formation of Miocene(?) and Pliocene age contain various saline deposits 

that are rich in lithium as well as other alkali metals and alkaline 

earths. The rocks of the Muddy Mountains have been involved in 

several episodes of deformation. Thrust faulting occurred during Cretaceous time and strike-slip faulting during Tertiary time. However, 

normal faulting in the Tertiary and Quaternary that is characteristic of 

basin and range deformation appears to have controlled the deposition of the Cenozoic rocks.

Lithium concentrations greater than 1,000 ppm occur in rocks in at 

least three geographic areas: West End Wash, White Basin, and Overton Ridge. High concentrations of lithium are associated with clays, 

borate mineralization, and magnesite deposition. In West End Wash 

and White Basin, lithologies and sedimentary structures suggest that 

the Horse Spring Formation and the borate minerals within it accumulated in a saline lake or hot spring environment. At Overton Ridge the 

magnesite member of the Horse Spring Formation probably formed 

in a similar environment, and associated coarse conglomerate within 

the Horse Spring indicates a nearby source of clastic material.

There is evidence that the Horse Spring Formation was deposited in 

a single, closed basin that may have covered much of the Muddy 

Mountains and the southern part of the Virgin Mountains. The deposition of the Muddy Creek Formation appears to have been confined 

to valleys presently in existence in southern Nevada.

INTRODUCTION

A varied section of upper Tertiary and Quaternary 

sedimentary rocks rims the west and south sides of the 

Muddy Mountains in southern Nevada (fig. 52); it is rich 

in lithium, magnesium, sodium, boron and manganese. 

This section, which contains abundant clay-rich clastic 

material, magnesite, dolomite, limestone, gypsum, halite 

and volcanogenic sedimentary rocks probably originated in a large, closed bolson because many of the deposits are characteristic of alluvial fans, playa lakes and 

river flood plains. Longwell (1928, 1949) and Longwell, 

Pampeyan, Bowyer, and Roberts (1965) subdivided the 

Tertiary rocks in some places, into the Miocene Horse

Spring and Miocene(?) and Pliocene Muddy Creek 

Formations, but they included equivalents of these units 

and some older rocks in the Cretaceous(P) and Tertiary

EXPLANATION 

„ Thrust fault

• Basin and Range 

margin

- Fault zone

FIGURE 52.—Index map of the major structural features in the vicinity 

of the Muddy Mountains, Nev. Square in left center of the diagram 

outlines the Muddy and Virgin Mountains and Frenchman Mountain. DV, Detrital Valley; RL, Red Lake.
110 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

Gale Hills and Thumb Formations in other places. Although geologic mapping is incomplete, much of the 

enrichment in light metals and boron and most of the 

exotic lithologies appear to be part of the Horse Spring 

Formation; the more uniform, clastic Muddy Creek 

Formation contains local pockets of manganese (McKelvey and others, 1949).

Because of the enrichment in lithium and other light 

elements within the Tertiary sedimentary section in the 

vicinity of the Muddy Mountains, a detailed study of 

these rocks is underway. These rocks are well suited for 

a study of lithium and its behavior in a nonmarine 

sedimentary environment because they are well exposed. Hence a good three-dimensional view of the 

rocks is possible, but complex geologic structures must 

be understood first. Once the details of the structural 

geology are ironed out, geochemical sampling of all the 

different sedimentary facies and environments can yield 

information relating to the localization of lithium, the 

chemical and mineralogical associations of lithium, the 

most likely sedimentary environments for lithium accumulation, the possible sources of lithium, and any 

necessary tectonic or volcanologic controls on lithium 

accumulation. This paper marks the beginning of such a 

long-range study; and, although the work is just in the 

stage of geologic mapping, the major structures and 

Tertiary sedimentary environments of the area can be 

described and preliminary geochemical data discussed.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This paper has benefited from many discussions with 

geologists associated with the U.S. Geological Survey's 

lithium program, and most of the chemical data referred to in the report were supplied by Alien Meier. 

Chemical analyses for lithium were performed in the 

field using an atomic-absorption apparatus. Powdered 

solid samples were dissolved in hydrofluoric acid and 

nitric acid and the solution taken to dryness. Hydrochloric acid was used to redissolve the remaining residue; distilled water was employed to dilute that solution.

TECTONIC SETTING

The Muddy Mountains occur where several major 

tectonic elements of differing ages come together (fig. 

52). A late Mesozoic zone of thrust faults and folds, the 

Sevier Orogenic belt (Armstrong, 1968), extends from 

northern Utah to southern California and includes most 

of the Muddy Mountains. The Glendale thrust and the 

Muddy Mountain thrust (Longwell, 1949) are the two 

principal low-angle faults resulting from this deformation. Also, the Walker Lane (Locke and others, 1940), 

which trends northwest through most of western and 

southern Nevada, terminates in the vicinity of the

Muddy Mountains. Albers (1967) proposed that the 

right-slip Las Vegas Shear Zone (Longwell, 1960) is part 

of the Walker Lane—which he claimed is as old as Jurassic but was active through the Miocene—and that the 

Muddy Mountains are a giant right-lateral "oroflex." 

Anderson (1973) however, has documented several left 

strike-slip faults north of Lake Mead within the rightlateral "oroflex", as proposed by Albers (1967), and 

these left-slip faults appear to be of about the same 

magnitude as the Las Vegas Shear.Zone (Stewart and 

others, 1968). Also, Fleck (1970) concluded that the Las 

Vegas Shear Zone is no older than 10.7 million years, or 

about the same age as Anderson's (1973) left-slip faults. 

More research is needed in order to resolve some of 

these conflicting details of the structural setting of the 

Muddy Mountains.

Several other major tectonic features also occur in the 

vicinity of the Muddy Mountains, and these may have a 

direct bearing on lithium accumulation in the area. The 

Wasatch Line, a term commonly applied to the zone that 

divides the thick "geosynclinal" Paleozoic sedimentary 

sections in the western Cordillera from the thinner eratonal sections in the eastern Cordillera and on the Colorado Plateau, passes through the Muddy and Virgin 

Mountains. In the Muddy Mountains, this transition 

takes the form of a major thrust fault—the Muddy 

Mountain thrust, which juxtaposes the thick Paleozoic 

carbonate rocks characteristic of south-central Nevada 

on top of the thinner carbonate and red bed sections 

characteristic of the Colorado Plateau. In central Utah, 

the Wasatch Line roughly corresponds to the tectonic 

transition from the Basin and Range Province into the 

Colorado Plateau, but in southern Nevada and northwestern Arizona, this transition is about 70 km east of 

the faulted sedimentary facies change in the Muddy 

Mountains. The Muddy Mountains, then, occur within 

the Basin and Range Province but are near the margin 

of the Colorado Plateau. Other areas of anomalous 

lithium accumulations and thick evaporite deposits, 

mentioned below, share the above characteristics.

LITHIUM AND THE TERTIARY ROCKS

Geologic mapping is incomplete in the Tertiary rocks 

of the Muddy Mountains; thus, subdivisions within 

these rocks are poorly defined and understood. Several 

rock units have been named (Longwell, 1949; Longwell 

and others, 1965; Anderson, 1973); these include the 

Horse Spring (Miocene) and Muddy Creek (Miocene? 

and Pliocene) Formations, Gale Hills and Thumb Formations (Cretaceous? and Tertiary) and the Overton 

Fanglomerate (Tertiary). The Baseline Sandstone and 

Willow Tank Formation have been referred to as Cretaceous (Longwell, 1949), but may be, in part, Tertiary 

as well. Lithium occurs in abundance throughout all the
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 111

above-named rocks, with the possible exceptions of the 

Willow Tank and Baseline; but it is most concentrated in 

three areas: the magnesite near Overton, the White 

Basin borate area, and the West End Wash borate area 

(fig. 53). All three areas are thought to be part of the 

Horse Spring Formation.

The two borate areas appear to be similar in their 

overall lithology. In addition to the presence of borate 

minerals, both areas contain sections of well-bedded, 

predominantly clastic rocks that have abundant 

sedimentary structures such as ripple marks and smallscale crossbedding. In both areas, carbonate beds, gypsum veins, and claystone are common as well. Although 

no detailed geologic mapping or sedimentological study 

has been conducted in either area, the lithologies, bedding, mineralogy, and sedimentary structures that occur 

in both areas suggest a saline lake and (or) spring environment for their deposition.

Reconnaissance surface sampling was conducted at

10 KILOMETRES

both the West End Wash and White Basin localities, and 

some drill cuttings were sampled from the White Basin 

area. The results of lithium determinations on the surface samples are summarized in tables 49 and 50; the 

average lithium concentration from 194 samples taken 

from five drill holes in the White Basin is 474 ppm. The 

highest lithium value from the drill cuttings is 1,600 

ppm and the lowest is 22 ppm. Most of these values,

TABLE 49.—Lithium analyses of the West End Wash surface samples in the 

Muddy Mountains

FIGURE 53.—Map showing the distribution of three lithium-rich areas 

in the Muddy Mountains area. Geology modified from Longwell 

Pampeyan, Bowyer, and Roberts (1965).

Sample No.

MAI 161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

181

182

183

184

185

TABLE 50

Sample No.

MAG 617

618

619

620

621

622

623

624

625

626

627

628 

629

630

631

632

633

634

635

636

637

638

639

640

641 

642

643

Description

Carbonate rock

Clay — _ - ————

Borate ore

__________ do .___ __ ________ __ — ___ —

Channel near ore zone

__ _ Channel 1.8 m above ore -_ —— ____

Magnesite(P) _ _ — -

______ —— do __ — __ — ____ — __ — — _ ——— — -_ —

Colemanite(?) _ ___

Clay debris _ __

__ _ Clay and magnesite ___ __

Chert__ ______ _

Shaley zone _ _ __ _

______ Clay ________________________________

unknown ___ _____

Volcanic ash _ _

__________ do ________ _ _______________ __ -

do _ __-_ -_ __

Clay with borates _ _ _

______ Clay -_-______-_——_-————

__ Chert(?) from biotite ash _ __ ____

___ _ Clay __ _ ___ _ _ _ — __ ____ ______

_ __ __ do _ _ _ — — __ _ _ _ _

Carbonate _ _ __ — — - __

__________ do ______ _____ — _ __ - ___ —

— Lithium analyses of the White Basin surface samples

Muddy Mountains

Description

___ _ Clay __ ___ ___ ___ _ ____ ____

do _ _

Gypsiferous clay

_ __ Clay __ _____ _ _____

Sandstone

______ Clay _ ___ _ ___________ _ _________

do. _ ________

__ _ _____ do ________________ ___ ____ _ ____

Siltstone _ _ _

______ Clay ________ _ _____________________

Clay and borate _ _ _ _

_ Claystone _ _ _ 

______ do ________________________________

__ __ Siltstone __ _______ __ ______ _

_ ___ Claystone _ ________________ _

______ __ do ___________

____ Siltstone ___________ _______

_ __ _ Clay gouge in sandstone _ _____ — _

_ __ Concretion _ ____________ ______

_ _ Borate concretion ___

Tailings __ _ _

Volcanic ash _ ___ _

- _ Fault-zone clay in borates

Tailings _ _ _ _

Gypsum and clay _ __ __ __ __ 

Calcareous sandstone

Tailings _ _ _

Li(ppm)

230

590

600

560

660

730

360

420

110

470

670

67

700

540

410

130

72

130

750

470

45

830

770

11

33

in the

Li(ppm)

300

800

220

110

130

760

670

680

100

330

420

330 

1,250

1,000

400

750

540

250

130

120

540

550

1,000

920

540 

160

450
112 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

which are anomalously high with respect to crustal averages, are based on the value of 20 ppm reported for the 

upper crust by Heier and Billings (1970), and many values seem to be much higher than average for most 

nonmarine basins (J. D. Vine, oral commun., 1975). 

Values above 1,000 ppm are among the highest reported in sedimentary rocks (pure hectorite runs about 

3,000 ppm Li). On the average, fine-grained clastic 

rocks such as claystone and siltstone contain the highest 

concentrations of lithium, but the borate zones themselves are also rich in lithium. There does not seem to be 

a noticeable trend of lithium values with depth in the 

drill holes.

Recent geologic mapping in the vicinity of the Overton magnesite deposits shows several changes from the 

original map of Longwell (1949) (fig. 54). The older 

conglomerate stratigraphically below and west of the 

conglomerate on Overton Ridge is not a laterally continuous unit; but rather the conglomerate interfingers 

to the south with the quartz arenite of the Baseline 

Sandstone (fig. 54) and is the same age as the Baseline 

Sandstone. In this report, the above-mentioned unit is 

retermed conglomerate and is assigned to the Baseline 

Sandstone as the Overton Conglomerate Member. Also, 

the Horse Spring Formation has been divided into four 

informal members: the conglomerate member, the 

dolomite member, the magnesite member, and the 

sandstone and claystone member. The younger conglomerate that makes up Overton Ridge is conformable 

with and is mapped as the basal member of the Horse 

Spring Formation (fig. 54). This same unit was formerly 

included with the conglomerate and quartz arenite 

below it as part of the Overton Fanglomerate (Longwell, 

1949), but it rests above these older rocks with a slight 

angular discordance, and there is evidence of channeling at its base. The Muddy Creek Formation has been 

divided into two members: The conglomerate member, 

which only occurs near Overton Ridge; and the 

sandstone member, which occurs east of the conglomerate member. The general stratigraphic relationships 

found in Magnesite Wash are depicted in figure 55. 

Data on the age of the rocks has been supplied by Anderson, Longwell, Armstrong, and Marvin (1972) and 

Longwell, Pampeyan, Bowyer and Roberts (1965).

Figure 55 also shows the averages of analyses for 

lithium in several of the units in Magnesite Wash. 

Lithium values in the dolomite member of the Horse 

Spring Formation are averaged from 62 samples with a 

high value of 580 ppm and a low value of 24 ppm. In the 

magnesite member of the Horse Spring, they are averaged from 118 samples with a high of 1,400 ppm and a 

low of 90 ppm, and in the sandstone and claystone 

member of the Horse Spring, the average is from 26 

samples with a high of 850 ppm and a low of 90 ppm. 

The average lithium value in the Muddy Creek Formation is from seven samples that range in value from 75 to 

190 ppm.

The highest concentrations of lithium occur in the 

magnesite member of the Horse Spring Formation, 

where maximum values above 1,000 ppm occur in several beds. This member appears to have accumulated in 

place as a sedimentary deposit. The lines of evidence 

supporting this conclusion are the well-preserved bedding and other sedimentary structures such as ripple 

marks; the fact that the member occurs as a discrete 

sedimentary body; the fact that the relative proportion 

of magnesite to other minerals is controlled by bedding; 

and the fact that beds of tuff occur interbedded in the 

member and are unaltered. Lithium also appears to 

have accumulated with the sediments, because lithium 

concentrations show strong bedding control. The dolomite member of the Horse Spring Formation has 

slightly lower lithium values and appears to be, in part, a 

clastic carbonate rock. X-ray analysis shows that both 

dolomite and calcite occur in this member and thinsection analysis indicates the presence of angular, sandsized grains of carbonate in a micritic carbonate matrix. 

It is likely that the clastic grains are calcite; the matrix is 

dolomite. Lithium concentrations are probably low 

owing to "diluting" of the material that formed in place 

by lithium-poor clastic grains. This idea, however, is not 

documented. Clay occurs in all the members of the 

Horse Spring and Muddy Creek Formations. In the 

magnesite member of the Horse Spring Formation the 

clay is a trioctahedral smectite (Harry Starkey, written 

commun., 1976) that contains as much as 3,300 ppm 

lithium.

The coarse conglomerate interbedded with the finegrained rocks of the Horse Spring Formation suggests 

that a nearby source of clastic material existed for the 

Horse Spring Formation in this area and that the 

magnesite may have formed near the edge of the Horse 

Spring basin. Although no detailed sedimentologic work 

has been attempted on this conglomerate, derivation 

from a terrane of carbonate rocks can be assumed on 

the basis of the abundance of carbonate clasts; the most 

logical nearby source is a carbonate terrane to the west 

in the north Muddy Mountains. That the Horse Spring 

basin east of this probable source was a closed basin is 

suggested by the widespread occurrence of gypsum in 

the Horse Spring Formation and by rock salt, which 

probably also originated in the Horse Spring Formation 

(Mannion, 1963).

CONCLUSIONS

Rocks called the Horse Spring Formation have been 

mapped in many areas in southern Nevada. These rocks 

are also described in the Virgin Mountains, east of the 

Muddy Mountains (Morgan, 1964) and in the Nevada
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 113

M4°30'

CORRELATION OF MAP UNITS

r Holocene

UNCONFORMITY }• QUATERNARY 

r- Pleistocene

I KILOMETRE

EXPLANATION

UNCONFORMITY

Pliocene ond 

Miocene (?)

Miocene

Muddy Creek Formation (Pliocene and Miocene ? )

Conglomerate member

Sandstone member

r- TERTIARY

:ThS

=Thm=

Horse Spring Formation (Miocene) 

Conglomerate member

Sandstone member 

Magnesite member

SThdiii Dolomite member

CRETACEOUS

LIST OF MAP UNITS 

Alluvium (Holocene)

Terrace deposits (Pleistocene)

Baseline Sandstone (Cretaceous) 

Overton Conglomerate Member

Sandstone member

Contact--Dashed where approximately located;

dotted where concealed 

Fault—Dashed where approximately located;

dotted where concealed 

Strike and dip of bedding

FIGURE 54.—Geologic map of the area west of Overton, Nev. Geology from this report.

Test Site, 100 km northwest of the Muddy Mountains 

(Sargent and others, 1970; Sargent and Stewart, 1971). 

In the Nevada Test Site, however, Sargent, McKay, and 

Burchfiel (1970) reported that the Horse Spring Formation is about 29 m.y. old which is older than the date of 

21 m.y. reported for it in the Muddy Mountains (Anderson and others, 1972). Also, Will Carr (oral commun., 

1974) suspects that the Horse Spring Formation in the
114 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

SYSTEM

or

hor

UJ

hCRETACEOUS

SERIES

Miocene(?) and Pliocene

Miocene

FORMATION

Muddy Creek Fomation

Spring Horse Formation

CO 

0)

_c

o 

CD

(M) THICKNESS 

O

CVJ

A

O

CVJ

7\

O

m 

co

m

CVJ

00

O

o

CVJ

A

UJ

>• => O UJ _|

o o <

O CC. Q.

I UJ 5 0_

li I

1-

— —— ——

— — — _

— — — —

— — —

— — — —

— — — —

— — — — .

^==±1

~ ~~ — — ~~l

— —— —— ——

o o>'rr'.-r-'..

0 0 I/ f\ ^T~ ft"""*

UNCONFOR 

O°0 ° 0 00£

Iz£?£7£

-E?£E-iZr

:ffrVrH:-h\

/ / / /

/ / / >

/ / /

/ / / /

/ / /

/ / / /

125

1

VIITY

A0

3 

t>

)

)

D'

J

307

^

^ 372

'y x , ' 4 132

III L.

UNCONFOR

30°oA

MTny

°^ V° 0° o o : • y

<s o Q o o.

MEMBER

Sandstone 

Conglomerate

Conglomerate

Sandstone 

and 

claystone

Magnesite

Dolomite

Conglomerate

DESCRIPTION

Sandstone (lithic-arkose), claystone, and siltstane 

with parallel bedding 2-30 cm thick.

Lenticularly bedded conglomerate with sandy matrix.

Conglomerate with poorly defined lenticular beds. Clasts 

are subround to subangular, are clast supported, and 

composed of carbonate rocks. The largest clast is 15 cm 

in diameter. The matrix is composed of sand and 

contains crossbedding.

Sandstone and shale. Sandstone is most abundant near the 

base of the unit and contains parallel bedding 5mm to 

25 cm thick.

Fine-grained and parallel-bedded magnesite and dolomite. 

Magnesite and dolomite are interbedded. Ripple marks 

occur on the tops of some beds.

Interbedded dolomite and limestone.

Conglomerate with poorly defined, lenticular bedding. 

Carbonate closts are set in a carbonate matrix.

Quartz arenite and subarkose with some conglomerate 

lenses interbedded. The bedding is lenticular, 2 cm to 

2 m thick, cross stratified, and convolute in same 

places.

FIGURE 55.—Stratigraphic section of Tertiary rocks in Magnesite Wash, near Overton, Nev. Average lithium values are shown.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 115

test-site area was deposited in flood plains or possibly in 

a single large flood plain, which might have included 

some small lakes. He does not think, however, that evidence that these rocks formed in a closed basin is conclusive. In the Nevada Test Site, rocks that are equivalent to the Horse Spring Formation near its type section 

in the southern part of the Virgin Mountains are probably mostly volcanic types. In the southern part of the 

Virgin Mountains, the Horse Spring Formation is probably similar in age to the same formation in the Muddy 

Mountains; it has high concentrations of lithium, to 

about 800 ppm in some beds (Dick Glanzman, oral 

commun., 1975); and it is similar in lithology to the same 

formation near Overton.

Prior to the Oligocene, no evidence of any Tertiary 

basins is present in the Muddy Mountains, in the Virgin 

Mountains, or at the Nevada Test Site. Southern 

Nevada appears to have been an area of erosion (assuming that the Willow Tank Formation and Baseline 

Sandstone are Cretaceous). About 29 million years ago, 

a broad downwarp must have formed in the test-site 

area and the rocks of the Horse Spring Formation and 

slightly younger rocks were deposited in flood plains 

within it. During this time the Muddy Mountains appear 

to have been undergoing erosion. The 21 m.y. old 

evaporite deposits of the Horse Spring Formation in the 

Muddy and southern part of the Virgin Mountains represent the first evidence of a closed basin—similar to 

modern basin and range basins—to form in southern 

Nevada. Other nearby basin and range valleys contain 

rocks similar to the Horse Spring and may be as old as it 

is, but these valleys are not now at the same level of 

erosion. Peirce (1972, 1973) described thick salt and 

anhydrite deposits that occur in Arizona in Detrital 

Wash, in Red Lake Valley, near Phoenix (Luke salt 

body), and in Pinal County (Picacho Basin). All of these 

deposits, and the Lyles lithium deposit in Arizona (Norton, 1965), lie on a trend with the Horse Spring Formation in the Muddy Mountains and may be some of the 

initial basins to form in the eastern part of the Basin and 

Range Province. The above-mentioned trend occurs 

near the eastern margin of the Basin and Range Province, near its border with the Colorado Plateau. Other 

lithium-rich areas occur in this area as well. These include the Spor Mountain area, the Great Salt Lake Desert, and the Great Salt Lake itself.

In summary, the lithium-rich rocks in the vicinity of 

the Muddy Mountains that appear to be concentrated in 

the Horse Spring Formation occur in at least three succinct localities rather than throughout the formation. 

The Horse Spring Formation appears to have accumulated in a closed basin about 21 m.y. ago at the earliest, 

and it represents the earliest known basin and range

basin in this part of southern Nevada. Other basins and 

volcanic centers that lie near the eastern margin of the 

Basin and Range Province are also high in lithium or 

contain abundant evaporite deposits; they must share 

some common source or other characteristic with the 

Horse Spring Formation that allows such lithium-rich 

chemical deposits to form. However, this common factor is not well understood at the present.

REFERENCES CITED

Albers, J. P., 1967, Belt of sigmoidal bending and right lateral faulting

in the western Great Basin: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 78, no. 2,

p. 143-156.

Anderson, R. E., 1973, Large magnitude late Tertiary strike-slip faulting north of Lake Mead, Nevada: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper

794, 18 p. 

Anderson, R. E., Longwell, C. R., Armstrong, R. L., and Marvin, R. F.,

1972, Significance of K-Ar ages of Tertiary rocks from the Lake

Mead region, Nevada-Arizona: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 83,

no. 2, p. 273-287. 

Armstrong, R. L., 1968, Sevier orogenic belt in Nevada and Utah:

Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 79, no. 4, p. 429-458. 

Fleck, R. J., 1970, Age and possible origin of the Las Vegas Valley

shear zone, Clark and Nye Counties, Nevada: Geol. Soc. America

Abs. with Programs, v. 2, no. 5, p. 333. 

Heier, K. S., and Billings, G. K., 1970, Lithium, 3, Part B, in

Wedepohl, K. H., ed., Handbook of geochemistry, Volume 2-1:

Berlin, Springer-Verlag. 

Locke, Augustus, Billingsley, P. R., and Mayo, E. B., 1940, Sierra

Nevada Tectonic Patterns: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 51, no. 4,

p. 513-539. 

Longwell, C. R., 1928, Geology of the Muddy Mountains, Nevada,

with a section through the Virgin Range to the Grand Wash Cliffs,

Arizona: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 798, 152 p. 

————1949, Structure of the northern Muddy Mountain area,

Nevada: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 60, no. 5, p. 923-967. 

-1960, Possible explanation of diverse structural patterns in

southern Nevada: Am. Jour. Sci., v. 258-A (Bradley Volume), p.

192-203. 

Longwell, C. R., Pampeyan, E. H., Bowyer, Ben, and Roberts, R. J.,

1965, Geology and mineral deposits of Clark County, Nevada:

Nevada Bur. Mines Bull. 62, 218 p. 

McKelvey, V. E., Wiese, J. H., and Johnson, V. H., 1949, Preliminary

report on the bedded manganese of Lake Mead region, Nevada

and Arizona: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 948-D, p. D83-D101. 

Mannion, L. E., 1963, Virgin Valley salt deposits, Clark County,

Nevada, in Bersticker, A. C., ed., Symposium on salt: Northern

Ohio Geol. Soc., p. 166-175. 

Morgan, J. R., 1964, Structure and stratigraphy of the northern part

of the south Virgin Mountains, Clark County, Nevada: New

Mexico Univ. Ph.D. thesis, 103 p. 

Norton, J. J., 1965, Lithium bearing bentonite deposit, Yavapai

County, Arizona, in Geological Survey research 1965: U.S. Geol.

Survey Prof. Paper 525-D, p. D163-D166. 

Peirce, H. W., 1972, Red Lake salt mass, in Fieldnotes from the

Arizona Bureau of Mines: Arizona Bur. Mines, v. 2, no. 1, p. 4-5. 

————1973, Evaporite developments thickest anhydrite in the world?,

in Fieldnotes from the Arizona Bureau of Mines: Arizona Bur.

Mines, v. 3, no. 2, p. 1-2.
116 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

Sargent, K. A., McKay, E. J., and Burchfiel, B. C., 1970, Geologic map 

of the Striped Hills quadrangle, Nye County, Nevada: U.S. Geol. 

Survey Geol. Quad. Map GQ-882.

Sargent, K. A., and Stewart, J. H., 1971, Geologic map of the Specter

Range NW quadrangle, Nye County, Nevada: U.S. Geol. Survey 

Geol. Quad. Map GQ-884.

Stewart, J. H., Albers, J. P., and Poole, F. G., 1968, Summary of regional evidence for right-lateral displacement in the western 

Great Basin: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 79, no. 10, p. 1407-1413.

LITHIUM ABUNDANCES IN OILFIELD WATERS

By A. GENE COLLINS,

U.S. ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION, 

BARTLESVILLE, OK

ABSTRACT

The abundance of lithium in oilfield waters was surveyed because of 

its potential use in energy production. Waters from several locations 

were found to contain about 500mg/l of lithium and one approached 

700mg/l. It is postulated that the high lithium concentrations in some 

waters in the Jurassic Smackover Formation originated from lithiumenriched continental waters.

INTRODUCTION

The demand for lithium in the United States may 

increase because of its use in the manufacture of lithium 

batteries and in the generation of electrical power by 

controlled thermonuclear power. Electric batteries used 

to power vehicles require about 45 kg of lithium in the 

electrolyte and electrodes. Batteries in only 130,000 vehicles would have consumed the entire 1974 production 

of lithium in the United States (about 6,000 tonnes). 

Thermonuclear power plants now being designed will 

require lithium to produce tritium, the prime fuel. The 

required amount of lithium is dependent upon the design, but it could be on the order of 3-900 kg of lithium 

per megawatt of electrical power yielded. Lithium is 

used in several other industries, such as ceramics, glass, 

greases, air conditioning, brazing, welding, and metallic 

alloys (Cummings, 1970). Subsurface brine in Clayton 

Valley, near Silver Peak, Nevada, in which lithium concentration is about 300 mg/1, has been a major source of 

lithium since about 1967; however, the economic life of 

this deposit is limited to only a few more decades at the 

present rate of production.

Most oilfield waters contain lithium, and some studies 

indicate that lithium concentrations can be used to 

explore for petroleum (Miodrag, 1975). Several oilfield 

waters contain more than 50 mg/1 of lithium, and this 

study was conducted to determine the availability of information concerning waters in this category.

LOCATIONS OF OILFIELD WATERS

CONTAINING LITHIUM

IN EXCESS OF 50 MG/L

Table 51 lists the state, county, location, depth, 

geologic unit, specific gravity of the water, and concentrations in milligrams per litre of lithium, sodium, potassium, rubidium, cesium, and fluoride for several oilfield 

waters in the United States. These analyses were derived 

from an oilfield-water data bank at the ERDA (Energy 

Research and Development Administration) Energy Research Center in Bartlesville, Okla. Lithium concentrations as much as 692 mg/1 were found in the Jurassic 

Smackover Formation in Texas, 400 mg/1 in an unnamed Devonian formation in North Dakota, 345 mg/1 

in the Mississippian Madison Group in North Dakota, 

118 mg/1 in the Devonian Saskatchewan Group of Baillie 

(1953) in North Dakota, 90 mg/1 in the Pennsylvanian 

Minnelusa Formation in Wyoming, 93 mg/1 in the Cretaceous Rock Springs Formation in Wyoming, 70 mg/1 in 

the Tertiary Wilcox Formation in Oklahoma, and 51 

mg/1 in the Cambrian and Ordovician Arbuckle Group 

of Oklahoma. Although several oilfield water systems 

have been analyzed for lithium, many others have not. It 

is therefore possible that an oilfield water exists that 

contains lithium in excess of 700 mg/1.

GENERAL GEOLOGY OF THE 

SMACKOVER FORMATION

Because of the relative abundance of data concerning 

lithium concentrations in Smackover Formation oilfield 

waters (table 51), it was decided to try to determine the 

origin of the lithium in the Smackover. According to 

Imlay (1940), the Smackover Formation was named 

after the Smackover oilfield in Arkansas, where the unit
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 117

TABLE 51.—Sampling locations, depths, geologic unit, specific gravity, concentrations (mg/l) of lithium, sodium, potassium, rubidium, cesium, andfiuoride of

some oilfield waters of the United States

State

Do- — — .....

Do__ .. .... .

Do. .-__ __ _

Do-.- — -_..__

Do—... — ....

Do ——— ........

Do........ . .

Do... ..........

Do.... .. .....

Do... .- ——— _

Do— ... .......

Do...——.....

Do——— —— —

Do __ _ ___ ..

Do —— ——— —

Do---... ———

Do _ ------

Do— ... ... ....

Do -- --.. —

Do— ——— ——

Do.— — ———

Do . ..... ..

Do_________-__

Do —————— ..

Do.————...

Do __- ——— ___

Do . ----- ——

Do———.—...

Do__ __ . _

Do. ____________

Do—— .........

Do——— — ——

Location, 

County section-township-range

——— do————

——— do—— —

. ._ do---...

-.— do.—...

---_ do ____ .

_____ do———..

.-—doWilliams ——

_____do______

Noble ______

—— ..dO———..

__ .- do. _ -_

——— do— ___

. 35-11N-4W

23— 19S-23W

- 31 17S-20W

- 2-18S-20W

111 8S-20W

5 18S-20W

- 6-18S-20W

23— 18S-20W

12 15S-25W

13 17S— 13W

21 5N 29W

40 5N 30W

10 23N 9W

_ 10 23N-6W

3 152N 96W

._ 22 3N 24E

__ 16-30S-24E

- 19-43S-22E

._ 2 15N 2W

_- 16-47N 70W

- 16-47N-70W

__ 16-47N 70W

Depth, 

metres

3,560 

3,326-3,364 

2,603-2,667 

2,572-2,662 

2,544-2,635 

2,533-2,621 

2,638-2,721 

2,624-2,713 

2,588-2,682 

2,583-2,675 

2,559-2,654 

2,610-2,697 

2,591-2,614 

1,997-1,998 

1,897 

4,783 

4,740 

3,363-3,369 

3,048 

3,048 

3,959 

4,834 

3,867 

3,317-3,323 

3,106-3,210

1,935-1,942 

1,890 

1,564 

942 

3,063 

3,198 

3,712 

2,888 

3,897 

4 351 

4.188-4J206 

3,891-3,901

2,553 

1,478 

2,623 

1,799 

2,939 

3,031 

2,939 

3,031 

2,676

Specific 

Unit gravity

Smackover Fm.

-_- do _ ----- ... ..

. -- do---- - -.-. -.

—— do... ——— ....... ...

__ . do ---- --.... . ..

— - do. -__- _ _- - .

—— do __ - — -___-—

. .- do --.- ___ ...

-- - do- -- -- .-._ _ -

---- do------ ...........

—— do— ——— .........

— . do— ...............

.- _ do____ _ --- - _ —

—— - dO———— —————— —————

—— _ dO——————— —— ————— -

—— -dO———— ——————— ————

.... do _ _ _ _ _ .- -_

____ do _ ____- --. -___

—— - dO—— ...............

—— do ——— ——————

Saskatchewan Gp. ' 

Unnamed 

Devonian 

Madison Gp.

Wilcox Fm. 

Arbuckle Gp. 

Smackover Fm.

——— dO--- —— —————— -

-___ do----- -- . _._ __

--dO-—— ...... ... ... .

.. do__ _ _ ————— _

do

- do ----- -- . ___ _

Madison Gp. 

Unnamed Mississippian 

Ismay zone 2 

Leadville Ls. equivalent 

Green River Fm. 

Minnelusa Fm.

—— do——— — ———— —

Rock Springs Fm.

.222 

.197 

.231 

.231 

.229 

.229 

.230 

.231 

.128 

.230 

.231 

.230 

.221 

.183 

.157 

.226 

.209 

.227 

.186 

.191 

.209 

.188 

.210 

.223 

.238

.210 

.231 

.161 

.140 

.105 

.211 

.129 

.160 

.081 

.237 

.233 

.210 

1.044 

1.049 

1.052 

1.148 

1.064 

1.103 

.082 

1.103 

.082 

.106

Li

61 

86 

462 

481 

423 

404 

481 

519 

481 

442 

462 

462 

308 

75 

50 

102 

81 

66 

101 

80 

75 

67 

80 

118 

400

345 

164 

70 

51 

473 

404 

293 

99 

100 

624 

224 

692 

85 

56 

58 

53 

68 

90 

75 

70 

75 

93

Na

75,370 

66,100 

70,200 

77,900 

78,400 

75,700 

73,800 

73,000 

71,400 

74,000 

64,900 

64,200 

84,400 

59,400 

55,470 

73,100 

79,200 

113,000 

87,400 

82,800 

70,947 

55,200 

74,500 

51,300 

58,200

106,000 

115,000 

74,400 

56,700 

26,800 

69,300 

49,000 

53,600 

25,300 

90,000 

75,500 

75,400 

15,000 

21,400 

19,700 

59,600 

28,900 

52,400 

41,800 

52,800 

41,820 

54,830

K

8,000 

163 

4,670 

6,950 

5,640 

5,330 

5,260 

7,460 

5,550 

4,410 

6,230 

11,100 

5,790 

720 

614 

7,650 

5,360 

616 

1,090 

1,380 

800 

4,260 

650 

13,400 

9,500

633 

3,850 

860 

1,340 

280 

6,390 

4,660 

2,400 

2,860 

15,820 

6,645 

7,430 

1,700 

1,400 

1,010 

2,400 

408 

2,100 

950 

2,100 

950 

700

Kb

3.75 

13.8 

14.5 

12.0 

12.5 

14.0 

16.0 

15.5 

15.0 

14.5 

14.5 

9.5 

3.5

25.0

.5

5.0

Cs

4.0 

7.0 

9.0 

6.0 

6.0 

6.0 

8.0 

10.0 

9.0 

8.0 

10.0 

3.0 

2.0

25.0

.2

1.0

F

3.6 

3.1 

6.9 

3.4 

7.6 

7.5 

3.2 

6.4 

7.1 

4.7 

7.1 

4.8 

5.1

....

....

——

'Of Baillie, 1953 

2Of Paradox Formation.

comprises 213 m of oolitic limestone. Smackover equivalents have been identified in Mexico, Texas, Arkansas, 

Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama (fig. 56) and on the 

basis of good paleontological evidence correlated with 

the Upper Jurassic Argovian Substage of the Oxfordian 

Stage in England (Imlay, 1945).

The Smackover Formation is the equivalent of the 

Zuloaga Formation in Mexico (fig. 56). The Zuloaga carbonate crops out west of the Tamaulipas Peninsula in 

northeast Mexico. The Smackover in the United States 

overlies a salt basin in the western part of the Rio 

Grande embayment in southwest Texas. From there it 

extends across the crest of the San Marcos arch, the 

northwest part of the east Texas salt basin, the northern 

part of the north Louisiana-Arkansas salt basin, and 

then southeastward across the north area of the central 

Mississippi salt basin to the Florida panhandle and 

offshore areas, as illustrated in figure 57. The Smackover Formation does not crop out.

The northward boundary of the Smackover Formation follows the approximate updip edge of the subcrop 

of the Jurassic rocks. Regional and local subsidence in

the Gulf Coast geosyncline have caused thousands of 

fault trends associated with slumpage and folding.

Mexico

La Casita 

Formation

Olivido 

Formation

Zuloaga

Formation

Minas Viejas 

Formation

System 

or Series

o

to 

to 

< tr

_D—3

a.

UJ

a. 

a.

:D 

T/WWT/VX

c— 

CJ

</) </)

< 

a.

^ —3

Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, 

Mississippi, Alabama, Florida

Cotton Valley Group

Buckner Formation

Smackover Formation

Norphlet Formation

UNCONFORMITY 

ix\/i/va/\x\/vxi/(/v/x/ix\/i^xi/\xi/XA/i

Louann Salt

Werner Formation

FIGURE 56.—Correlation chart of Jurassic and Jurassic(P) formations 

in Mexico and in Gulf Coast areas of the United States.
118 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

__________86° /-T-\

/ i \

FIGURE 57.—Approximate geographic extent of the Smackover Formation.

Structural deformation of the Smackover also has been 

caused by tectonics related to the flow of the underlying 

Louann Salt, a nearly pure coarsely crystalline salt.

The Zuloaga Formation in northeast Mexico lies 

below La Casita and Olivido Formations (fig. 56). The 

western limit of the Zuloaga lies west of and parallel to 

the Tamaulipas Peninsula. Surface exposures of the 

Minas Viejas Formation are found in the Galeana area 

south of Monterrey and northwest of the Carcia Caves 

anticline of Sierra del Fraile (R. W. Eaton, written commun., 1970). More than 915 m of anhydrite, salt, and 

gypsum constitute the Minas Viejas Formation and 

underlie the 425-m-thick Zuloaga carbonates. The 

Zuloaga thins northeastward toward the northern updip 

limit of Jurassic sedimentation. The top of the Zuloaga 

is about 3,000 m deep, and the formation is about 180 m 

thick near the Mexico-United States border.

Bishop (1969) divided the Smackover into members 

based on an interpretation of environments of deposition: (1) an upper member deposited in shallow water 

with various types of agitation and composed of different types of nonskeletal carbonate and mud; and (2) a 

lower member deposited in a quiet, toxic environment, 

composed primarily of carbonate mud with pyrite and 

abundant carbonaceous material. Dickinson (1968) divided the Smackover into lower, middle, and upper 

members based on lithologic differences. In this 

scheme, the upper member is predominantly oolitic 

limestone, the middle is mostly a dense limestone, and 

the lower member is predominantly a dark-brown, silty 

to argillaceous, commonly laminated limestone. Locally, 

various units of the Smackover and Zuloaga Formations 

are absent. The updip areas are truncated by erosion as 

a result of uplift west of the Tamaulipas Peninsula and 

uplift to the north of the Gulf Coast area prior to the 

close of the Jurassic Period.

Figure 58 illustrates types of rocks found in strata in 

the Werner, Louann, Norphlet, Smackover, and Buckner Formations and Cotton Valley Group in northeast 

Texas (Dickinson, 1968).

ORIGIN OF SMACKOVER FORMATION WATERS

Oilfield waters originate through many complex 

natural processes. Some of the mechanisms that cause 

oilfield waters to differ in composition from the water

<

1

<

1

(

(

4 

<

(V

o

>

o

o

E 

en

j

<u

.c 

a

•z. o

LLouann . 

Werner .

Clastic

3

3

» '§

5 °

3

5

n\

> *

.> 0 

in *T S£ IE

a

E

u.

c •-

i -

Jr 0>

U- C

Formation

f——

"5

CO

Formotion

= =:±

*_*" • • '*

M±

§§

r-tr-lr- ~|~l-~' -

~ -I-- -\--\:~ :

,1-1;-

i i

J

i I

1

^ fl'/'K->

^>K-Y| •UHy

>M--,K ft

jf-p-> 

/ /

/ /

/ / /

/ /

/ /

/ /

/ /

, / /

/ /

/ /

/

w^

*&#£

i'.'i V'*"

'*?&*

?'/'//

-t- -t--f

-1- -4-

-r4- +

-t- -t- v--^

-t-4--t-

•+4-"1"-,-

-+- +-

Red-green-gray mudstones interbedded with fine-, 

medium-, and coarse— grained varicolored 

and white sandstone

Fine-, medium-, and coarse-grained varicolored

and white sandstone with subordinate interbed

to fine crystalline sometimes oolitic and

pelletoidal limestone with subordinate

gray limy sandstone

tan and gray, dense, sandy, and often oolitic

Gray- brown dolomite, good oolimoldic framework.

Dense oolite, large aolimolds often graded to

fine crystalline drab dolomite. Dark gray-brown

Fine, silty, argillaceous, orange sandstones

Clear crystalline halite

White to brown massive anhydrite

FIGURE 58.—Generalized section of Jurassic and Jurassic(P) rocks in 

northeast Texas showing types of lithologies in each unit. The units 

are not to scale.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 119

originally deposited with the sediments include ion exchange, infiltrating waters, sediment leaching, mineral 

formation, sulfate reduction, and ultrafiltration through 

clay-shale membranes (Collins, 1974).

Most of the Smackover brines are defiicient in magnesium relative to an evaporite-formed brine. Table 52 

illustrates the approximate amounts of calcium, magnesium, bromide, and sulfate that could exist in a water 

before and after precipitation of gypsum.

Assuming that the residual sulfate 1,644 mg/1 was removed by the dolomitization reaction,

MgCT2 +2CaCO3-+JGaei2+CaMg (COs)2 

J&gCT2

MgSO4 +2CaCO3-»CaSO4+CaMg (CO3)2

(1)

(2)

(3)

then the Mg/Br ratio would be about 883/65=13.6, as 

illustrated by the data in table 52.

However, if the residual sulfate was removed by 

bacterial reduction,

Na2CO3 + H2S+ CO2 + H2O, (4)

the Mg/Br ratio would be about 1,300/65 = 20.

Magnesium will react with CaCOs (calcite) to form 

dolomite; thus, the concentration of calcium is increased 

in the brine, and the Smackover brines are enriched in 

calcium. However, the total calcium plus magnesium in 

the brine should remain constant; this can be calculated

24- 31 /i i • /, • i as Xmg/1 calcium + mg/1 magnesium=total equiva40.08

lent magnesium or Mg'. The ratio Mg'/Mg will vary, 

depending upon the availability of calcite, and the ratio 

should be indicative of the degree of dolomitization.

For example, brines in equilibrium with sandstones 

should have a relatively low Mg'/Mg ratio; those in 

equilibrium with dolomite should have higher ratios; 

and those in equilibrium with limestone should have the 

highest ratios. The average Mg'/Mg ratio for the 

Smackover brines studied is 7; this ratio indicates that 

the brines were in equilibrium with limestone and 

dolomite. Previous studies have shown that the average 

ratio in sandstones is about 2.5 and in limestones about 

9.5 (Collins, 1975).

The formation of chlorite from montmorillonite requires about 9.2 moles of MgO per mole of chlorite, as 

follows:

1.7A12O3 , 0.9 MgO, 8SiO2 , 2H2O+9.2 MgO+6H2O -> 

10.1 MgO, 1.7 A12O3 , 6.4 SiO2 , 8H2O+1.6 Si62 (5)

Such a reaction can remove large amounts of magnesium from waters.

Table 53 presents data obtained by comparing the 

average composition of the analyzed Smackover brines

TABLE 52.—Approximate composition ofseawater changed by mineral formation and bacterial reduction

Gypsum precipitation

Bacterial 

Dolomitization reduction

Before (in mg/1) After (in mg/1) After (mg/1) After (mg/1)

Calcium .... 

Magnesium 

Bromide..-. 

Sulfate -.-.

390

1,300

65

2,580

0

1,300

65

1,644

0

1,300

65

0

TABLE 53.—Concentration ratios and excess factor ratios for some constituents 

in Smackover brines

Average composition, 

mg/1

Constituent Seawater

——————— Number of

Smackover Concentration Excess Smackover

brines ratio1 factor2 samples

Lithium —_ —— 0.2 174 870 18.1 71

Sodium _ --_ 10,600 66,973 6 .1 283

Potassium ___-- 380 2,841 8 .2 82

Calcium - - 400 34,534 86 1.8 284

Magnesium --- 1,300 3,465 3 .1 280

Strontium ___--- 8 1,924 241 5 85

Barium .......... .03 23 767 16 73

Boron_ ___ 4.8 134 28 .6 71

Copper . . .003 1.1 359 7.5 64

Iron _ . .01 41 4,069 84.2 90

Manganese ___ .002 30 14,957 311 69

Chloride--___.. 19,000 171,686 9 .2 284

Bromide __ 65 3,126 48 1 74

Iodide-.--_____ .05 25 501 10.4 73

Sulfate ________ 2,690 446 .2 .003 271

Mg' 3 __._____ 1,543 24,362 16 .3 284

'Amount in brine/amount in seawater.

Concentration ratio of a given constituent/concentration of bromide.

3Mg'=(24.31/40.08)xmg/l calcium + mg/1 magnesium.

to seawater. The concentration ratio was calculated by 

dividing the mean average for a given constituent in the 

Smackover brines by the amount of the constituent 

found in normal seawater. The excess factor was determined by dividing the concentration ratio of a constituent by the concentration ratio of bromide. The calculation for Mg' or total equivalent magnesium is 

related to dolomitization (Collins, 1975). The number of 

Smackover samples indicate how many samples were 

used in the calculation; thus, 71 Smackover brines were 

analyzed for lithium, whereas 283 were analyzed for 

sodium.

The concentration ratios indicate that with the exception of sulfate, all the determined constituents in the 

Smackover brines were enriched with respect to seawater. The excess factor ratios, however, indicate that 

sodium, potassium, magnesium, boron, chloride, sulfate, and total equivalent magnesium generally were 

depleted in the Smackover brines, whereas lithium, calcium, strontium, barium, copper, iron, manganese, and 

iodide were enriched. Furthermore, these ratios indicate that the Smackover brines have been altered considerably if it is assumed that they originally were seawater.

The concentration ratio 48 for bromide is one of the 

highest we have seen. In contrast, bromide concentra-
120 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

tion ratios of 1.2, 4.4, 8.8, and 7.2 were found for brines 

from Tertiary, Cretaceous, Pennsylvanian, and Mississippian rocks in previous studies (Collins, 1969, 1970).

Bromide does not form its own minerals when seawater evaporates. Some of it is lost from solution because it 

forms an isomorphous admixture with chloride in the 

halite precipitate. However, more bromide is left in solution than is entrained in the precipitate. Therefore, 

relative to chloride, the bromide concentration in the 

brine increases exponentially. Because of this, the 

bromide concentration in the brine is a good indicator 

of the degree of seawater concentration, assuming that 

appreciable quantities of biogenic bromide have not 

been introduced.

When a brine containing lithium is subjected to an 

evaporation sequence, lithium is one of the elements 

whose concentration does not decrease in the liquid 

phase as various minerals precipitate (Collins, 1975). 

Therefore lithium, like bromide, increases in concentration in the bitterns.

Figure 59 shows how the concentrations of calcium 

and sodium in the Smackover brines compare with the 

concentrations of calcium and sodium in some altered 

relict bitterns. The sodium and calcium concentrations 

in the bitterns are dependent upon the solubilities of 

their respective compounds, and the plot in figure 59 is 

indicative of this. In contrast, the calcium concentration 

increases as the sodium concentration increases in the 

Smackover brines (fig. 59), which indicates that the increased calcium probably results from cation exchange 

or perhaps mineral formation.

Figure 60 is a plot of Na' versus Br for the Smackover 

brines, an altered relict bittern, evaporating seawater, 

and evaporite salt dissolved in water. The Na'=mg/l

46 Na+ — mg/1 Ca because in an exchange reaction, 2

moles of sodium are exchanged for 1 mole of calcium. 

The assumption is that the sodium in the brine exchanges for calcium in the clay thus increasing the calcium concentration in the brine. Na' was plotted versus 

Br because the bromide concentration should be proportional to the amount of salt redissolved. The Smackover brines contain some iodide, which indicates bioconcentration; therefore, some biogenic bromide is present, 

and this accounts for some of the point scatter.

The plots in figure 60 indicate that the Smackover 

brine is altered relative to evaporated seawater; however, the alteration apparently differs from the pattern 

of the altered relict bittern. The high bromide content 

in the Smackover brines indicates either that the Smackover brines reached the bittern state at some time, or 

that biogenic bromide was added to the brine. Some of 

the Smackover samples obviously were diluted by fresh 

water; that is, those samples that fall to the left of the 

evaporating seawater line.

Na,g/l

FIGURE 59.—Comparison of calcium and sodium concentrations of 

some Smackover brines (solid dot) to those of some altered relict 

bitterns(x).

• Re-solution salt in pure woter

-I

/

-/ Na'=mg/l Na+l|mg/ICa

•Evaporating seawote

1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 

Br, mg/l

FIGURE 60.—Comparison of Na' and Br concentrations of some 

Smackover brines (solid dot) to those of an altered relict bittern 

(open dot), evaporating seawater (long-dashed line), and redissolved 

salt (short-dashed line).
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 121

The concentration of Na' decreases as the Br increases in the altered relict bittern, whereas the reverse 

is characteristic of the Smackover brines. It is therefore 

postulated that the Smackover brine is an altered seawater that has at one or more times approached or reached 

the bittern stage. Bitterns from the Louann Salt probably mixed with the Smackover brines; however, this 

study provided no proof of this.

ORIGIN OF LITHIUM IN THE 

SMACKOVER WATERS

Correlation coefficients of the Smackover brine data 

show a high degree of intercorrelation among K, Rb, Li, 

and B. Iodide does not correlate. Combining data from 

the Smackover with data from an altered relict bittern 

produced a high correlation between K ,and B, and between Li and Rb. This correlation suggests that a 

mechanism in addition to seawater evaporation is involved in producing the high concentration of Li and Rb 

in the brines.

Data shown in table 53 indicate the relative concentrations of various constituents in the Smackover brines. 

The excess factors were obtained by assuming that 

bromide, which does not form minerals, is the best 

single indicator of the degree to which seawater has concentrated. From table 53 it can be seen that about 80 

percent of the original K is missing and that 40 percent 

of the original B is missing, whereas there is about 18.1 

times as much lithium and about 10.4 times as much 

iodide.

The anomalous iodide can be reasonably explained as 

a result of bioconcentration (Collins, 1969). However, a 

similar mechanism to explain all the anomalous lithium 

is not available. It has been postulated that lithium enrichment results at least in part from exchange reactions 

with clays because lithium has a small radius, a low 

atomic number, a larger hydrated number than sodium, 

and a larger polarization than sodium. Therefore, its 

replacing power in the lattices of clay minerals is low. 

Other ions such as Ba, Sr, Ca, Mg, Cs, Rb, K, and Na will 

preferentially replace Li in clay minerals thus releasing 

Li to solutions. Also the solubility products of most 

lithium compounds are higher than those of other alkalies or alkaline earths, so lithium tends to stay in solution (Collins, 1975).

A plausible source of some of the anomalous lithium 

is continental drainage of lithium-enriched solutions 

into an evaporating sea, a process which is similar to that 

now occurring at Great Salt Lake, Utah. The effect of 

this mechanism can be determined if, for example, continental water with a known composition is mixed with a 

brine similar to that of Great Salt Lake and subjected to 

evaporation. Table 54 shows the result of repeatedly 

mixing a volume of spring water similar to that at

TABLE 54.—Compositions obtained by successively mixing one volume of 

Clayton Valley, Nev., spring water with one of brine and then evaporating to 

the original brine volume

Bromide

mg/1

Lithium 

mg/1

Seawater ______________________________ 65

48x seawater _________________.__________ 3,120

Spring water____-_----_-________-_-_— ..___________ 4

One volume each of 2 and 3 ________ __________ 1,562

Evaporate 4 to one-half volume -_._______________------„ 3,124

Ada second volume of 3 and evaporate to one-half ________ 3,128

Add third volume of 3 and evaporate to one-half -- — ____ 3,132

Add fourth volume of 3 and evaporate to one-half ---.__-. 3,136

Add fifth volume of 3 and evaporate to one-half _____ 3,140

Add sixth volume of 3 and evaporate to one-half __-____ 3,144

Add seventh volume of 3 and evaporate to one-half ______ 3,148

Add eighth volume of 3 and evaporate to one-half --______ 3,152

Add ninth volume of 3 and evaporate to one-half ___-_-_--- 3,156

0.2

9.6

55

32.3

64.6

119.6

174.6

229.6

284.6

339.6

394.6

449.6

504.6

Clayton Valley, Nevada (4 mg/1 Br, and 55 mg/1 Li), with 

an equal volume of concentrated seawater brine and 

evaporating to the original brine volume. (The seawater 

is assumed to be concentrated 48 times in order to attain 

the average bromide concentration of the Smackover 

brines, as shown in table 53.) It can be seen that a 

lithium concentration in excess of 500 mg/1 is obtained 

after 9 successive cycles of mixing and evaporation. (If 

the fresh water source were river water containing 0.02 

mg/1 of lithium rather than the spring water containing 

55 mg/1 lithium, 9 evaporations would yield a lithium 

concentration of only 9.76 mg/1.)

To determine how long such evaporation sequences 

might take under optimum conditions, again consider 

the Great Salt Lake. With a volume of about 12 km3 and 

an annual inflow and evaporation of about 3 km3 , each 

equal volume dilution and evaporation would require 

only 4 years, or a total of only 36 years for 9 cycles.

This evaporation sequence assumption is too simplistic for total direct application, but it can be used to postulate a plausible theory for anomalously high concentrations of lithium in the Smackover brine.

The probable origin of the lithium-rich Smackover 

brine was an influx into the Smackover Sea of lithiumenriched continental water from springs or other 

sources in the vicinity of the Mexia-Talco fault system, 

as shown in figure 61. Volcanic rocks of Triassic age in 

the Gulf Coast area may be the source of lithium in the 

spring water that was concentrated by evaporation in 

the Smackover Sea.

APPROXIMATE ESTIMATE OF AMOUNTS OF 

LITHIUM IN SMACKOVER BRINE

The precise amount of lithium in brine from the 

Smackover Formation is unknown, but an estimate can 

be made for a unit area if assumptions are made for the 

thickness and porosity of the reservoir, as well as the 

grade of the lithium and density of the brine. If an area 

of 25,000 km2 has a reservoir thickness of 60 m and an
122 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

93°

33C ^ervJi ! —piieupj_._J

WOOD J UPSHUR i 

^~^-l_

97

FIGURE 61.—Map showing the relation of high lithium concentrations (in mg/1) in Smackover Formation waters in Arkansas and Texas to the 

Mexia-Talco fault zone and to an arcuate contour line parallel to the truncated subcrop of the formation.

effective porosity of 5 percent, and if the enclosed brine 

has a specific gravity of 1.2 and contains an average of 

100 mg/1 of lithium, then about 0.75X106 tonnes of 

lithium would be contained in 7.5 km3 of brine. While 

the total area underlain by the Smackover Formation 

may be as much as 10 times the area assumed in the 

above calculations, the other assumptions may be overestimated. The amount of brine that would have to be 

pumped from depths ranging from about 1,800 to 

4,800 m and evaporated nearly to dryness makes primary product recovery of this lithium economically unsatisfactory with the technology available today. If an 

extraction technique could be developed to recover 

lithium as a byproduct of the recovery of petroleum, 

bromine, potassium, or other chemical products, the 

economic feasibility would be improved significantly.

REFERENCES

Baillie, A. D., 1953, Devonian names and correlation in the Williston 

Basin area: Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geologists Bull., v. 37, no. 2, p. 

444-447.

Bishop, W. F., 1969, Environmental control of porosity in the upper 

Smackover Limestone North Haynesville Field, Claiborne Parish, 

Louisiana, m Geology of the American Mediterranean: Gulf Coast 

Assoc. of Geol. Socs. Trans., v. 19, p. 155-169.

Collins, A. G., 1969, Chemistry of some Anadarko basin brines containing high concentrations of iodide, in Geochemistry of subsurface brines: Chem. Geology, v. 4, no. 1-2, p. 169-187.

————1970, Geochemistry of some petroleum-associated water from 

Louisiana: U.S. Bur. Mines Rept. Inv. 7326, 31 p.

————1974, Geochemistry of liquids, gases, and rocks from the 

Smackover Formation: U.S. Bur. Mines Rept. Inv. 7897, 84 p.

————1975, Geochemistry of oilfield waters: New York, Elsevier,

496 p.

Cummings, A. M., 1970, Lithium, in Mineral facts and problems: U.S. 

Bur. Mines Bull. 650, p. 1073-1081.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 123

Dickinson, K. A., 1968, Upper Jurassic stratigraphy of some adjacent

parts of Texas, Louisiana, and Arkansas: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof.

Paper 594-E, 25 p. 

Imlay, R. W., 1940, Lower Cretaceous and Jurassic formations of

southern Arkansas and their oil and gas possibilities: Arkansas

Geol. Survey Inf. Circ. 12, 64 p.

————1945, Jurassic fossils from the southern states, Number 2: Jour.

Paleontology, v. 19, no. 3, p. 253-276. 

Miodrag, S., 1975, Should we consider geochemistry as [an] important

exploratory technique?: Oil and Gas Jour., v. 73, no. 31, p. 106-

110.

LITHIUM IN THE GILA CONGLOMERATE, 

SOUTHWESTERN NEW MEXICO

By ELIZABETH B. TOURTELOT and ALLEN L. MEIER, 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, DENVER, CO

ABSTRACT

Reconnaissance sampling of the Gila Conglomerate of Pliocene and 

Pleistocene age in southwestern New Mexico revealed anomalously 

high lithium values in lake beds within the Gila Conglomerate. The 

lithium is probably derived from the volcanic rocks of the MogollonDatil volcanic province by postvolcanic hydrothermal activity associated with hot springs. The alkaline lake environment in which the 

lake beds were deposited was a sink for the elements added to surface 

waters by hot-spring activity. Although no deposits of economic potential were found, the geochemistry of the area suggests that beds of 

hectorite could occur within the lake bed sediments of the Gila Conglomerate.

INTRODUCTION

This is a preliminary report based on reconnaissance 

sampling and field determinations of lithium content 

during a reconnaissance survey of the Rocky Mountain 

region for lithium in 1974 and 1975. Anomalous lithium 

values were found in some lake-bed deposits within the 

Gila Conglomerate of southwestern New Mexico. 

Lithium was determined by atomic absorption analysis 

using field-exploration methods (see Meier, this volume, 

for discussion of analytical techniques). Fluorine and 

chlorine analyses were made using specific ion electrodes. Semiquantitative spectrographic analysis was 

used to determine the other elements discussed in this 

report.

In general, we have regarded any rock or sediment 

sample containing more than 100 ppm (parts per million) lithium as having an anomalous concentration. 

This value corresponds well with other studies such as 

that by J. R. Davis (this report), which show an average 

value of less than 100 ppm lithium for most common 

rocks and sediments.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Discussions with colleagues have contributed to this

work. We also wish to thank Wolfgang Elston of the 

University of New Mexico and James C. Ratte and 

Richard A. Sheppard of the U.S. Geological Survey for 

valuable information on the geology of southwestern 

New Mexico. The assistance of Laura L. Wray both in 

the field and in the laboratory contributed immeasurably to this project. Robert Brown performed the X-ray 

diffraction analysis and Katherine Van Weelden helped 

in the identification of minerals on the X-ray traces. J. C. 

Hamilton did the six-step semiquantitative spectrographic analyses.

GILA CONGLOMERATE

The Gila Conglomerate, named by Gilbert (1875), is a 

stratigraphic term that includes most of the basin fill in 

southwestern New Mexico (fig. 62). The Mimbres River 

or the Continental Divide generally is considered to be 

the eastern extent of the Gila Conglomerate; similar sediments east of this area are called Santa Fe Group. The 

Gila Conglomerate is not precisely dated—its age generally is given as ranging from Pliocene to Pleistocene 

(Heindl, 1952) and its age probably varies between basins. Fossils of late Pliocene age were described by 

Knechtel (1936) from southeastern Arizona. Basaltic 

andesite at or near the base of the Gila Conglomerate 

along Sapillo Creek (fig. 62) has been radiometrically 

dated at 20.6±0.5 m.y. (early Miocene) and basalt near 

the top in the Mimbres River valley was dated at 6.3 m.y. 

(late Miocene) (Elston and others, 1973). Heindl (1952, 

1954, 1963) has discussed the problems of the name, 

"Gila Conglomerate" in detail. The Gila Conglomerate 

generally correlates with the Santa Fe Group to the east 

and with the Muddy Creek Formation in Nevada and 

Utah—all these being general names for continental 

rocks of late Tertiary to Quaternary age.

Most of the Gila Conglomerate is made up of
124 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

108° TABLE 55. — Mean content of minor elements in 14 samples of lake beds in the 

Gila Conglomerate, southwestern New Mexico

[From six-step semiquantitative spectrographic analyses by J. C. Hamilton. Lithium analyses 

by atomic absorption by A. L. Meier. Values are in parts per million except for Fe, Mg, Ca, 

and Ti, which are in percent]

Element

Y(ppm) -——_ — „— — —

'Turekian and Wedepohl (1961)

diatomaceous section.

Mean

75

2

1

3

.17

- - 200

— ' 50

_ 500

1.6

8 

70

20

30

7.8

17

16

8

--- 380

16

86

The lithium

i r i

Standard 

deviation

43 

.76 

.41 

2.4 

.05 

70 

20 

180 

.63 

3.7 

27 

4.8 

8.9 

4.6 

7 

2.1 

2.6 

183 

130 

5 

18

values in

Average in shale 1

66 

4.7 

1.5 

2.2 

.46 

850 

100 

580 

3 

19 

90 

45 

92 

11 

68 

20 

13 

300 

130 

26 

160

14 samples

40 KILOMETRES

FIGURE 62.—Distribution of the Gila Conglomerate (patterned areas) 

in southwestern New Mexico, generalized from the New Mexico 

geologic map (Dane and Bachman, 1965). Heavy lines indicate 

faults.

salmon-colored conglomerate and sandstone which are 

coarser grained at the margins of basins. Towards the 

centers of basins, the rocks are finer grained, grading 

into siltstone and claystone. Locally, near the centers of 

the basins, gypsum deposits, tuffaceous beds, 

diatomaceous beds, and thin units of freshwater limestone (Heindl, 1952; Gillerman, 1964) occur. Evidence 

of tectonic and volcanic activity during deposition can be 

found in many places—lava flows and ash beds are not 

uncommon in the Gila. The Gila Conglomerate is locally 

folded and faulted (Ballmann, 1960). In some areas, 

such as south of Redrock, N. Mex., tufa beds, probably 

from old hot springs, occur in the Gila Conglomerate 

(Elston, 1960).

BUCKHORN AREA

Lacustrine clay, silt, and diatomite in the Gila Conglomerate crop out along U.S. Highway 180 in the valley 

of Duck Creek near Buckhorn, N. Mex. Although never 

studied in detail, these lake beds have been described by 

Elston (1960), Gillerman (1964), and Ratte and others 

(1972). The diatomite has been prospected (Gillerman, 

1964) and on the southeastern margin of the old 

lakebed a zeolite deposit is being prospected (R. A. 

Sheppard, 1975, oral commun.).

Two miles (3.2 km) northwest of Buckhorn a roadcut 

in the lake beds exposes about 25 feet (8 m) of the

from this section ranged from 14 to 170 ppm—the 

mean value was 75 ppm, the standard deviation 43. 

X-ray diffraction analyses showed that besides diatoms 

the rock contains a montmorillonitic clay, quartz, potassium feldspar, plagioclase, biotite, clinoptilolite, calcite 

in some samples, and minor amphibole. Looking at 

hand samples through a binocular microscope revealed 

a rock made of diatom fragments, very small detrital 

grains and flakes (silt size) of quartz, feldspars, biotite, 

and amphiboles. In some samples pieces of reed replaced by potassium feldspar are abundant.

Spectrographic analyses of these samples show that 

they have a fairly uniform composition. The lithology 

and geochemistry of the sediments suggests that in this 

part of the section the lake never evaporated to dryness, 

but the presence of authigenic potassium feldspar and 

clinoptilolite suggests that it was highly alkaline. Of the 

elements analyzed for, only lithium and vanadium occur 

in anomalous amounts (table 55). However, lithium and 

vanadium show no correlation with each other whereas 

lithium does show a weak correlation with magnesium 

and iron.

Owing to the high (170 ppm) lithium value found in 

the lake beds, we decided to collect some more samples. 

The first sample site was a zeolite prospect pit 1.4 miles 

(2.25 km) southeast of the Post Office at Buckhorn, N. 

Mex., in NW/4 sec. 10, T. 15 S., R. 18 W. The beds in 

this sequence range from about 6 inches (15 cm) to 2 

feet (60 cm) thick and consist of brown to gray to white 

zeolitic tuff, claystone, siltstone, freshwater limestone, 

and red, green, and gray chert. Above the excavated 

part of this section, limestone and chert increase. X-ray 

diffraction analyses showed that the claystone and 

siltstone consist chiefly of feldspar, quartz, clinoptilolite
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 125

and clay. The lithium content of samples from this section ranged from 44 ppm in green chert to 200 ppm in 

the claystone. The lithium contents of the samples above 

the excavated part were lower (maximum 150 ppm), but 

this may be because the samples are more weathered.

About 1 1A miles (2 km) west of the zeolite pit another 

prominent section of more than 200 feet (60 m) of the 

lake beds is exposed in a draw. The top of this section is 

about 400 feet (120 m) topographically above the top of 

the section exposed in and near the prospect pit. A 

west-northwest-trending fault occurs on the north side 

of the draw and basalt is juxtaposed to the lake beds. 

According to J. G. Ratte (oral commun., 1975) the basalt 

is older than the lake beds. The lake beds appear to be 

flat lying in both areas, but detailed mapping would be 

necessary to determine the exact stratigraphic relationships between the two sections.

The section exposed in the cliff on the southwest side 

of the draw is similar to that exposed at the zeolite pit 

except that some prominent white beds of zeolitic tuff 

also occur. At the base of this section, red-gray to redbrown rocks become more prominent. Although weathered, the sediments in this section still show some 

anomalous lithium contents. The lithium contents range 

from 17 ppm in green chert to 240 ppm in a white ash 

bed near the base of the outcrop.

As mentioned, chert is abundant in these sections, and 

some of it closely resembles Magadi-type chert as described by Eugster (1967, 1969), Hay (1968, 1970), Surdam, Eugster, and Mariner (1972), and Sheppard and 

Gude (1974). Magadi-type chert was first reported from 

the Buckhorn area by D. M. Dennis (oral commun. in 

Sheppard and Gude, 1974). According to Surdam, 

Eugster, and Mariner (1972), the presence of Magaditype chert indicates a depositional environment having a 

pH of at least 9.5. The lithium content of the chert 

sampled ranged from 17 to 84 ppm; the mean lithium 

content in six samples was 41 ppm and the standard 

deviation 23. The mean fluorine content was 1,125 ppm 

and the standard deviation 724. In the chert, lithium 

and fluorine have a correlation coefficient (r) of 0.83, 

indicating a strong relationship (fig. 63).

We analyzed the samples from the Buckhorn area for 

fluorine as well as lithium. As mentioned, the strongest 

correlation between lithium and fluorine was found in 

the chert samples. In 28 claystone and siltstone samples 

containing less than 1 percent fluorine the correlation 

coefficient between lithium and fluorine (r=0.7) indicates a fairly strong relation. However, in the samples 

containing more than 1 percent fluorine, there is almost 

no correlation between lithium and fluorine (r=0.26 for 

five samples). In the samples containing less than 1 percent fluorine, lithium increases as fluorine content increases; in the samples containing more than 1 percent 

fluorine, lithium content tends to decrease as fluorine 

content increases (fig. 63).

2.5

LJ 2.0

O

rr 

LJ

Q.

UJ

? 1.5

rr

O

EXPLANATION

• Fine-grained 

sediments 

or ash

x Chert

1.0 — 

Q.9 I I ' I i i I i I I I

eooor—

5500

5000

4500

4000

LJ

rr 

O

3500

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0 50 100 150 200 250 

LITHIUM, IN PARTS PER MILLION

FIGURE 63.—Lithium-fluorine correlations in samples of 

lake-bed sediments in the Gila Conglomerate near 

Buckhorn, N. Mex. Correlations based on least squares 

linear regression equation, y =mx+b.x, lithium value;)), 

fluorine value, r, computed correlation coefficient.
126 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

HYDROTHERMAL ALTERATION OF 

THE GILA CONGLOMERATE

Mineralizing episodes have occurred repeatedly 

throughout the geologic history of southwestern New 

Mexico, and in several places the Gila Conglomerate is 

mineralized. Chrysocolla coats boulders and forms veinlets in the Gila Conglomerate in the northern Big Burro 

Mountains (Hewitt, 1959, p. 92; Gillerman, 1964, 

p. 59-60). Fluorite veins occur in the Gila (Elston, 1960, 

1970), and south of Redrock, N. Mex., manganese was 

mined from veins in the Gila Conglomerate (Elston, 

1965, p. 212). North of Silver City, N. Mex., veins of 

meerschaum (Sterrett, 1908; Ratte and others, 1972) 

occur in the Gila. Areas of hot-spring alteration are evident between Silver City and the Gila Cliff Dwellings 

National Monument, and hot springs are common in 

the area.

In the Caprock district, south of Redrock, N. Mex. 

(fig. 62), manganese oxide veins in the lower part of the 

Gila Conglomerate are associated with travertine deposits and have other features suggesting that the viens 

were deposited from hot springs. The lower part of the 

Gila in this area consists of very coarse bedded conglomerate and sandstone; cobbles as large as 15 cm in diameter occur near the manganese veins. The veins are 

steeply dipping to vertical and fill faults which are alined 

parallel to major regional structures (Gillerman, 1964, 

p. 168). Along with psilomelane and pyrolusite, calcite, 

white fluorite, and quartz occur in the veins, The quartz 

ranges from opaline to coarsely crystalline and generally 

occurs near the center of the veins. The manganese 

oxides replace the matrix of the conglomerate near the 

veins, and calcite locally cements the conglomerate. 

Elston and others (1973) reported that the manganese 

mineralization is younger than the basaltic andesites in 

the area dated at 20.6±1.6 m.y.

To check the possibility of lithium occurring in the 

mineralizing solutions, we took some grab samples of 

the manganese ore, vein materials, and country rock. 

Lithium contents of the eight samples taken ranged 

from 10 to 40 ppm, so we have to conclude that either 

the mineralizing solutions did not contain much lithium 

or that the lithium was not precipitated with the manganese and fluorine. The evidence we have now, which 

is mostly negative, suggests that the lithium in the system was carried in the hot springs to surface drainage.

Another area of mineralized Gila Conglomerate occurs approximately 1 mile (1.6 km) north of New 

Mexico Highway 25 where meerschaum was mined (fig. 

62). Meerschaum is a lightweight, tough clay that can be 

carved and is used for pipes (for smoking tobacco), as 

insulation for pipes, and for radio insulators. The occurrence was described by Sterrett (1908) and Ratte and 

others (1972). The meerschaum is in steeply dipping

veins and veinlets in Gila Conglomerate and the underlying basaltic andesite (Ratte and others, 1972). 

Meerschaum is usually defined as sepiolite (American 

Geological Institute, 1957), but X-ray diffraction 

analysis shows the vein material from the meerschaum 

deposit to be palygorskite, (Mg,Al)2Si4O10(OH)-4H2O. 

The material also contains calcite crystals, clinoptilolite, 

a small amount of quartz, and and undetermined clay 

mineral having a sharp peak at 15 A. The altered conglomerate near the veins consists of quartz grains in a 

matrix of clay, clinoptilolite, palygorskite, and calcite. 

The lithium contents of samples from the area were low: 

10 ppm in the vein material and 25 ppm in the altered 

conglomerate. In contrast, a sample of coarse sandstone 

from several miles north of the meerschaum deposit 

contained 105 ppm lithium. A sample of altered andesite underlying the Gila Conglomerate about 3 miles (5 

km) northwest of the meerschaum deposit contained 6 

ppm lithium which is half the average content (12 ppm) 

reported for andesites by Heier and Adams (1964). 

These few preliminary data suggest that lithium may 

have been leached from the country rock and carried 

out by the same solutions that deposited the 

palygorskite, and that similar hot-spring systems have 

leached the andesite underlying the Gila Conglomerate. 

Systematic sampling in altered and unaltered areas of 

Gila Conglomerate is needed to confirm or refute the 

leaching hypothesis.

HOT SPRINGS

Many hot springs occur in and near the Mogollon 

Mountains. The average lithium content of hot springs 

in this region, from our data and from published data 

(table 56), is approximately 0.25 mg/1. Chlorine averages 

35 mg/1 and conductivity averages 713 micromhos for 

eight springs. The lithium/chlorine ratios plot along a 

curve which has a slope normal for hot springs (Smith, 

this report). However, even though dilute, these springs 

do supply lithium.

SUMMARY

Reconnaissance sampling in southwestern New 

Mexico suggests an opportunity for detailed study of a 

geochemical cycle of lithium. We have preliminary evidence of leached rocks (a source), of mineralizing fluids 

(transport), and lake beds (deposition). Lakes, similar to 

those represented by the rocks in the valley of Duck 

Creek, can be a sink for the elements leached by hot 

springs. Although reconnaissance did not disclose anything more than anomalous lithium contents in the lake 

beds in the Gila Conglomerate in the Valley of Duck 

Creek, higher concentrations of lithium may occur 

within the lake bed sequence, possibly in beds of hectorite.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 127

TABLE 56.—Chemistry of hot springs in southwestern New Mexico

[Leaders(—_-) indicate no data]

Temperature

Location

NEWsec. 5, T. 13 S., R. 13 W. 

SEW sec. 24, T. 12 S., R. 14 W. 

NEW sec. 10, T. 13 S., R. 13 W. 

NEW sec. 31, T. 12 S., R. 13 W. 

NWW sec. 20, T. 13 S., R. 13 W. 

NWW sec. 20, T. 20 S., R. 11 W. 

NEW sec. 12, T. 18 S., R. 10 W. 

NEW sec. 14, T. 12 S., R. 20 W. 

Average _ -_ „„

Name

Gila 

Unnamed 

do - —

—-do __ — -

Faywood 

Mimbres 

San Francisco

(°F)

148 

152 

'106.5 

1 149.6

1 129.2 

2 129.2 

2 117 

133

(°C)

64 

66 

41 

65

"54 

54 

47 

56

Li

(mg/1)

0.21 

.34 

'.20-0.23 

'.37-0.40 

'.25 

.18 

.12 

.44 

.25

Cl 

(ppm)

110 

115 

1 98-103 

'105-110

2 ~17 

2 19 

2 473 

135

Conductivity 

(micromhos)

600 

700 

'568-581 

'720-771

2 610 

2440 

2 1,300 

713

Specific

gravity

1.0006 

1.0005

2 1.000 

2 1.000 

M.001

"Summers (1972). 

'Summers (1965).

REFERENCES CITED

American Geological Institute, 1957, Glossary of geology and related 

sciences: Natl. Research Council Pub. 501, 325 p.

Ballmann, D. L., 1960, Geology of the Knight Peak area, Grant, 

County, New Mexico: New Mexico Bur. Mines and Mineral Resources Bull. 70, 39 p.

Dane, C. H., and Bachman, G. O., 1965, Geologic map of New 

Mexico: Washington, D.C., U.S. Geol. Survey.

Elston, W. E., 1960, Reconnaissance geologic map of Virden thirtyminute quadrangle: New Mexico Bur. Mines and Mineral Resources Geol. Map 15.

————1965, Mining districts of Hidalgo County, New Mexico [summ.], 

in Guidebook of Southwestern New Mexico II—New Mexico 

Geol. Soc., 16th Field Conf. 1965: Socorro, New Mexico, New 

Mexico Bur. Mines and Mineral Resources, p. 210-214. 

-1970, Volcano-tectonic control of ore deposits, southwestern

New Mexico, in Guidebook of the Tyrone-Big Hatchet 

Mountains-Florida Mountains region—New Mexico Geol. Soc. 

Field Conf., 21st, 1970: Socorro, New Mexico, New Mexico Bur. 

Mines and Mineral Resources, p. 147-153.

Elston, W. E., Damon, P. E., Coney, P. J., Rhodes, R. C., Smith, E. I. 

and Bikerman, Michael, 1973, Tertiary volcanic rocks, 

Mogollon-Datil province, New Mexico, and surrounding region; 

K-Ar dates, patterns of eruption, and periods of mineralization: 

Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 84, no. 7, p. 2259-2273.

Eugster, H. P., 1967, Hydrous sodium silicates from Lake Magadi, 

Kenya—precursors of bedded chert: Science, v. 157, p. 1177- 

1180.

————1969, Inorganic bedded cherts from the Magadi area, Kenya: 

Contr. Mineralogy and Petrology, v. 22, p. 1-31.

Gilbert, G. K., 1875, Report on the geology of portions of New Mexico 

and Arizona, in Report upon U.S. geographical and geological 

explorations and surveys west of the one hundredth meridian, in 

charge of First Lieut. G. M. Wheeler, Volume 3: Washington, 

D.C., U.S. Govt. Printing Office, p. 503-567.

Gillerman, Elliot, 1964, Mineral deposits of western Grant County, 

New Mexico: New Mexico Bur. Mines and Mineral Resources 

Bull. 83, 213 p.

Hay, R. L., 1968, Chert and its sodium-silicate precursors in sodiumcarbonate lakes of East Africa: Contr. Mineralogy and Petrology, 

v. 17, p. 255-274.

————1970, Silicate reactions in three lithofacies of a semi-arid basin, 

Oldavai Gorge, Tanzania, in B. A. Morgan, ed., Fiftieth Anniversary Symposia—Mineralogy and petrology of the Upper Mantle, 

sulfides, [and] mineralogy and geochemistry of non-marine 

evaporites: Mineralog. Soc. America Spec. Paper 3, p. 237-255.

Heier, K. S., and Adams, J. A. S., 1964, The geochemistry of the alkali 

metals, in Physics and chemistry o£ the earth, Volume 5: New 

York, Macmillan Co., p. 253-381.

Heindl, L. A., 1952, Gila Conglomerate, in Arizona Geol. Soc., 

Guidebook for field trip excursions on southern Arizona: p. 

113-116.

————1954, Cenozoic alluvial deposits in the upper Gila River drainage basin, Arizona and New Mexico [abs.]: Geol. Soc. America 

Bull., v. 65, no. 12, pt. 2, p. 1262. 

-1963, Cenozoic geology in the Mammoth area, Final County,

Arizona: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1141-E 41 p.

Hewitt, C. H., 1959, Geology and mineral deposits of the northern Big 

Burro Mountains-Redrock area, Grant County, New Mexico: 

New Mexico Bur. Mines and Mineral Resources Bull. 60, 151 p.

Knechtel, M. M., 1936, Geologic relations of the Gila Conglomerate in 

southeastern Arizona: Am. Jour. Sci., 5th ser., v. 31, no. 182, p. 

81-92.

Ratte, J. C., Gaskill, D. L., Eaton, G. P., Peterson, D. L., Stotelmeyer, R. 

B., and Meeves, H. C., 1972, Mineral resources of the Gila Primitive Area and Gila Wilderness, Catron and Grant Counties, New 

Mexico: U.S. Geol. Survey open-file rept. 428 p.

Sheppard, R. A., and Gude, A. J., 3d, 1974, Chert derived from 

magadiite in a lacustrine deposit near Rome, Malheur County, 

Oregon: U.S. Geol. Survey Jour. Research, v. 2, no. 5, p. 625-630.

Sterrett, D. B., 1908, Meerschaum in New Mexico, in Contributions to 

economic geology, 1907: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 340, p. 466-473.

Summers, W. K., 1965, Chemical characteristics of New Mexico's 

thermal waters—a critique: New Mexico Bur. Mines and Mineral 

Resources Circ. 83, 27 p.

————1972, Factors affecting the validity of chemical analyses of 

natural water: Ground Water, v. 10, no. 2, p. 12-17.

Surdam, R. C., Eugster, H. P., and Mariner, R. H., 1972, Magadi-type 

chert in Jurassic and Eocene to Pleistocene rocks, Wyoming: Geol. 

Soc. America Bull., v. 83, no. 8, p. 2261-2265.

Turekian, K. K., and Wedepohl, K. H., 1961, Distribution of the elements in some major units of the Earth's crust: Geol. Soc. America 

Bull., v. 72, no. 2, p. 175-191.
128 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

LITHIUM IN CLAYEY ROCKS OF PENNSYLVANIA AGE, 

WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA

By HARRY A. TOURTELOT and ALLEN L. MEIER, U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, DENVER, CO

ABSTRACT

Clayey rocks of Pennsylvanian age in western Pennsylvania have a 

wide range of lithium concentrations. The first of three data sets consists of analyses of 162 samples of clay and shale from the Greater 

Pittsburgh region which were selected for testing because of possible 

ceramic usefulness. Lithium concentrations for shale range from less 

than 33 ppm to 165 ppm and for underelay from less than 33 ppm to 

270 ppm; 25 samples contain 100 ppm lithium or more. Formation 

name, geometric mean, geometric deviation, and number of samples 

are as follows: Pittsburgh Formation, 15 ppm, 3.25, 27; Casselman 

Formation, 12 ppm, 4.13, 34; Glenshaw Formation, 47 ppm, 2.39, 22; 

Freeport Formation, 93 ppm, 1.97, 8; Kittanning Formation, 23 ppm, 

4.19, 29, and Clarion Formation, 56 ppm, 2.83, 16. The relatively 

large geometric deviations indicate that the stratigraphic variation 

among the formation means should be viewed judiciously.

The second data set consists of analyses of 38 samples of shale, 

underclay, and siderite from Beaver County, Pa. The range of lithium 

concentrations is similar to that in the first data set, but one shale 

sample contains 280 ppm lithium and an underclay sample contains 

330 ppm. Siderite contains 15-40 ppm lithium. Within two stratigraphic sections, lithium concentrations greater than 100 ppm may 

represent marine shale and concentrations less than 100 ppm may 

represent nonmarine shale.

The third data set consists of a subset of analyses of 13 samples of 

shale and underclay from Armstrong and Butler Counties and 

another subset of analyses of about 20 samples of flint clay from Clearfield, Jefferson, and Somerset Counties. The shale and underclay have 

smaller lithium concentrations than similar rocks in Beaver County, 

the highest value being 160 ppm in a shale. Perhaps these rocks were 

deposited in an area in which marine influences were very slight.

Flint clay tends to contain more lithium than any other clayey rocks 

analyzed: 17 of 20 flint clay samples contain 300 ppm or more and 10 

of these 17 contain more than 500 ppm. In addition 6 of the 20 values 

cluster at about 300 ppm and another 6 cluster at about 900 ppm. 

Although a diaspore clay contains only 40 ppm, no differences in 

mineral composition that might be related to lithium content can be 

detected by whole-sample X-ray diffraction analyses. Flint clay is made 

up almost entirely of well-crystallized kaolinite. Quartz was detected in 

only two samples. Illite and boehmite each are present in a few samples but there is no evident relation between mineral composition and 

lithium content. In one set of samples through a clay bed, lithium 

concentrations are largest in the upper part of the bed.

Structural substitution of magnesium and lithium for aluminum 

may account for the occurrence of lithium in polymineralic shale and 

underclay that contain considerable illite as well as kaolinite if lithium 

concentrations are less than perhaps 300 ppm. Some lithium may be 

held in cation-exchange positions, but the amounts should be small 

because other cations should replace lithium in clay minerals in nearsurface rocks in a humid climate. The small magnesium content of 

flint clays makes unlikely magnesium-lithium substitution in the 

kaolinite in flint clay, and cation exchange seems even more improbable because of the small cation-exchange capacity of well-crystallized 

kaolinite. The lithium content of flint clays may be due to the presence 

of small amounts of a lithium mineral that has not been recognized. If 

a mineral contains 1.5 percent lithium, 1 percent of the mineral in a 

sample would give the sample a lithium concentration of 150 ppm.

Underclays are thought to be the result of relatively pure accumulation of clay in low-energy coal-swamp environments or the result of 

severe leaching following coal-bed deposition. Flint clay and more 

aluminous minerals are generally interpreted as the result of extreme 

leaching. Another view is that flint clay, and perhaps other occurrences of kaolinite as well, are the result of silication of preexisting 

aluminum-hydroxide minerals. Under the conditions of either extreme leaching or silication, it is possible that lithium-bearing minerals 

could be formed. Although lithium aluminosilicates are known so far 

only from igneous rocks, the wide range of authigenic silicate minerals 

in the Eocene Green River Formation makes it clear that the mineralforming potential of unusual sedimentary environments is not completely understood.

INTRODUCTION

Clay minerals are widely believed to be the primary 

residence sites for trace constituents, including lithium, 

in sedimentary rocks. Clayey rocks contain more lithium 

than other kinds of sedimentary rocks, the lithium contents of which are grossly proportional to their clay contents. Horstman (1957, p. 3) estimated the average 

lithium content of worldwide shales to be 66 ppm, an 

estimate accepted by Turekian and Wedepohl (1961, 

table 2) and Heier and Billings (1972, p. 3-k-l); other 

recent estimates range from 60 ppm (Ohrdorf, 1968, p. 

207) to 80 ppm (Ronov and others, 1970, p. 86).

Keith and Degens (1959, p. 42) reported that marine 

shales of Pennsylvanian age in western Pennsylvania 

contain an average of 159 ppm lithium, whereas associated nonmarine shales contain 92 ppm. The 

geochemical interest in lithium in shales of Pennsylvanian age was reemphasized by publication of platereader spectrographic analyses of shale and clay in the 

six-county Greater Pittsburgh region as part of the U.S. 

Geological Survey's program of environmental studies 

there (O'Neill, 1973). Of the 162 samples of shale and 

clay selected for their possible ceramic uses, 25 have a 

lithium content of 100 ppm or more, and the maximum 

value was about 270 ppm. Brief reconnaissance sampling therefore was undertaken in 1974 and 1975 in conjunction with other work in the Greater Pittsburgh region.

This paper deals with three sets of data: (1) the platereader semiquantitative spectrographic analyses for 

lithium of 162 samples of shale and clay from the Greater Pittsburgh region; (2) atomic absorption analyses for 

lithium in 38 samples from Beaver County, Pa. (table 

57); and (3) two data subsets, first, atomic absorption 

analyses for lithium of 13 samples of shale and clay from
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 129

Armstrong and Butler Counties, Pa. (table 57), and second, 21 samples of flint clay and related materials from 

Clearfield, Jefferson, and Somerset Counties, generously supplied for lithium analysis (table 57) by the General Refractories Company, Pittsburgh, Pa.

SHALE AND CLAY FROM DIFFERENT AREAS

GREATER PITTSBURGH REGION SHALE AND CLAY

Shale and clay resources in the Greater Pittsburgh 

region (Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, Butler, 

Washington, and Westmoreland Counties, figure 64) 

are being investigated by the Pennsylvania Bureau of 

Topographic and Geologic Survey in cooperation with 

the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Bureau of 

Mines (O'Neill, 1973). The lithologic, physical, chemical, 

mineralogic, and use data obtained will contribute to 

broadening the natural resource base of the region. Reginald P. Briggs of the U.S. Geological Survey supplied 

the stratigraphic positions of most of the samples (written commun., 1974).

The 162 samples collected by the Pennsylvania 

Bureau of Topographic and Geologic Survey were

FIGURE 64.—Distribution of sample localities and rocks of Pennsylvanian and Permian ages in western Pennsylvania Pennsylvanian and 

Permian rocks patterned. Stipple-outlined six counties constitute 

the Greater Pittsburgh region. Italic capital letters indicate counties: 

AL, Allegheny; AR, Armstrong, B, Beaver; BU, Butler, CL, 

Clearfield; /, Jefferson; S, Somerset; WA, Washington; WE, 

Westmoreland. Roman capital letters, sample localities in table 57.

selected primarily for the possible ceramic usefulness of 

the rock units sampled. Shale and clay of possible 

ceramic use are not particularly more prevalent in 

marine than in nonmarine strata, nor do these shale and 

clay units have other characteristics that would exclude 

them from the general class of fine-grained rocks called 

shale. The wide range of values found for lithium, from 

less than 33 ppm to 270 ppm, is thought probably to 

represent a major part of the potential spectrum of 

lithium contents in such rocks. Lithium concentrations 

in 96 of the 162 samples were reported as qualified values, that is, as "less than 33 ppm;" this value suggests 

that current estimates of the abundance of lithium in 

shale may be too large.

The lithium contents of the samples from the formations of the Allegheny, Conemaugh, and Monongahela 

Groups of Pennsylvanian age are summarized in figure 

65. The frequency distributions are positively skewed, 

thus the geometric mean is the best estimate of the most 

common value. For some formations, more than half 

the samples were reported as containing less then 33 

ppm lithium. Logarithmic transformations and the 

Cohen method of dealing with qualified values in

10 

5

10 

5

10

to

5 

UJ

5 

< 5 

to

10 

5

10

5

- •• Pittsburgh Fm." 

•• GM = I5 

JJ GD = 3.25 

11 n r 27

: ::.A i . . ;. i i i

— •• Casselman Fm. ' 

: •• GM=I2 

: ••• GD = 4.I3 

I ••• n = 34

— Glenshaw Fm. 

- GM = 47 

I GD = 2.39

r .... n=22

- Freeport Fm. 

1 GM=93 

|_ GD=I.97

- A | • • !«*••! 1 I A I

- • Kittanning Fm. 

'- •• GM=23 

: «A GD = 4.19

: It • n = ^

: Si A ••! »| A 1 A | A |A |

- Clarion Fm. 

: GM = 56 

: GD = 2.83

: n=l6

- It \ ••• »| A A A | A A | A | |

0 50 100 150 200 250 30

a

•£• c

|a

o

a. 

o

Conemaug

0.

O 

I

0>

LITHIUM, IN PARTS PER MILLION

FIGURE 65.—Frequency distribution of lithium concentrations by 

geologic formation in Greater Pittsburgh region. Solid triangle, 

underclay; solid circle, shale and clay; GM, geometric mean; GD, 

geometric deviation; n, number of samples.
130 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

geochemistry as discussed by Miesch (1967) were used in 

analysis of the data.

The Freeport and Clarion Formations of the Allegheny Group and the Glenshaw Formation of the 

Conemaugh Group have geometric means for lithium 

of 93, 56, and 47 ppm, respectively. These figures are 

markedly different from those of the Pittsburgh Formation (15 ppm), the Casselman Formation (12 ppm), and 

the Kittanning Formation (23 ppm). To the extent that 

sample selection has not introduced large biases, these 

figures clearly point to the Freeport, Clarion, and Glenshaw Formations as the most interesting for future 

studies on lithium in shale in the Greater Pittsburgh 

region.

Among the samples from all formations that contain 

100 ppm lithium or more, shales and underclays 1 are 

about equally divided with 13 and 12, respectively. It is 

obvious, however, that all the samples containing more 

than 100 ppm lithium in the Kittanning and Clarion 

Formations are underclays, and also these formations 

are the only formations in which underclays make up a 

significant proportion of the samples that contain less 

than 33 ppm lithium. This data may partly be a result of 

sampling, inasmuch as underclays seem to be thicker 

and more suitable for ceramic use in these formations 

than in the others and would receive more attention in 

sampling for ceramic testing. With respect to lithium, 

however, the data imply that the lithium contents of 

underclays are independent of the special composition 

and position in the sedimentational sequence of the underclays compared to the shales that make up the bulk 

of the coal-bearing sequences. The reason for the variability in lithium is not evident to us.

BEAVER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

The sampling in Beaver County, Pa., mostly within 

the Kittanning Formation, was intended primarily to investigate localities reported by O'Neill (1973) that had 

yielded samples containing more than 100 ppm lithium, 

although the exact beds yielding those samples could 

not be identified in the field. The correspondence between the localities shown in figure 64 and those in 

O'Neill (1973) is shown below (capital letters are 

localities from figure 64 and numbers are from O'Neill): 

C (Cain mine) ————_________58 (approximately) 

E (Ellsman mine) ____________58-60 

G (Glasgow) ______________62 

M (Midland) _______________63 

PR(Peggs Run) _____________64 

V (Vanport) ________________76-79 (approximately)

'"Underclay. A layer of fine-grained detrital material, usually clay, lying immediately beneath a coal bed or forming the floor of a coal seam" (Gary and others, 1972, p. 766). 

Mineralogically, most underclays consist chiefly of mixtures of kaolinite and illite in contrast to 

associated shales that consist of illite, kaolinite, and chlorite with admixed quartz and commonly carbonate minerals. For example, see table 57.

Shale, underclay, and siderite nodules were sampled 

to get information on the relations between lithium content and rock type and to estimate variation within 

stratigraphic sections. Siderite nodules were sampled 

because S. Landergren reported 100 ppm lithium in 

marine siderite iron ores (Rankama and Sahama, 1950, 

p. 428). The method of atomic absorption analysis is 

described by Meier (this report). The analyses in table 

57 confirm the general magnitude of the plate-reader 

spectrographic analyses reported by O'Neill (1973).

The frequency distribution of lithium in shale, underclay, and siderite nodules in shale is shown in figure 66. 

The distribution is very similar to those derived from 

the spectrographic data in figure 65. The lithium contents of both shale and underclay vary widely. Most of 

the concentrations in shale less than 100 ppm come 

from the Glasgow and Vanport localities (table 57). The 

siderite nodules contain less than 50 ppm lithium.

The shales range in clay content from 50 to 70 percent (table 57) with quartz making up the remainder 

except for minor amounts of plagioclase feldspar and 

siderite. The clay fraction is made up chiefly of illite, but 

kaolinite predominates in some of the underclays and 

almost equals the amount of illite in many samples. 

Chlorite occurs in the shale in amounts of 5-10 percent, 

but it is generally absent from the underclays. No relation is evident between lithium content and the mineral 

composition of the samples.

The stratigraphic and lithologic distributions of 

lithium are shown in figure 67. Stratigraphic assignments are based on the geologic map of Patterson 

(1963), but uncertainty remains in our interpretation of 

the stratigraphic position of the Glasgow section. If an 

underclay exists beneath the Middle Kittanning coal, it 

is very thin compared to the underclay of the Middle 

Kittanning at the Ellsman mine. In addition, we did not 

find the Middle Kittanning coal at the Midland section, 

although it may be present above the sandstone at the 

top of the section in figure 67, at a much greater interval 

than separates the Middle and Lower Kittanning coals at 

the Ellsman mine.

Few regularities in distribution of lithium content by 

lithology and stratigraphic position are evident in figure 

67. The largest lithium concentration is 330 ppm in a 

sample of the underclay of the Middle Kittanning coal at 

the Ellsman mine but the next largest (280 ppm) is a 

siderite-rich sample of black shale at the Midland locality. Samples from the Lower Kittanning underclay contain about 150 ppm lithium at both the Ellsman mine 

and the Midland locality.

The stratigraphic distribution of lithium in the 

Ellsman mine and at the Midland sections seems to be 

partly inter pretable in terms of the difference in lithium 

content of marine and nonmarine shales reported by
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 131

TABLE 57.—Lithium contents and X-ray mineralogical analyses of clayey rocks of Pennsylvanian age, western Pennsylvania

[Lithium analvses by A. L. Meier; X-ray diffraction analyses by H. A. Tourtelot using the method of Schultz (1964). Mineral percents in parentheses are result of different kind of X-ray 

analysis that yields order-of-magnitude figures only; x, mineral detected; n, mineral not detected; leaders indicate no data]

Clay minerals

Clayey rocks

Armstrong County 

Heilman mine

West Valley mine 

Lower Freeport coal

Bea\er County 

Cain mine

Ellsman mine

Glasgow

Midland

Peggs Run

Van port

Underclay (Lower Freeport? coal) _ _ _ _-.___

Butler County 

McCall mine

Coal __________________________ ............

Clearfield County

Galbraith Property, Mercer clay

Do ........._-..........................

Do . ... ... . _ .

Do

Do .....................................

Do -- — — ..—_..__ — .___-__________..

Curwensville-Anderson Creek area, Prospect 

Hole 1, Mercer clay

Jeffnes mines, Decatur Twsp., Mercer clay

Jeffries mines, Woodward Twsp., Mercer clay

Philipsburg

Jefferson County 

Brookville flint clav.. __ .. ......... ___ .. .

Sample 

locality

HMl 

HM2

WVI 

WV2 

WV3

Cl 

C2

El 

E2 

E3 

E3s 

E4 

E4s 

E5 

E6 

E7 

F.8 

E9 

E9s 

E10

Gl 

Gls

G2 

G3 

G3s

Ml 

Mis 

M2 

M2s 

M3 

M5 

M6+2 

M6+8 

M6+9

PRl

VI 

Vis

V2 

V3 

V3s

V4 

V5 

V6

McCl 

McC2 

McC3 

McC4 

McC5 

McC6 

McC7

L2 

CLl

GAl 

GA2 

GA4 

GA5 

GA6 

GA7 

GAS 

GA9 

GAIO 

GAll 

GA12

KAl 

KA2

L3 

L4 

PHI 

BRl

Li 

(ppm)

77 

80

160 

72 

64

85 

81

150 

100 

110 

21 

75 

40 

330 

110 

110 

100 

100 

18 

90

67 

14

36 

76 

21

48 

25 

74 

40 

160 

280 

130 

150 

14

80

88 

24

100 

64 

16

140 

160 

130

120 

13 

78 

110 

28 

80 

57

950 

320

880 

900 

900 

840 

550 

590 

330 

320 

340 

330 

450

1400 

850

290 

41 

63 

700

(Percent of total clay)

Kaolinite1 Chlorite Illite and 

expanding clay

21 

22

17(2) 

15

(60)(2) 

(50)

(80)(2) 

(45)(2) 

(40) 

(x) 

(40)(2) 

(x) 

(60)(2) 

(40) 

(x) 

(40)(2) 

(35)(2) 

(x) 

(25)(2)

(40)(2) 

(x)

(35)(2) 

(40) 

(x)

(30) 

(x) 

(35)(2) 

(x) 

(40)(2) 

(45)(2) 

(40) 

(35) 

(75)(2)

(35)

(35)(2) 

(x)

(40)(2) 

(40)(2) 

(x)

(40)(2) 

(35) 

(40)

12(1) 

50(2) 

27(2) 

31(2) 

26(2)

100(1)

100(1) 

100(1)

100(1) 

100(1)

100(1)

100(1)

100(1)

100(1) 

100(1)

100(1) 

10(1) 

22(2) 

100(1)

(n) 

(n)

23

(n)

(n) 

(10)

(n) 

(10) 

(10) 

(n) 

(10) 

(n) 

(n) 

(10) 

(x) 

(10) 

(15) 

(n) 

(15)

(10) 

(n)

(n) 

(15) 

(n)

(5) 

(x) 

(n) 

(n) 

(5) 

(15) 

(10) 

(10) 

(x)

(10)

(5) 

(n)

(x) 

(10) 

(n)

(10) 

(10) 

(10)

24 

n 

2 

n 

n

(n)

n 

n

n 

n

n

n

n 

n

n 

n 

15 

n

"79 

"78

60

2 85

2 (40) 

2 (40)

'(20) 

'(45) 

2 (50) 

(x) 

(50) 

(x) 

2 (40) 

2 (50) 

(x) 

2 (50) 

(50) 

(x) 

(60)

2 (50) 

(x)

2 (65) 

(45) 

(x)

(65) 

(x) 

2 (65) 

(n) 

2 (55) 

2 (40) 

(50) 

2 (55) 

(25)

(55)

(60) 

(x)

*(60) 

(50) 

(x)

(50) 

2 (55) 

2 (50)

64 

2 50 

2 71 

69 2 75

(n)

n

x

n 

x

n

n

x

n

x

X

n 

63 

n

Total 

clay

70 

40

45 

40

(60) 

(55)

(70) 

(50) 

(60) 

(x) 

(60) 

(x) 

(75) 

(50) 

(30) 

(50) 

(50) 

(x) 

(50)

(55) 

(x)

(60) 

(55) 

(x)

(50) 

(x) 

(60) 

(x) 

(60) 

(60) 

(55) 

(55) 

(35)

(50)

(60) 

(x)

(60) 

(55) 

(x)

(55) 

(55) 

(50)

40 

60 

75 

45 

40

100 

85

95 

95

95 

95

95

95

95

95 

95

95 

10 

45 

95

Mineral composition

(Percent)2

Quartz Other 

minerals

13 

21

15 

30

(40) 

(45)

(30) 

(50) 

(40) 

(x) 

(40) 

(x) 

(25) 

(50) 

(20) 

(50) 

(50) 

(x) 

(50)

(45) 

(x)

(40) 

(45) 

(x)

(50) 

(x) 

(40) 

(x) 

(40) 

(40) 

(45) 

(45) 

(65)

(50)

(40) 

(x)

(40) 

(45) 

(x)

(45) 

(45) 

(50)

15 

15 

22 

18 

21

(n) 

15

n

n 

n

n

n

n

n 

n

n 

n 

26 

n

Calcite 5, 

Dolomite 2.

Siderite 5

Siderite(90)

Siderite(95)

Siderite(50) 

Plagioclase(x)

Siderite(90) 

Siderite(x)

Plagioclase(x) 

Siderite(90), 

Pyrite(x)

Siderite(90)

Plagioclase(x) 

Siderite(75)

Siderite(75)

Plagioclase(x) 

Plagioclase(x) 

Plagioclase(x)

Plagioclase(x)

Plagioclase(x) 

Siderite(90), 

Calcite(x)

Calcite(70), 

Siderite(20). 

Plagioclase(x)

Siderite(x)

Siderite 15

Goethite?

Boehmite x 

Boehmite x

Diaspore 90

Boehmite x
132 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

TABLE 57.—Lithium contents and X-ray mineralogical analyses of clayey rocks of Pennsylvanian age, western Pennsylvania—Continued

Clayey rocks

Somerset county

Clay minerals Mineral composition

(Percent of total clay) (Percent)2

Sample Li Kaolinite1 Chlorite Illite and Total Quartz Other 

locality (ppm) expanding clay clay minerals

LI 210 100(1) n n 95 n - - -

SOI 150 78(1) n 22 70 23 — — --

'Crystallinity shown by figures in parentheses if determinable: (1) well crystallized; (2) poorly crystallized. 

Mllite contains much expandable material.

- •• A • f •

: .. : : . A .. A. f . . .A A , , . , A 1 100 150 200 250 

LITHIUM, IN PARTS PER MILLION

FIGURE 66.—Frequency distribution of lithium concentrations in 

underclay (solid triangles), shale and clay (solid circles), and siderite 

(solid squares) from Beaver County, Pa.

Kittanning Formation Freeport Formotion

:LLSMA

MINE

•ii

:—— ^~

59?

'lV(V

N 

90ppm Li

> s

^Lower Freepart 

coal

100

^100"'

_330 Middle 

— 40 Kittanning 

75 coal 

^21 

_ 115

100

LASGOW 

OADCUT

miam

i ijssL 3 Si fTT

•m

METRE 

20— | 

-Upper Kittanningf?.) 

coal

MIDLAND 

•21 ppm Li ROADCUT 15 — 

_76 rrr-^>r-, 

— jg ••.'.•'.'.•.•.'. !4ppmLi

67

~

~~I50 Lower Kittanning coal

—— ——

—————

BEEE;

^TffB

— -»p=

- 130 5- 

280

= 160 

t-4805 °J 

48 -25

EXPLANATION

| «._•».] Siderite

concretion

FIGURE 67.—Ellsman mine, Glasgow, and Midland stratigraphic 

sections, Beaver County, Pa., showing lithium concentrations by 

rock types.

Keith and Degans (1959) and the cyclic sequences of 

environments of coal deposition conceived by Edmunds 

(1968, p. 25-37). Although such an interpretation is 

highly speculative, it seems worthwhile in order to point 

out a potential relation between sedimentation and 

geochemistry of an unusual type that needs further 

study.

Edmunds' ideal sequence (fig. 68) begins with sediments deposited landwards of a coal swamp, which are 

transgressed by the swamp itself. The resulting underBrackish or marine 

open-water deposits

Nonmarine fluviatile 

back-swamp deposits

(Obscure boundary)

Brackish or marine 

open-water deposits

Nonmarine fluviatile 

back-swamp deposits

DIRECTION OF TRANSGRESSION

FIGURE 68.—Idealized cyclic sequence of depositional environments 

for coal-bearing rocks in west-central Pennsylvania. Modified from 

Edmunds (1968).

clay and coal may be regarded as generally a single unit. 

As transgression continues, the coal is overlaid by sediments deposited in brackish or marine open water, that 

transgresses the swamp. The beginning of a regression 

may be marked by a coal, usually without much of an 

underclay, but the relation between a regressive unit 

and the underlying transgressive unit may be obscure 

(Edmunds, 1968, p. 34-35). The nonmarine fluviatile 

deposits making up the regressive unit are complex in 

lithology and arrangement and are characterized by 

concurrent erosion-and-deposition features. Such cycles 

of deposition theoretically would result in nonmarine 

fluviatile shale containing a relatively small amount of 

lithium overlain by coal and then brackish or marine 

shale containing relatively large amounts of lithium.

If the above models hold, the beds containing less 

than 100 ppm lithium beneath the Lower Kittanning 

coal at Midland would be nonmarine, whereas the beds 

containing more than 100 ppm lithium above the coals 

at Midland would be marine. The sandstone at the top
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 133

of the local section probably is a fluviatile sandstone of 

the regressive unit and the base of the sandstone a disconformity. Similarly, at the Ellsman mine the section 

between the Lower and Middle Kittanning coals could 

consist of transgressive marine shale containing 100 or 

more ppm of lithium; it is separated obscurely from an 

overlying regressive nonmarine shale containing less 

than 100 ppm lithium. The situation for the section between the Middle Kittanning and Lower Freeport coals 

is not clear because the sample for lithium analysis was a 

composite of the entire unit and the possible variation in 

lithium concentration from botttom to top is not determined.

The Glasgow and Vanport sections are not interpretable in these simplistic terms, perhaps partly because 

neither field observations nor samples were closely 

enough spaced to reveal a complex depositional sequence.

Keith and Degens (1959, p. 43-44) did not explain the 

mineralogical basis for the difference in lithium contents between marine and nonmarine shales other than 

to suggest that lithium and some other trace elements 

would be more abundant in the marine environment 

and might be incorporated in clay mineral structures. It 

was also suggested that lithium can proxy for magnesium in illite and chlorite. Nicholls and Loring (1962, 

p. 207-208) deduced that a substantial amount of the 

lithium in their rocks was an original constituent of detrital illite. At concentrations of 150 ppm or so, it seems 

unlikely that the mode of occurrence of lithium in 

polymineralic shales can be determined.

ARMSTRONG AND BUTLER COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA

A few samples were collected at the Heilman and 

West Valley coal strip mines in Armstrong County (HM 

and WV in figure 64) and the McCall mine in Butler 

County (McC in fig. 64). Very wet ground made it impossible to observe the rocks well or to collect samples 

systematically. The stratigraphic position of the coals is 

uncertain, but they are within the Allegheny Group.

The lithium concentrations are much lower than in 

Beaver County, the highest value being 160 ppm in a 

dark-gray shale at the West Valley mine. Only two other 

samples contain 100 ppm or more. One underclay 

(McCall mine, table 57) contains only 13 and 78 ppm 

lithium in two samples.

These rocks in Armstrong and Butler Counties may 

have been deposited in an area of little marine influence 

even though transgressive and regressive cycles are 

present (Edmunds, 1968, p. 30). On the other hand, if 

only a limited amount of lithium were available in the 

environments of deposition, then only small amounts of 

lithium could be incorporated in the rocks regardless of 

their marine or nonmarine origin.

FLINT CLAY

Clearfield, Jefferson, and Somerset Counties

Samples from these counties were provided by the 

General Refractories Company from a collection of bulk 

samples maintained at the Company's field office at 

West Decatur, Pa. The collection had accumulated over 

a period of years, and most if not all the samples represent mined-out deposits. Most of the samples are flint 

clay2 that commonly occurs as an underclay. The flint 

clay in National Bureau of Standards standard sample 

97 was known to be a Mercer flint clay from Clearfield 

County and to contain 0.23 percent Li2O (1,070 ppm Li) 

(Bureau of Standards, 1931, 1955). Consequently, the 

opportunity to investigate the lithium content of material of this kind was a welcome one even though field 

observations could not be made.

Most samples of flint clay contain more lithium than 

do any other clayey rocks analyzed, 17 of 20 samples 

containing 300 ppm or more and 10 of these 17 containing more than 500 ppm (fig. 69). The range of concentration is 41 to 1,400 ppm. The lowest lithium concentration is found in a diaspore clay, which is included here 

with flint clay for convenience. The next lowest values, 

150 and 200 ppm, come from Somerset County and 

may indicate regional variation in lithium content of 

flint clays in this part of Pennsylvania. Although most of 

the samples come from Clearfield County, the single 

sample from Jefferson County to the northwest contains 

700 ppm lithium (table 57), which is in the upper range 

of values for all flint clay samples.

According to X-ray diffraction analysis (table 57), the 

flint clays are made up almost entirely of well-crystallized kaolinite. Illite is a significant component of the 

clay fraction only in sample SOI, which probably should 

be classified as a semi-flint clay (Hosterman, 1972, p. 4). 

However, illite is also present in detectable amounts in 

several other samples. Quartz was detected in only two 

samples. Boehmite is present in three samples in detectable amounts that might be as large as" 5-10 percent. 

Only diaspore was detected in the diaspore sample.

10

UJ

I 5

n

f~\ /DIASPORE

1 * , * 4

A 

A

* 1 *

. * 4 4 I * ? k 1 L 1 ,4

400 600 800 1000 

LITHIUM, IN PARTS PER MILLION

FIGURE 69.—Frequency distribution of lithium concentrations in flint 

clays and one diaspore clay, from Clearfield, Jefferson, and Somerset Counties, Pa.

2 "Flint clay is defined as a sedimentary, microcrystalline clay (rock) composed dominantly of 

kaolin, which breaks with - - —-----— J ——u-:j-i r—-...— ~-J ,_„:..,.. ..i,-!,:.,.. :„ ..,„«_•• 

(Keller, 1968, p. 113).

a 3CUJIIICH141 y, iimiun ysirtiiiiic Liay \i\j^r^t »_wiiijjvav« W*-MIIIII

i a pronounced conchoidal fracture and resists slacking in water"
134 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

None of these mineralogic variations, except diaspore, 

have any evident relation to the lithium contents of the 

samples.

A section through the Mercer flint clay bed is shown 

in figure 70. Each sample represents about 15 cm (6 in.) 

of the bed (G. P. Jones, General Refractories Co., written commun., 1975); the bed is thus about 180 cm (6 ft) 

thick. The upper 75 cm of the bed contains from 840 to 

900 ppm lithium in contrast to the lower 105 cm of the 

bed which contains from 320 to 600 ppm lithium. The 

bottom sample contains 450 ppm compared to the sample just above which contains 330 ppm. This marked 

pattern of variation within the bed does not correlate 

with any megascopic features of the samples and contrasts with the uniform mineral composition of the samples based on X-ray diffraction. The pattern of variation 

is similar, however, to that for germanium and several 

trace elements in coal, which is interpreted as indicating 

post-burial addition of elements to the coal from 

diagenetic, or later, circulating solutions (Nicholls, 1968, 

p. 289—290). Data are needed on the behavior of other 

elements besides lithium in sections such as this before 

any explanation can be offered.

180

300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 

LITHIUM, IN PARTS PER MILLION

FIGURE 70.—Variations in lithium concentrations within the Mercer 

clay bed, Galbraith Property, Clearfield County, Pa.

OCCURRENCE OF LITHIUM IN CLAY MINERALS

The mode of occurrence of lithium in most clay minerals is not definitely known. In hectorite and stevensite, 

however, lithium seems to occur with magnesium in the 

octahedral layer (Deer and others, 1962, p. 230; Weaver 

and Pollard, 1973, p. 79). This mode of occurrence of 

lithium ha"s led to the interpretation that lithium and 

magnesium are similarly paired in other clay minerals 

such as illite (Nicholls and Loring, 1962, p. 217-218; 

Tardy and others, 1972, p. 407). The lithium contents 

of perhaps 300 ppm or so in some of the shales and 

illite-rich underclays may be explainable in this way. 

Some lithium also may be held in ion-exchange positions, but the amounts should be very small in clay minerals in near-surface rocks, in moist climates such as in 

Pennsylvania, because any Li+ likely would be displaced 

by more abundant cations. Lithium is the most easily 

replaced of the common cations in ion-exchange processes (Grim, 1968, p. 212).

Neither magnesium-lithium pairing nor cation exchange seems to explain the relatively large amounts of 

lithium found in these flint clays. Nearly pure kaolinites 

contain very little magnesium. The 14 readily recognizable sedimentary kaolinites for which Weaver and Pollard (1973, p. 132, 134) give chemical analyses contain 

only 0.05 to 0.46 percent magnesium oxide (0.03—0.28 

percent magnesium). Most of the alkali and alkaline 

earth elements in kaolinite are attributable to impurities; Deer, Howie, and Zussman (1962, p. 200) give 

0.15 percent magnesium oxide (0.09 percent magnesium) as the average magnesium content of a number 

of analyses of kaolinite with few impurities. This 

amount of magnesium would be equivalent to about 250 

ppm lithium if Horstman's theoretical "most effective 

magnesium-lithium ratio" of 3.5 is applicable, which is 

unlikely. The magnesium-lithium ratio ranges from 6 to 

490 and the median value is 30 (Horstman, 1957, p. 7, 

25). Foose (1944, p. 568) gives an analysis of a typical 

flint clay from Clearfield County that contains 0.28 percent magnesium oxide (0.17 percent magnesium), which 

would correspond to about 500 ppm lithium according 

to Horstman's most effective ratio if all the magnesium 

is assigned to kaolinite, but only about 100 ppm lithium 

according to the median ratio of 30. Although magnesium analyses are not available for the flint clays discussed here, the published data suggest that magnesium-lithium pairing may have little to do with the 

lithium content of flint clays.

The cation-exchange capacity of kaolinite is the smallest of all the clay minerals and is chiefly an effect of 

broken crystal edges (Grim, 1968, p. 189, 193). The 

cation-exchange capacity of sample Kal (table 57) is 

about 9.5 milliequivalents per 100 grams ( (H. C. Starkey, U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 1976).
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 135

The leachate contained lithium equivalent to removing 

22 ppm of the 1,400 ppm that the sample contains. 

Lithium in this sample thus is very tightly held. If kaolinite is the mineral in these samples in which lithium is 

strongly bound in structural positions, substitution to 

the extent of 1,000 ppm or so has not been documented.

Alternatively, the lithium in these flint clay samples 

may not be associated at all with kaolinite but may be 

occurring in a specific lithium-bearing mineral. The 

amounts of such a mineral could be so small as to go 

undetected in whole-sample X-ray analysis. Only 1 percent of a mineral containing 1.5 percent lithium (3.2 

percent lithium oxide) would need to be present in the 

sample for the sample to contain 150 ppm lithium. If 

the lithium content of a sample is based on such a mineral, a sample containing 1,000 ppm lithium would contain only about 7 percent of the mineral.

Such a mineral could be derived from the same source 

minerals or rocks from which the kaolinite was derived. 

This seems a logical origin for the few to several 

hundred ppm lithium found in the kaolinites of Great 

Britain and other kaolinites derived by alteration or 

weathering of igneous rocks (Horstman, 1957, p. 25). 

The Pennsylvania kaolinites, however, and the detrital 

rocks with which they are associated were derived predominantly from sedimentary rocks of pre-Pennsylvanian age (Glass, 1972, p. 88) in which lithiumbearing minerals are not likely to occur. In addition, 

lithium-bearing flint clays in Missouri (National Bureau 

of Standards, 1969) seem to have been derived ultimately by weathering of a terrane made up chiefly of 

carbonate rocks of pre-Pennsylvanian age, in which it 

also seems improbable that lithium-bearing minerals 

would occur.

This line of thought suggests that the lithium-bearing 

mineral in flint clays, if such a mineral exists, is formed 

by the same processes by which the flint clays themselves 

are formed.

ORIGIN OF UNDERCLAYS AND FLINT CLAYS

The origin of underclays, of which flint clays are a 

special type, still is much debated despite persuasive arguments for each of two principal viewpoints. The first 

view is that underclays, in which kaolinite is more abundant than in the underlying shales, formed by the 

sedimentational concentration of clay in the quiet waters 

that preceded the development of most coal swamps. 

The beginning of the coal swamp, which may be represented only by roots and disseminated plant fragments 

in the underclay, may have had a preferential effect by 

trapping the very fine sediment. This was roughly the 

view of Schultz (1958) which he based on underclays in 

the Eastern Interior Coal Region, and of Wilson (1965) 

which he based on underclays in Great Britain. They

observed that highly kaolinitic underclays are usually 

associated with highly kaolinitic shales, from which they 

concluded that most of the kaolinite must have developed before the sediment entered the coal swamp. 

They believed that only minerals highly susceptible to 

leaching, such as chlorite, were systematically leached in 

most coal swamps; and more resistant minerals, such as 

illite or quartz, were not generally much altered except 

locally under extreme leaching conditions under which 

flint clays developed. The second view is that underclays 

formed by diagenetic alteration of normal polymineralic 

shales beneath the coal bed. Organic-rich solutions are 

considered to be powerful leaching agents. This was the 

view of Huddle and Patterson (1961) which they based 

on the published record and much experience with underclays, and of Patterson and Hosterman (1962), which 

they based on studies in Kentucky. They observed all 

gradations between highly kaolinitic plastic underlays 

and flint clays, from which they concluded that both 

types of rock resulted from the same process— 

authigenic leaching. Implicit in the concept is that flint 

clay and aluminum hydroxides are the result of intensification or long continuance of the process that formed 

kaolinite from other clay minerals.

These two views have been combined to some extent 

by Keller, Westcott, and Bledsoe (1954), Keller (1968), 

and Williams, Bergenback, Falla, and Udagawa (1968), 

all of whom were concerned specifically with flint clays 

and more aluminous materials. Great emphasis is placed 

on the accumulation of colloidal material in back 

swamps and other special environments, the colloidal 

material then being leached and undergoing dialysis to 

remove cations. The fabric of flint clays consists of 

tightly interlocking crystals of kaolinite, which probably 

accounts for the flint-like character of typical flint clay 

(Keller, 1968). The fabric is similar to that of igneous 

rocks that have crystallized from a melt, but it seemingly 

results from reorganization and crystallization of colloids.

Curtis and Spears (1971) suggested that flint clays, 

and probably other kinds of kaolinite accumulations as 

well, form by silication of aluminum hydroxides such as 

gibbsite, and aluminum oxyhydroxides such as 

boehmite and diaspore. Silication of gibbsite has been 

demonstrated in the Arkansas bauxite deposits 

(Goldman and Tracey, 1946; Goldman, 1955) and was a 

widespread process there. Other occurrences of mixed 

gibbsite and kaolinite, such as the Eufaula bauxite deposits in Alabama (Warren and Clark, 1965), may have 

had a similar origin.

A flint clay in Australia (Loughnan, 1970) is unusual 

in that it occurs in a red-bed sequence instead of a coalbearing sequence, and it contains odd minerals such as 

gorceixite (a complex phosphate) and gyrolite (a calcium
136 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

silicate cement mineral). The minerals seem to be authigenic. This flint clay may represent an original 

sedimentary deposit of aluminum hydroxide and 

oxyhydroxide minerals that were silicated to kaolinite 

after deposition. The hypothesis that silication of 

aluminum-hydroxide and oxyhydroxide minerals is a 

principal process in the development of flint clay has 

not, however, been tested by an integrated field and 

laboratory investigation.

The contrasting ideas on the genesis of flint clay also 

identify two possible chemical regimens under which 

small amounts of lithium-bearing minerals could 

perhaps form: (1) an extreme leaching regimen that 

forms kaolinite or aluminum-hydroxide minerals from 

cation-rich aluminum-silicate minerals, whether this 

leaching takes place in the source area prior to the deposition of an underclay or whether it takes place afterwards; (2) a silication regimen, whether it takes place in 

a residual bauxite deposit or an underclay, or whether it 

takes place during or after the erosion and sedimentation of aluminum-hydroxide minerals.

The leaching hypothesis implies a relatively closed 

and short-lived chemical system, in that the process is 

confined to the environments of coal-forming sedimentation. The silication hypothesis implies a relatively open 

and long-lived chemical system in that silica would be 

introduced into the system from sources extraneous to 

the coal-forming environment and after, perhaps long 

after, the underclay is formed. Intuitively, the regimen 

of the silication hypothesis seems the more likely regimen for the formation of small amounts of lithiumbearing minerals simply because an open, long-lived system allows for a wider range of geochemical conditions, 

even though it may be very difficult to learn about them.

A possible lithium-bearing mineral in flint clays might 

be a lithium aluminosilicate, with or without other cations, of a type ordinarily thought of as occurring only 

in igneous rocks; or such a mineral might be a lithium 

aluminate. Considering the startling range of authigenic 

silicate minerals found in the oil shale of the Green 

River Formation (Milton and Eugster, 1959; Milton and 

others, 1960) and the unusual minerals in the Australian 

flint clay (Loughnan, 1970), the possibility of lithiumbearing minerals in flint clay should not be dismissed 

peremptorily.

CONCLUSIONS

Further investigation of lithium in flint clay and related materials is needed to determine the applicability 

of the three alternative modes of occurrence of the 

lithium that now seem possible: (1) in the wellcrystallized kaolinite of the flint clays by structural substitution in the kaolinite, perhaps in association with 

magnesium; (2) in detrital minerals derived from the

source areas of the kaolinite; (3) in a previously unrecognized authigenic mineral that formed under the 

same conditions and by much the same processes as the 

kaolinite was formed.

Such an investigation has significance not only for 

clarification of the origin of flint clays and related 

aluminous materials, but also for the possible discovery 

of sedimentary rocks that contain enough lithium to be 

ultimately of economic interest.

REFERENCES

Curtis, C. D., and Spears, D. A., 1971, Diagenetic development of

kaolinite: Clays and Clay Minerals, v. 19, no. 4, p. 219-227. 

Deer, W. A., Howie, R. A., and Zussman, J., 1962, Rock-forming

minerals—Volume 3, Sheet silicates: New York, John Wiley and

Sons, 270 p.

Edmunds, W. E., 1968, Geology and mineral resources of the northern half of the Houtzdale 15-minute quadrangle, Pennsylvania:

Pennsylvania Geol. Survey, 4th ser., Atlas A85ab, 150 p. 

Foose, R. M., 1944, High-alumina clays of Pennsylvania: Econ. Geology, v. 39, no. 8, p. 557-577. 

Gary, Margaret, McAfee, Robert, Jr., and Wolf Carol, eds., 1972,

Glossary of geology: Washington, D.C., Am. Geol. Inst., 858 p. 

Glass, G. B., 1972, Geology and mineral resources of the Philipsburg

7 1/2-minute quadrangle, Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania Bur. Topo.

and Geol. Survey, Atlas 95a, 241 p [1974]. 

Goldman, M. I., 1955, Petrology of bauxite surrounding a core of

kaolinized nepheline syenite in Arkansas: Econ. Geology, v. 50,

no. 6, p. 586-609. 

Goldman, M. I., and Tracey, J. I., Jr., 1946, Relations of bauxite and

kaolinite in the Arkansas bauxite deposits: Econ. Geology, v. 41,

no. 6, p. 567-575. 

Grim, R. E., 1968, Clay mineralogy [2d ed.]: New York, McGraw-Hill,

596 p. 

Heier, K. S., and Billings, G. K., 1972, Lithium [Chap.] 3, Part B, in

Wedepohl, K. H., ed., Handbook of Geochemistry, Volume 2-1:

Berlin, Springer-Verlag, looseleaf. 

Horstman, E. L., 1957, The distribution of lithium rubidium, and

cesium in igneous and sedimentary rocks: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 12, nos. 1-2, p. 1-28. 

Hosterman, J. W., 1972, Underclay deposits of Somerset and eastern

Fayette Counties, Pennsylvania: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1363, 17

PHuddle, J. W., and Patterson, S. H., 1961, Origin of Pennsylvanian

underclay and related seat rocks: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 72,

no. 11, p. 1643-1660. 

Keith, M. L., and Degens, E. T., 1959, Geochemical indicators of

marine and fresh-water sediments, in Abelson, P. H., ed., Researches in geochemistry: New York, John Wiley and Sons, p.

38-61. 

Keller, W. D., 1968, Flint clay and a flint-clay facies: Clays and Clay

Minerals, v. 16, no. 2, p. 113-128. 

Keller, W. D., Westcott, J. F., and Bledsoe, A. O., 1954, The origin of

Missouri fire clays, in Swineford and Plummer, eds., Clays and

Clay Minerals, Natl. Research Council Pub. No. 327, p. 7-46. 

Loughnan, F. C., 1970, Flint clay in the coal-barren Triassic of the

Sydney Basin, Australia: Jour. Sed. Petrology, v. 40, no. 3, p.

788-854. 

Miesch, A. T., 1967, Theory of error in geochemical data: U.S. Geol.

Survey Prof. Paper 574-A, 17 p. 

Milton, Charles, Chao, E. C. T., Fahey, J. J., and Mrose, M. E., 1960,

Silicate mineralogy of the Green River formation of Wyoming,
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 137

Utah, and Colorado: Internal. Geol. Cong., 21st, Copenhagen

1960, Rept., pt. 21, p. 171-184. 

Milton, Charles, and Eugster, H. P., 1959, Mineral assemblages of the

Green River formation [Colo.-Utah-Wyo.], in Abelson, P. H., ed.,

Researches in Geochemistry: New York, John Wiley and Sons, p.

118-150. 

National Bureau of Standards, 1931, Certificate of analyses, Standard

Sample No. 97: Flint clay, 1 p. 

————1955, Revised values for alkalies in NBS Standard Samples 76,

77, 97, 98, 102 and 104: 1 p. 

-1969, Certificate of analysis. Standard Reference Material 97a:

Flint clay, 1 p. 

Nicholls, G. D., 1968, The geochemistry of coal-bearing strata, in Murchison, D. G., and Westoll, T. S., eds., Coal and coal-bearing

strata: New York, Elsevier, p. 269-307. 

Nicholls, G. D., and Loring, D. H., 1962, The geochemistry of some

British carboniferous sediments: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta,

v. 26, no. 2, p. 181-223. 

Ohrdorf, Renate, 1968, Ein Beitrag zur Geochimie des Lithiums in

Sedimentgesteinen: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 32, no. 2, p.

191-208. 

O'Neill, B. J., Jr., 1973, Clay and shale resources in the Greater

Pittsburgh region of Pennsylvania; Phase III, Clay-shale sample

test data—text and tables: U.S. Geol. Survey open-file rept., 294

p., 1 table.

Patterson, E. D., 1963, Coal resources of Beaver County, Pennsylvania: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1143-A, 33 p. 

Patterson, S. H., and Hosterman, J. W., 1962, Geology and refractory

clay deposits of the Haldeman and Wrigley quadrangles, Kentucky, with a section on Coal resources, by John W. Huddle: U.S.

Geol. Survey Bull. 1122-F, 113 p. [1963]. 

Rankama, K. K., and Sahama, T. G., 1950, Geochemistry: Chicago,

Chicago Univ. Press, 912 p. 

Ronov, A. B., Migdisov, A. A., Voskresenskaya, N. T., and Korzina, G.

A., 1970, Geochemistry of lithium in the sedimentary cycle:

Geochemistry Internat. v. 7, no. 1, p. 75-102. 

Schultz, L. G., 1958, Petrology of underclays: Geol. Soc. America

Bull., v. 69, no. 4, p. 363-402. 

————1964, Quantitative interpretation of mineralogical composition

from X-ray and chemical data for the Pierre Shale: U.S. Geol.

Survey Prof. Paper 391-C, 31 p. 

Tardy, Yves, Krempp, Gerard, and Trauth, Norbert, 1972, Le lithium

dans les mineraux argileux des sediments et des sols: Geochim. et

Cosmochim. Acta, v. 36, no. 4, p. 397-412.

Turekian, K. K., and Wedepohl, K. H., 1961, Distribution of the elements in some major units of the Earth's crust: Geol. Soc. America

Bull., v. 72, no. 2, p. 175-191. 

Warren, W. C., and Clark, L. D., 1965, Bauxite deposits of the Eufaula

district, Alabama: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1199-E, 31 p. 

Weaver, C. E., and Pollard, L. D., 1973, The chemistry of clay minerals: New York, Elsevier, 213 p. 

Williams, E. G., Bergenback, R. E., Falla, W. S., and Udagawa, S.,

1968, Origin of some Pennsylvanian underclays in western

Pennsylvania: Jour. Sed. Petrology, v. 38, no. 4, p. 1179-1193. 

Wilson, M. J., 1965, The origin and geological significance of the

South Wales underclays: Jour. Sed. Petrology, v. 35, no. 1, p.

91-99.

LITHIUM MINERALIZATION IN ARKANSAS

By CHARLES G. STONE and CHARLES MILTON, Arkansas Geological Commission, Little

Rock, AR; The George Washington University, Washington, DC;

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA

ABSTRACT

Three lithium minerals are found in Arkansas, all in the Ouachita 

Mountains. Cookeite, a lithium chlorite, is associated with many small 

hydrothermal milky-quartz veins in the Jackfork Sandstone of Mississippian and Pennsylvanian age, in an area extending some 77 km (48 

mi) from Little Rock, in Pulaski County, westward into Perry County. 

Cookeite has been tentatively identified in association with antimony, 

lead, and zinc in quartz veins in Sevier County, some 240 km (150 mi) 

southwest of Little Rock. Taeniolite, a rare lithia mica, occurs in 

smoky-quartz veins and in recrystallized novaculite adjacent to alkalic 

syenites at Magnet Cove, Hot Spring County, and in a milky-quartzfluorite vein in the "V" alkalic intrusive, Garland County, some 16 km 

(10 mi) west of Magnet Cove. Lithiophorite, a lithium-cobaltaluminum manganese oxide, has been reported in the manganese ore 

deposits in Polk and Montgomery Counties; and it also occurs with 

quartz veins in many other Arkansas localities.

The bromine-rich brines in the Upper Jurassic Smackover Formation in Columbia County, southwestern Arkansas, contain as much as 

445 parts per million Li; smaller quantities are reported from various 

water wells and springs, hot and cold, in the State.

The widespread distribution of lithium minerals, for the most part

unrecognized until recently, warrants further search for economic 

concentrations of lithium in Arkansas. Furthermore, because the three 

known lithium minerals appear very similar to common non-lithium 

species, their discovery may require somewhat sophisticated methods 

of identification, such as emission spectroscopy, and X-ray diffraction.

LOCATION OF LITHIUM MINERALIZATION 

IN ARKANSAS

The lithium minerals cookeite, taeniolite, and 

lithiophorite occur in Arkansas only in the Ouachita 

Mountains, in the west-central part of the State (table 

58; fig. 71). In this region, cookeite and taeniolite each

TABLE 58.—Arkansas lithium minerals

Mineral

Lithiophorite

Formula

__ __ __ LiAl2 Mn3O93HsO 

— — ... LiAlsSi3 010 (OH)8

Li2O 

(in percent)

0-8 

3

Reference

Fine and Frommer, 1956
138 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

FIGURE 71.—Major areas of lithium mineralization in Arkansas. C, 

cookeite; T, taeniolite; L, lithiophorite; B, bromine-rich brines of 

Smackover Formation.

occur in a limited area, but lithiophorite is widespread. 

Figure 72 shows the distributions of the lithium minerals in more detail. The bromine-rich brines of the 

Smackover Formation, which contain lithium, are in the 

southwest corner of the State, beneath the Coastal Plain 

sediments.

LITHIUM CONTENT OF ARKANSAS MINERALS

Figure 73 is a histogram showing spectrographic determinations of lithium content of many Arkansas minerals. It is evident that only the three minerals discussed 

in this paper have significant lithium content—the "sericite" and "fault gouge" are probably altered cookeite. 

Table 59 also lists these minerals, with the serial number 

of the X-ray powder pattern by which the mineral was 

identified.

TAENIOLITE

The first lithium mineral reported in Arkansas was 

taeniolite (KLiMg2Si4OioF2) at Magnet Cove in Hot 

Spring County (Miser and Stevens, 1938). It contains 4

OUACHITAS

GRANITE 

MOUNTAIN

BENTON - BROKEN BOW UPLIFT

POTASH 

; SULFUR

'SPRINGS.

/X/"SOUTHERN

FIGURE 72.—Spatial distribution of lithium minerals in central Arkansas, showing occurrences of cookeite (C), lithiophorite (L), and taeniolite 

(T). Dark shading represents Cretaceous alkalic intrusives as shown by Hollingsworth (1967). Geology is from Haley (1976).
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 139

ui 

o

cc

ID 

X

MINERAL OR SAMPLE TYPE

FIGURE 73.—Precentage of lithium in Arkansas minerals and fault 

gouge. Numbers in parentheses indicate the number of determinations on each mineral that yielded the values shown. Determinations 

showing less than 0.01 percent lithium were made on the following 

minerals: adularia (1); albite with quartz (2); K-Na feldspar (1); K 

feldspar with quartz (1); anthraxolite (1); chlorite (2); dickite (5); 

halloysite-kaolinite (6); hornblende (1); lithiophorite (3); K-Fe mica 

(1); miserite (1); muscovite (1); montmorillonite (2); narsarsukite 

(1); natrolite (1); pyrophyllite (2); narsarsukite (1); rutile (1); sphalerite (1); tetrahedrite (1); thuringite (1); wollastonite (1).

percent L^O. Previously, taeniolite had been discovered 

in Narsarsuk, Greenland, and again found in the Kola 

Peninsula, U.S.S.R. (Later it was found elsewhere in the 

Soviet Union.) In Arkansas, Milton has now found a 

second occurrence of Taeniolite at the "V" intrusive in 

Garland County, some 16 km (10 mi) west of the first. 

The two Arkansas localities are shown in figures 71 and 

72.

In Arkansas, as elsewhere, taeniolite is associated with

TABLE 59.—-Arkansas minerals on which lithium determinations have

been made

[Numbers are X-ray films identifying the minerals. A spectrographic analysis was made of each. 

Only those italicized contain significant lithium]

Adularia 348

Albite+quartz 126, 639

Na-K feldspar 645

K-Na feldspar+quartz 125, 16976, 16980 

Anthraxolite 

Chlorite 16662, 16669 

Cookfite 124, 1275, 1280 

Cryptomelane 1261, 1267, 1213 

Dickite 589, 17028, 16873, 16875, 17016

Halloysite-Kaolinite 16874, 16875, 16983 (5?), 16877, 16902, 16868 

Hornblende 7/1/65 Union Carbide 

Lithiophorite 573, 590, 597, 598, 1268 

K-Fe mica 588 

Miserite 

Muscovite 16989, 1281, 1257

Sericite 1253, 1257

Montmorillonite 16664, (0.001%), 16666 

Narsarsukite 16671 

Natrolite 16675 

Pyrophyllite 17017, 17018 

Quartz+muscovite+cookeite(?) 1247, 1248 

Rectorite 16666, 16674, 16677, 16992 

Rutile 341 

Sphalerite 

Stevensite 1285 

Taeniolite 17037 

Tetrahedrite 130 

Thuringite 16899, 16977, 1282 

Wollastonite

alkalic syenitic intrusives. The Arkansas taeniolite is related to early Late Cretaceous volcanism (Zartman and 

others, 1967).

At Magnet Cove, taeniolite occurs in small smokyquartz-brookite veins and in recrystallized Arkansas 

Novaculite of Devonian-Mississippian age; it is associated with dickite, brookite, and rutile (Miser and 

Stevens, 1938; Fryklund and Holbrook, 1950). Significant concentrations of vanadium and columbium accompany the taeniolite. Herman Jackson (written commun., 

1973) found that the quartz-brookite veins crystallized 

at a temperature under 440°C. Taeniolite generally 

forms less than 1 percent of the veins or of altered 

chert-novaculite; but locally there are concentrations as 

high as 20 percent (Fryklund and Holbrook, 1950).

Erickson and Blade (1963) also reported 0.03 percent 

lithium in some molybdenite- and rutile-bearing veins at 

Magnet Cove, but the lithium mineral has not been 

identified.

At the "V" intrusive, taeniolite occurs in a milkyquartz-fluorite vein, associated with opaline silica or 

chalcedony, pyrite, sulfur, gypsum, rutile, anatase, 

goethite, jarosite, sphalerite, dolomite, zircon, sanadine, 

and tourmaline; present in lesser amounts are barite, 

witherite, galena, brookite, and zeolite minerals; there 

are also small quantities of gold and silver.

In 1955, taeniolite was synthesized; it was the first 

synthetic mica. Miller and Johnson (1962) reported a 

synthetic fluor-mica intermediate between taeniolite and 

hectorite (LixMg6xSi8O2o (OH)4 <Na); it is like the
140 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

former physically and optically and like the latter in 

number and configuration of cations. The relationship 

of taeniolite, Li-Mg mica, to hectorite, a Li-Mg clay, may 

be compared to that of paragonite, Na-mica, to rectorite 

(allevardite), a Na-clay.

Table 60 gives the X-ray powder patterns of taeniolite 

from Magnet Cove and from the "V" intrusive, with 

those of the Miller and Johnson (1962) synthetic. They 

are all very similar.

COOKEITE

Cookeite (LiAlsSi3Oio(OH)8), containing 3 percent 

Li^O, was first found in Arkansas at the Jeffrey Quarry, 

North Little Rock, Pulaski County (Miser and Milton, 

1964). It occurs in many small milky-quartz veins in the 

Jackfork Sandstone of Mississippian and Pennsylvanian 

age. Since 1964, it has been recognized in numerous 

other Arkansas localities, as far east as the old Kellogg 

Mines (about 8 km [5 mi] northeast of the Jeffrey 

Quarry), and possibly as far west as south-central Perry 

County (fig. 72)—a total east-west distance of 77 km (48 

mi). Usually the cookeite forms no more than 1 or 2 

percent of the quartz veins, but at the Jeffrey Quarry it 

may be found in much greater abundance—some 

kilogram-size chunks of pure cookeite are obtainable. 

Recently, Milton has found what may be another occurrence of cookeite associated with antimony-lead-zinc 

ores in quartz veins in Sevier County, about 240 km (150 

mi) southwest of Little Rock.

TABLE 60.—X-ray diffraction patterns of taeniolite

"V" intrusive 

Hot Springs County

XRPD 15-256 

LaLonde (1963 

KLi'Mg2 Si4O, 0 F2 Synthetic taeniolite 

Magnet Cove, K 1 . 3 Mg4. 9 Li 1 . 25 Si7. 96O20. 03 F3. 97 

Hot Springs County Miller and Johnson (1962)

/ d(A) I d(A) / d(a)

VS

MS

Wb

Wb

VWb

W

vvs

MS

MS

vvw

MS

VW

MS

VVW

VW

S

MS

W

VW

VW

VW

10.02

5.00

4.52

-__

4.11

3.88

3.63

3.34

2.12

2.89

2.71

2.60

2.49

---_

2.38

2.26

2.15

2.00

__

1.66

__

1.51

1.35

1.30

1.25

75

45

____

8

8

18

100

25

25

12

12

14

10

---_

18

2

2

12

35

4

18

8

6

4

4

12

6

——

10.04

5.01

______

4.48

______

~3~87~

3.60

3.34

3.12

2.88

2.68

2.60

2.575

2.50

Y398

2.25

2.23

2.145

1.999

1.997

1.655

1.521

1.507

1.491

1.423

1.350

1.30

86

33

23

25

9

5

8

21

100

32

24

11

22

24

9

8

33

5

5

3

12

30

2

1

4

11

5

4

12

9

7

4

9.949

4.984

4.512

4.479

4.329

4.112

3.873

3.611

3.325

3.196

2.883

2.681

2.602

2.575

2.493

2.468

2.396

2.257

2.236

2.207

2.143

1.995

1.742

1.728

1.711

1.656

1.619

1.590

1.509

1.350

1.304

1.248

In a letter (Sept. 11, 1929) to Arkansas State Geologist 

G. C. Branner, C. S. Ross noted a possible occurrence of 

cookeite in granitic or pegmatitic microcline, "altered to 

a micaceous mineral, calcite, and a little purple fluorite." 

He said the micaceous mineral was in "coarse radial 

groups, uniaxial or nearly so." Ross gave no further details, but he probably noted the positive optical character 

of the mineral in support of his tentative identification. 

The location he gave was 1,544 ft (470 m) down in the 

Wilson No. 1 well of the Wonder State Development 

Co., in the NE&SW& sec. 21, T. 2 S., R. 11 W., Pulaski 

County; this place is 24 km (15 mi) southeast of Little 

Rock.

The Arkansas cooketie is quite variable in appearance; forming coarse crystals (up to a centimetre in size), 

finely crystalline granular aggregates, and fibrous masses. The cookeite can be colorless, white, yellow, brown, 

blue, or, where impregnated with manganese oxide, 

black. It is often weathered to clayey masses darkened 

by iron-manganese oxides.

Unlike many other occurrences of cookeite, where it is 

found in pegmatites with other lithium minerals such as 

tourmaline, spodumene, and lepidolite, nearly all the 

Arkansas cookeite is a hydrothermal quartz vein accessory. Characteristically, it is associated with rectorite 

(allevardite) NaAl(Al, Si)O(OH)-2H2O, a montmorillonite-type clay mineral, and thuringite, a green ironaluminum chlorite. Ankerite, pyrite, sphalerite, and 

galena accompany the cookeite and rectorite in places; 

at the abandoned Kellogg Mines, these minerals have 

been mined along with chalcopyrite, freibergite (Agtetrahedrite), and tennantite.

Two periods of complex folding and thrust faulting 

which occurred mostly during the late Paleozoic are recognized in the frontal Ouachita Mountain area and the 

southwestern Arkansas antimony district. In each 

period, quartz veins were formed. In the Little Rock

TABLE 61.—Lithium concentrations in Arkansas manganese ores (by spectroscopic analysis)

Region

Concentration Number of 

of Li (in ppm) samples Occurrence of MnO

Batesville district (Independence

County and vicinity) _______ 9.1-43.0

Ouachita Mountains:

Martindale area (Pulaski County, 

west of Little Rock) ______ 2.8-51.1 

36

Hot Springs area (Garland

County) ..__________________ 8.2, 47, 95

Crystal Mountains (Garland and

Montgomery Counties) ___- — — 48.4

3.1 

West central Arkansas manganese

district (Montgomery County __ 2590.

Polk County).______-- 585-1130 

Magnet Cove contact zone, Christy 

titanium-vanadium prospect, 

(Hot Spring County).___——— 77.7

Lenticular and irregular 

masses in Fernvale Limestone and Cason Shale 

(Ordovician) and in St. Joe 

Limestone (Mississippian).

Veins in Arkansas Novaculite 

(Devonian-Mississippian).

Accumulation in Holocene 

bog.

Veinlets and coatings on fractured Arkansas Novaculite.

Manganese mine (abandoned) 

in Crystal Mountain Sandstone (Ordovician).

Quartz crystal mine.

Manganese mine (abandoned) 

in Arkansas Novaculite.

——- do-—_

Metamorphose'd Arkansas

Novae

irphi 

ulite
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 141

area, the earlier veins, probably Late Pennsylvanian to 

Early Permian in age, carry dickite; while the later veins, 

probably Early Permian to Triassic in age, contain 

cookeite with rectorite (Stone, 1966). The cookeitebearing quartz veins are older than, and unrelated to, 

nearby nepheline syenite, kimberlite, and other intrusives of Cretaceous age.

LITHIOPHORITE

Lithiophorite, essentially LiAl2Mn3Og-3H2O, with an 

Li2O content ranging from 0 to 8 percent, is fairly widespread in Arkansas, although only recently noted. Fine 

and Frommer (1956) first reported it in a mine near 

Mena, in west-central Arkansas. Michael Jones, of the 

University of Arkansas (written commun., 1975), indicated that lithiophorite, cryptomelane, and manganite 

were the dominant ore minerals at many of the mines in 

the area. Lithiophorite also occurs with Upper 

Pennsylvanian-Permian-Triassic quartz veins and associated sedimentary rocks in the central and eastern 

Ouachita Mountains. Good specimens are found at the 

Coleman and Teal crystal quartz mines in Garland 

County. Because lithiophorite both encrusts and is intergrown with the quartz crystals, both hydrothermal 

and weathering processes may be involved in the crystallization of lithiophorite.

Recently, a preliminary evaluation of Arkansas man 

ganese ores as possible sources of lithium-bearing 

lithiophorite has been made, with generally negative results. Manganese oxides from two regions in the State 

were examined spectroscopically for lithium. Results are 

shown in table 61. In summary, only the samples from 

the west-central manganese district showed significant 

lithium, associated with Ba (5,000 ppm), Co (1,500- 

5,000 ppm), Ni (2,000-5,000 ppm), Cu (2,000-3,000 

ppm), and Zn (700-3,000 ppm).

Two available analyses of Arkansas lithiophorite show 

a Li2O content of 0.53 percent (Michael Jones, written 

commun., 1975), and 0.82 percent (lithiophorite with 

cookeite from near Little Rock). The latter analysis, on 

lithiophorite from Pulaski County, Arkansas, revealed 

the following composition (in percent): total MnO, 59.0; 

CoO, 17; A12C»3, 20.8; Li2O, 0.82; total H2O, 17.3; and 

SiO2 , 11. (Total percentage 100.7.) The specific gravity 

of the sample is 3.3. (Analytical data provided by J. 

Marinenko, U.S. Geological Survey, Oct. 29, 1975.)

Until Fleischer and Richmond (1943) established 

lithiophorite as a valid species, it was termed (lithian) 

wad. It is now known to have a worldwide distribution, 

and in some places it occurs as an ore mineral. It is 

widespread in the Piedmont region of the eastern 

United States from Georgia to New England; fine 

specimens are abundant near Reston, Virginia.

FIGURE 74.—X-ray powder patterns of cookeite A, taeniolite B, and 

lithiophorite C.

OTHER LITHIUM OCCURRENCES IN ARKANSAS

Besides the three lithium minerals discussed, and the 

bromine-rich brines of the Jurassic Smackover Formation, minor amounts of lithium have been noted in vari-
142 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

ous hot and cold springs: Lithia Springs in Baxter 

County, Blaylock Springs in Polk County, and Warm 

Springs, in Montgomery County.

Analyses of upper Paleozoic flysch rocks in the eastern 

Ouachita Mountains show an average of about 100 ppm 

lithium, about twice that of older leptogeosynclinal 

rocks. Barth (1962) cites an average content of 30 ppm 

lithium in the earth's lithosphere.

Bauxitic clays of Arkansas are tentatively reported to 

carry as much as 500 ppm lithium (Harry A. Tourtelot, 

written commun., 1976), but presently nothing is known 

of the mineralogy of this lithium.

IDENTIFICATION OF LITHIUM MINERALS

All three Arkansas lithium minerals resemble common non-lithium-bearing species; taeniolite much resembles muscovite, cookeite can be confused with 

pyrophyllite, and lithiophorite is not markedly different 

in appearance from other manganese oxides. However, 

all three have distinctive X-ray patterns, as seen in figure 

74, by which they may be conclusively recognized.

ECONOMIC POSSIBILITIES

Presently no economic concentration of lithium is 

known in Arkansas, but its lengthy period of geologic 

occurrence, its widespread distribution and local relative 

abundance (at Magnet Cove and North Little Rock), its 

presence in some manganese ores, and its presence in 

concentrations greater than 170 ppm in the brominerich brines of the Smackover Formation (191 million 

barrels (30.4 million m3 ) of which were treated for 

bromine extraction in 1974) suggest the possibility of

finding an economic lithium deposit in Arkansas and 

warrent further search.

REFERENCES CITED

Barth, T. W., 1962, Theoretical petrology [2d ed.]: New York, John

Wiley and Sons, 416 p. 

Erickson, R. L., and Blade, L. V., 1963, Geochemistry and petrology of

the alkalic igneous complex at Magnet Cove, Arkansas: U.S. Geol.

Survey Prof. Paper 425, 95 p. 

Fine, M. M., and Frommer, D. W., 1956, A mineral-dressing study of

manganese deposits of west-central Arkansas: U.S. Bur. Mines

Kept. Inv. 5262, 21 p. 

Fleischer, Michael, and Richmond, W. E., Jr., 1943, The manganese

oxide minerals, a preliminary report: Econ. Geology, v. 38,

p. 269-286. 

Fryklund, V. C., Jr., and Holbrook, D. F., 1950, Titanium deposits of

Hot Spring County, Arkansas: Arkansas Resources and Devel.

Comm. Bull. 16, 178 p. 

Haley, B. R., 1976, Geologic map of Arkansas: U.S. Geological Survey

and Arkansas Geol. Comm. map (in press). 

Hollingsworth, J. S., 1967, Geology of the Wilson Springs vanadium

deposit, in Geol. Soc. America Guidebook 1967 Field Conference,

Central Arkansas economic geology and petrology: Little Rock,

Ark., Arkansas Geol. Comm., p. 22-24. 

LaLonde, R. E., 1963, X-ray diffraction data for taeniolite: Am.

Mineralogist, v. 48, nos. 1-2, p. 204-206. 

Miller, J. L., and Johnson, R. C., 1962, The synthesis and properties of

a fluormica intermediate between fluortaeniolite and fluorhectorite: Am. Mineralogist, v. 47, p. 1049-1054. 

Miser, H. D., and Milton, Charles, 1964, Quartz, rectorite and

cookeite from the Jeffrey Quarry, near North Little Rock, Pulaski

County, Arkansas: Arkansas Geol. Comm. Bull. 21, 29. p. 

Miser, H. D., and Stevens, R. E., 1938, Taeniolite from Magnet Cove,

Arkansas: Am. Mineralogist, v. 23, no. 2, p. 104-110. 

Stone, C. G., 1966, General geology of the eastern frontal Ouachita

Mountains and southeastern Arkansas Valley, Arkansas: Kansas

Geol. Soc. Guidebook 29th Field Conf., Flysch facies and structure of the Ouachita Mountains, 1966: p. 195-221. 

Zartman, R. E., Brock, M. R., Heyl, A. V., and Thomas, H. H., 1967,

K-Ar and Rb-Sr ages of some alkalic intrusive rocks from central

and eastern United States: Am. Jour. Sci., v. 265, p. 848-870.

THE BEHAVIOR OF LITHIUM IN EXPERIMENTAL 

ROCK-WATER INTERACTION STUDIES

By WALTER E. DIBBLE, JR., and FRANK W. DICKSON, U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, and

STANFORD UNIVERSITY, STANFORD, CA

ABSTRACT

Experiments on the interaction of granitic rock and water at temperatures as high as 275°C and pressures as high as 500 bars show that 

lithium can be readily removed from crystalline igneous rocks and 

may attain aqueous concentrations similar to those found in natural 

hydrothermal waters. Some of the lithium can be extracted, at high 

rates, from such rocks before hydrothermal alteration occurs, thus

indicating that this lithium is held in cracks or on intergranular surfaces, perhaps as remnants of original pore fluids. Water-rock interaction experiments over periods of several months show that alteration 

of minerals in the rock will also contribute lithium to solution. Natural 

high-temperature water-rock interactions could be expected to contribute significant quantities of lithium to near-surface regions where it 

would be incorporated into stable mineral structures or would remain 

in subsurface solutions.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 143

INTRODUCTION

Large resources of lithium apparently exist in the 

western United States in brines and sediments in topographically closed basins (Vine, 1975). Vine (1975) has 

suggested that these brines and sedimentary rocks have 

received their lithium content from hydrothermal waters. Thermal waters commonly have lithium concentrations 2 to 4 orders of magnitude higher than cold surface waters (Brondi and others, 1973). Knowledge of 

the source and chemical behavior of the lithium in hydrothermal solutions may increase understanding of the 

role of solutions in supplying lithium to the near-surface 

environment.

One hypothesis proposed to explain high lithium concentrations in thermal waters is that circulating hydrothermal solutions may efficiently extract lithium from 

the rocks through which they flow (Ellis, 1967; Brondi 

and others, 1973; and Vine, 1975). Another hypothesis 

is that the lithium is derived from primary magmatic 

sources. Experiments were carried out to test the former 

mechanism by determining the behavior of lithium in 

granitic rock-water interactions at elevated temperatures and pressures.

PREVIOUS WORK

Previous experiments support the contention that ordinary dilute surface waters when heated can extract 

lithium from a wide variety of rocks (Ellis and Mahon, 

1964, 1967; Pentcheva, 1971, 1973). However, the behavior of lithium in rock-water interactions is not yet 

well understood. Pentcheva's studies indicate significant 

extraction of lithium from granite into aqueous solutions ranging in composition from pure water to dilute 

sodium carbonate and bicarbonate solutions. Pentcheva, 

who used both rock and mineral separates in her experiments, concluded that lithium was extracted from the 

solid phases. However, temperatures, rock-water ratios, 

and reaction times were unspecified.

Ellis (1967) concluded that lithium was released from 

crystal structures only after extensive alteration of the 

rock and that it could reach a concentration of 1-2 ppm 

(parts per million) at 500°-600°C. These conclusions 

were based on experiments involving the reaction of 

distilled water with graywacke and a variety of extrusive 

igneous rocks ranging from basalts to rhyolites (Ellis and 

Mahon, 1964, 1967). In a later report, Ellis (1970a) 

noted that the lithium distribution between solution and 

secondary minerals is not well established. Ellis (1970b) 

even included lithium in a group of "soluble" elements, 

such as chloride, bromide, boron, cesium, fluorine, and 

arsenic. The aqueous concentrations of these elements 

need not be controlled by temperature and pressuredependent chemical equilibria involving rock minerals

under some conditions.

The present work was done to determine the rates of 

lithium extraction from a crystalline granitic rock under 

controlled conditions. These experiments test whether 

lithium can be a "soluble" element with respect to rock 

leaching as Ellis (1970b) proposed.

EXPERIMENTS 

METHODS

ROCK-WATER INTERACTION EXPERIMENTS

Two different types of rock-water interaction experiments were undertaken. In the first, a teflon reaction 

cell held in a stainless steel pressure vessel described by 

Dickson, Blount, and Tunell (1963) was filled with a 

rock-water mixture and heated to 275°C at a pressure of 

500 bars. The rock used was ground to < 140 mesh, and 

distilled water was added to form a mixture with a 1:1 

rock/water weight ratio. The whole pressure vessel and 

furnace assembly was rocked to ensure thermal mixing 

of the contents. Internally filtered liquid samples were 

withdrawn at time intervals and analyzed for lithium.

Similar experiments were performed at lower temperatures and at 1 atmosphere pressure. Rock-water mixtures were continuously shaken at 25°C, and some of 

these similar mixtures were placed in containers in an oil 

bath at a constant temperature of 70°C. Water samples 

were taken after reaction times ranging from 1 day to 2 

months and were analyzed for lithium.

The second type of apparatus consisted of a largescale laboratory model of a geothermal reservoir 

(Hunsbedt, 1975) which can use large whole rocks for 

rock-water interaction experiments. This laboratory 

model was a large steel autoclave which can hold as 

much as 1 metric tonne of rock and which also has ancillary equipment, mainly for heating the water and providing circulation throughout the system. This system 

can produce pressures to as much as 50 bars and temp 

eratures as high as 260°C. Individual maximum rock 

dimensions ranged from about 3 to 50 cm. The largest 

mean diameter of rocks in this apparatus was 11 cm. 

The total rock mass in this system was 825 kg (kilograms). Tap water was used and ranged in mass from 

150 to 162 kg. No lithium was detected in the tap water. 

The absolute rock/water weight ratio ranged from 5:1 to 

5.5:1. Liquid water samples were taken from this system 

at various times during experimental operation and 

were analyzed for lithium.

The rock used in all experiments was an unweathered 

medium-grained leuco-granodiorite from a quarry at 

Rocklin, east of Sacramento, Calif. The rock contains 

plagioclase, quartz, and some potassium feldspar and 

biotite. The lithium content is 43 ppm.
144 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

ANALYSIS

Lithium was analyzed by atomic absorption spectroscopy, with a precision of ±3 percent and a limit of detection of 25 ppb (parts per billion).

RESULTS

Data from the rock powder-distilled water interaction 

experiments (table 62) indicate the rate of lithium extraction under conditions of constant temperature and 

pressure. Experiment 1 (table 62) was done by use of the 

high temperature equipment designed by Dickson, 

Blount, and Tunell (1963). These experimental data 

show that lithium is removed from the rock powder at 

high rates at 275°C and 500 bars. After 5 days, the 

lithium concentration in solution was about 1.3 ppm 

which also represents the quantity removed from the 

rock at a rock/water ratio of 1:1. Subsequently, the value 

of the rock/water ratio increased to about 1.5 as liquid 

samples were withdrawn. The solution pH, measured at 

25°C, indicated slightly alkaline experimental conditions 

and remained nearly constant after the first day. After 6 

months, almost 2.5 ppm lithium had been leached from 

the rock, or about 6 percent of that originally present.

A plot of lithium concentration versus time for experiment 1 (fig. 75) illustrates the exponential increase of 

lithium concentration in solution with time and the approach to a nearly constant value. The same lithium 

concentration data plotted against the l/° power of time 

(fig. 75, circles) results in a straight line for the first 36 

days. This line extrapolates to 750 ppb lithium at reaction times near zero. The first water sample was taken 

from this apparatus before the final experimental conditions were established. The lithium concentration in the 

first sample, 250 ppb, was attained in 8 hours after a 

temperature increase from 25°C to 256°C. The value of 

750 ppb more closely represents the initial lithium concentration at the experimental conditions. This concentration vvas attained a few hours after the temperature 

of 275°C was reached (table 62). These data illustrate 

the very rapid initial lithium extraction rate.

Explanation

+ Lithium concentration versus time 

o Lithium concentration versus (time)^ 

Solid and dashed lines represent 

generalized slopes

TIME, IN DAYS

(TIME)*

FIGURE 75.—Rock powder-water interaction at 275°C and 500 bars.

The last set of rock powder-water interaction experiments (table 62) also suggest that some lithium may be 

rapidly removed from the rock even when negligible 

alteration occurs. At 70°C, 300 ppb lithium was leached 

after 2 months as shown by experiment 2 (table 62). 

Experiments 3, 4, and 5 represent the successive leaching of the rock powder at 25°C. In these experiments, 

the same rock powder was leached three times. The first 

and second extractions removed 150 and 100 ppb 

lithium from the rock respectively. The third leach removed 55 ppb lithium from the same powder. These 

mixtures had been shaken for as long as 36 hours. The 

total amount of lithium extracted from the rock, 305 

ppb, was about the same as was leached in experiment 2 

(table 62). Alteration of the rock was undetectable during these experiments.

The data from the whole rock-water experiments obtained by use of the large autoclave (table 63) are useful 

in indicating the quantity of lithium that goes into solution from large mass rocks with small external surface 

area as compared to the quantity from the rock powder 

experiments. These experiments also closely resemble 

the successive extraction studies done at 25°C using rock 

powder. After each experiment, all the solution was

TABLE 62.—Data from rock powder-distilled water interaction experiments

Experiment pH

No. (25°C)

:

c

' 

I 

t

— — - _ — _. 6.65

6.10

6.03

6.11

6 39

6.30

— ___ ___ - 6.26

>

$

t

Rock/water 

ratio

1.00 

1.00 

1.09 

1.15 

1.21 

1.26 

1.38 

1.52 

1.00 

1.00 

1.00 

1.00

Lithium 

concentration 

(ppb)

250 

895 

1280 

1580 

1903 

2320 

2430 

300 

150 

100 

55

Temperature

PC)

25 

256 

275 

275 

275 

275 

275 

275 

70 

25 

25 

25

Pressure

(bars)

1

500 

500 

500 

500 

500 

500 

500 

1 

1 

1 

1

Time1

(days)

0 

.33 

1.00 

4.8 

19.7 

36.8 

93.7 

174.7 

65.0 

1.5 

1.0 

1.0

'Measured from start of experiment.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 145

TABLE 63.—Data from whole rock-water interaction experiments

Experiment

No.

1 __ _.

1 __ __ .

1__ _ __.

1

2— ____.

3

3

4__ ___.

5_-

5- _ .

5 - _.

9

10. ...__.

10 __ .

10 _ __.

Temperature (°C)

_______ 25

._ _ _ 188

. ___ 249

. _ _ 93

250

250

127

.____._ 250

149

. __ _ 180

. _ „ 60

177

.___— 20

. __ _ 246

20

Lithium 

concentration 

(ppb)

n/d2

30

95

280

130

140

230

155

220

290

340

100 n/d2

126

168

Time 1

(hrs)

0

4

7

31

7

7

30

7

72

240

504

168

0

28

336

'Measured from start of experiment. 

2 Not detected.

drained, and any lithium leached from the rock was 

removed from the system. However, in contrast to the 

rock powder leaching experiments, the rock/water ratio 

was higher (5:1-5.5:1), and the aqueous lithium concentrations were, therefore, greater than the actual 

amount leached from the rock. The data in table 63 

indicate, however, that a surprising amount of lithium 

was extracted even for very short reaction times and 

after several successive leaches.

Ten experiments involving heating the water in contact with the rocks in the autoclave were performed. 

The temperature during each experiment varied from 

about 25°C to a maximum between 175° and 250°C and 

then decreased to 25°C. The pressures at all times are 

water-vapor pressures at the experimental temperature. 

In experiments 1 and 3 (table 63), some water was removed as steam after the temperature maximum. For 

these experiments, lithium concentrations measured 

after the temperature maximum may represent slightly 

concentrated values inasmuch as the steam contained no 

detectable lithium.

The variation in temperature that occurred during 

the experiments made it possible to determine if lithium 

extracted at high temperatures reentered the rock when 

the system cooled down. It is clear from the data (table 

63) that no depletion of lithium occurred in solution 

during any experiment as the temperature decreased. 

Lithium concentrations continually increased for the 

duration of the experiments as is evident from experiment 10 during which the temperature increased from 

20°C to a maximum of 246°C and then decreased to 

20°C. The lithium concentration in solution increased at 

a regular rate and the last sample taken had the highest 

lithium content, 168 ppb. The preceding experiments 

show the same trend: longer reaction times invariably 

correlate with higher lithium concentrations.

Some evidence indicates that the maximum temperature attained during an experiment influenced the rate 

of lithium extraction. The data do not show this clearly, 

but the average lithium extraction rates were higher in 

experiments that attained a higher maximum temperature. This relationship is obscured somewhat by the fact 

that during the latter experiments and under the same 

conditions less lithium was being removed from the 

rock. The data suggest that more lithium can be removed from the rock by further leaching. More experiments are planned using the same rock load.

After eight leaching experiments, thin sections of the 

rock were examined and no evidence of alteration was 

observed. Most rock surfaces were unaltered as well.

DISCUSSION

The lithium extraction rate data from the high temperature and pressure interaction studies (fig. 75 and 

table 62) are useful in indicating the source of lithium 

and a removal mechanism. A possible diffusion control 

of rates is suggested during the first 36 days of experiment 1 (fig. 75) by the linear region on the tl/2 plot. (See 

also Wollast, 1967.) A diffusion mechanism would be 

important if lithium is transported to the bulk solution 

through altered zones around unstable minerals (Helgeson, 1971; Luce and others, 1972). Another possibility is 

that diffusion through pores in an artificially lithified 

rock may be the dominant transport mechanism to the 

bulk solution. Even though the apparatus was rocking, 

the powder tended to settle to the bottom of the teflon 

cell. Similar lithification effects were noted by Bischoff 

and Dickson (1975), who used the same equipment to 

study basalt-seawater interactions. Whatever the diffusion mechansim, a rate-controlled process involving diffusion was probably important during the first 36 days 

of the experiment. It is uncertain whether an equilibrium concentration had been attained at the greatest 

reaction times or whether a much slower rate of lithium 

removal had been established.

The very rapid increase in the aqueous lithium concentration during the first few hours of experiment 1 

(table 62) is difficult to attribute to rock alteration processes. The lithium concentration of 750 ppb obtained by 

extrapolating the linear part of the t1/2 plot in figure 75 to 

reaction times near zero probably represents a quantity 

of lithium available in readily soluble form. Soluble salts 

containing lithium may have been derived from original 

pore fluid inclusions during grinding. After only 5 days, 

about 1.3 ppm lithium had been removed from the rock 

suggesting that even more lithium than 0.75 ppm may 

exist in some highly soluble form. It becomes increasingly difficult to estimate how much "soluble" lithium is 

responsible for the increase in lithium content of the 

aqueous phase after 5 days. Certainly a large fraction of
146 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

the quantity extracted after 6 months (2.5 ppm) is derived from rock alteration processes.

The low-temperature interaction studies (table 62) 

also indicate a source of lithium that does not involve 

extensive rock alteration. The source of the lithium in 

these experiments is probably the same as in the higher 

temperature experiments at low reaction times. However, high temperatures seem to facilitate lithium extraction. Only about 300 ppb lithium could be removed 

from the rock powder at temperatures of 70°C or less, 

even for time periods as long as 2 months. From 0.75 to 

1.0 ppm lithium was leached in only hours at 275°C and 

500 bars. The larger quantity of lithium removed initially at the higher temperature may reflect higher 

transport rates or some other factors that are not well 

understood, such as rapid temperature-dependent ionexchange processes.

The data from the whole rock-water interaction 

studies also suggested that a "soluble" source of lithium 

exists in the rock and that its removal is dependent on 

the time of interaction and the temperatures attained 

during the course of the experiments. Estimates of the 

amount of lithium removed from the whole rock can be 

compared directly with amounts leached from the rock 

powder. Reasonable estimates for the total lithium concentration decrease in the whole rock after 10 successive 

leaches range from 0.4 to 0.6 ppm. The calculation assumes the bulk rock/water ratio to be 5.0:1. This concentration range is within the 0.3-1.3 ppm estimated to 

be "soluble" lithium removed during the rock-powder 

extraction experiments. This lithium must have come 

from the rock interiors and cannot be attributed to significant observable rock alteration. This hypothesis is 

consistent with some lithium being present on intergranular surfaces or in original pore fluids.

Ellis and Mahon (1967, p. 519) suggested that "soluble" elements in the more crystalline samples of the 

rocks they studied were held simply on intergranular 

surfaces of the rock rather than in solid solutions in 

silicate minerals or glass. Sprunt and Brace (1974) 

showed that granitic rocks could have as much as 1.2 

percent porosity. They also discussed several kinds of 

data that strongly implied high pore connectivity. In our 

experiments, the lithium in the whole rocks had to be 

sufficiently accessible during the relatively small times of 

reaction to account for the lithium concentrations observed in the bulk solution.

A diffusion mechanism or combined-diffusioninfiltration mechanism (Fletcher and Hofmann, 1974) 

seems necessary to account for the extraction of lithium 

from the rock interiors. Diffusion transport rates are 

strongly temperature dependent, increasing at higher 

temperatures. Diffusion at elevated temperatures 

through aqueous solutions in microcavities with a high

connectivity is a reasonable mechanism to account for 

the observed lithium fluxes.

If it is assumed that the "soluble" lithium is contained 

within 1 percent fluid-saturated rock porosity, the 

lithium concentration in the pore fluid can be estimated. 

If between 0.3 and 1.5 ppm of the total lithium in the 

rock exists in pore fluids, the pore solution concentration must range from 80 to 400 ppm. The pore solutions, therefore, may be more highly concentrated in 

lithium than most dilute hydrothermal waters (Ellis, 

1970b). Pore solutions contained within crystalline igneous rocks could represent water trapped in the rock just 

after crystallization of the solid phases (Sprunt and 

Brace, 1974). If this is true, lithium and other "soluble" 

elements extracted from pore solutions and introduced 

into meteoric hydrothermal waters could be considered 

to have a "magmatic water" source. This "magmatic" 

source is, of course, not the direct source that may be a 

possibility for some hydrothermal systems. This consideration, however, would further blur the distinction between a "magmatic" and high-temperature rock-water 

interaction origin for many of the elements contained in 

rock pores described as "soluble" by Ellis (1970b).

CONCLUSIONS

The described experimental work shows that lithium 

may be extracted from a crystalline granitic rock at high 

rates with little observable hydrothermal alteration. This 

fact indicates that as much as 1 ppm lithium is held on 

intergranular surfaces or in cracks, perhaps as remnants 

of original pore solutions. At a 1:1 rock/water ratio, 

aqueous lithium concentrations to as much as 2.5 ppm 

have been attained at 275°C and 500 bars in 6 months, 

suggesting that alteration of minerals in the rock also 

contributes lithium to solution.

These concentrations and higher values that would 

occur for greater rock/water ratios compare favorably 

with the lithium concentrations in many hydrothermal 

waters (Ellis, 1970b). Circulation within a hydrothermal 

system may carry lithium to regions where it does enter 

stable mineral structures perhaps in near-surface, lake 

sediment-brine systems.

REFERENCES CITED

Bischoff, J. L., and Dickson, F. W., 1975, Seawater-basalt interaction at 

200°C and 500 bars—implications for origin of seafloor heavymetal deposits and regulation of seawater chemistry: Earth and 

Planetary Sci. Letters, v. 25, no. 3, p. 385-397.

Brondi, M., Dall'Aglio, M., and Vitrani, F., 1973, Lithium as a pathfinder element in the large scale hydrogeochemical exploration 

for hydrothermal systems: Geothermics, v. 2, nos. 3-4, p. 142- 

153.

Dickson, F. W., Blount, C. W., and Tunell, George, 1963, Use of 

hydrothermal solution equipment to determine the solubility of
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 147

anhydrite in water from 100°C to 275°C and from 1 bar to 1000 

bars pressure: Am. Jour. Sci., v. 261, no. 1, p. 61-78.

Ellis, A. J., 1967, The chemistry of some explored geothermal systems, 

in Barnes, H. L., ed., Geochemistry of hydrothermal ore deposits: 

New York, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, p. 465-514.

————1970a, Chemical processes in hydrothermal systems—a review, 

in Proceedings of a symposium on hydrogeochemistry and 

biogeochemistry, v. I, Tokyo, Japan, Sept. 1970: Washington, 

D.C., The Clark Co., 662 p. 

-1970b, Quantitative interpretation of chemical characteristics of

hydrothermal systems: Geothermics, Spec. Issue 2, United Nations Symposium on the development and utilization of geothermal resources, Pisa, 1970, v. 2, pt. I, p. 516-528.

Ellis, A. J., and Mahon, W. A. J., 1964, Natural hydrothermal systems 

and experimental hot-water/rock interactions: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 28, no. 8, p. 1323-1357.

————1967, Natural hydrothermal systems and experimental hot 

water/rock interactions (Part II): Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 

31, p. 519-538.

Fletcher, R. C., and Hofmann, A. W., 1974, Simple models of diffusion and combined diffusion-infiltration metasomatism, in Hofmann, A. W., and others, eds., Geochemical transport and kinetics: Carnegie Inst. Washington Pub. 634, p. 243-259.

Helgeson, H. C., 1971, Kinetics of mass transfer among silicates and 

aqueous solutions: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 35, no. 5, p. 

421-469.

Hunsbedt, A., 1975, Laboratory studies of stimulated geothermal reservoirs: Stanford Univ., Ph.D. Dissert. Dec. 1975, 232 p.

Luce, R. W., Bartlett, R. W., and Parks, G. A., 1972, Dissolution kinetics of magnesium silicates: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 36, 

no. 1, p. 35-50.

Pentcheva, E. N., 1971, Studies on the migration properties of alkaline 

trace elements in the "water-rock" system: Bulgarska Akad. na 

Naukita, Doklady, v. 24, no. 9, p. 1235-1238.

————1973, Comparative studies on the behaviours of lithium, 

rubidium and cesium in certain rocks and minerals under the 

action of the alkaline aqueous phase: Comptes rendus de 

1'Academie bulgare des Sci., v, 26, no. 7, p. 945-948.

Sprunt, E. S., and Brace, W. F., 1974, Direct observation of microcavities in crystalline rocks: Internal. Jour. Rock Mineral Sciences and Geomechics Abs., v. 11, p. 139-150.

Vine, J. D., 1975, Lithium in sediments and brines—how, why, and 

where to search: U.S. Geol. Survey Jour. Research, v. 3, no. 4, p. 

479-485.

Wollast, R., 1967, Kinetics of the alteration of K-feldspar in buffered 

solutions at low temperature: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 

31, p. 635-658.

AN INTEGRATED GEOPHYSICAL APPROACH 

TO LITHIUM EXPLORATION

By BRUCE D. SMITH and DON R. MABEY, U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, DENVER, CO

ABSTRACT

Integrated geological and geophysical methods can be successfully 

applied to lithium exploration problems. This conclusion is supported 

by geophysical surveys which have been made in Searles Lake, 

California; Clayton Valley, Nevada; and the Willcox Playa, Arizona. 

Gravity data from the Searles Lake area demonstrate that thick accumulation of sediments are not located in the geometric center of the 

basin. Similar data from Clayton Valley define the location of major 

normal faults not obvious from surface geologic mapping. The gravity 

data provide a regional setting for the tectonic and structural features 

of Clayton Valley which may be related to the occurrence of lithium 

brines. Direct current resistivity soundings conducted in this area 

define a sequence of conductive rocks containing brines from which 

lithium is produced. Consequently combined geophysical methods can 

be used to locate areas which may be favorable for the occurrence of 

brine which may contain lithium.

The geophysical features of Clayton Valley are compared to those of 

Sulphur Springs Valley, which has been defined as an area geochemically anomalous in lithium. Regional gravity and airborne magnetic 

surveys demonstrate many geologic features similar to Clayton Valley. 

Surface and airborne electrical surveys define a closed basin containing a thick sequence of conductive sediments which may contain 

lithium brines.

Though geophysical surveys can yield data capable of definition of 

areas favorable for the lithium bearing brines, the geological and 

geophysical characters of such brines are not well defined. Borehole 

logging methods and laboratory measurements of rock properties of

evaporite sediments will provide useful information about physical 

parameters of sediments which may contain lithium. On a larger scale, 

remote sensing surveys may be used to relate possible geologic features of Clayton Valley to other closed basins within the Basin and 

Range Province. The geophysical characterization of areas favorable 

for lithium brine deposits is essential to the assessment and development of such deposits to meet the future industrial requirements of 

lithium.

INTRODUCTION

Integrated geological and geophysical methods can be 

applied successfully to exploration for lithium brines. 

Geophysical data and their interpretation which support 

this conclusion are presented in the following discussion. Geophysical methods have not generally been 

employed in exploration for bedded saline deposits in 

the United States, with the exception of the application 

of gravity and seismic methods to definition of salt 

domes. In particular, geophysical methods have not 

been used in exploration for lithium brines for two reasons. First, lithium minerals do not produce a direct 

geophysical anomaly because they are neither sufficiently abundant nor do they have a distinctive physical 

property to produce the kind of anomalies associated 

with sulfide or iron ore deposits. The second reason that
148 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

120°

geophysical methods have not been used in exploration 

is that they are found in sediments where drilling costs 

are much less than in hard rocks.

The definition of a physical model or models is fundamental in successful completion of any mineral exploration program. The physical parameters for a model of 

lithium brine deposits are not very well defined. Consequently an important aspect of the U.S. Geological 

Survey lithium program is to provide information on 

the physical properties of proven and potential lithium 

brine deposits.

GEOPHYSICAL APPLICATIONS

Geophysical surveys that are pertinent to lithium 

brine exploration have been conducted in three areas: 

Searles Lake, Clayton Valley, and Willcox Playa. The 

geophysical methods which we have used in exploration 

for bedded saline mineral deposits are seismic, gravity, 

magnetic, d.c. resistivity, and electromagnetic methods. 

Unfortunately the description of these methods in detail 

is beyond the scope of this report. An excellent overview 

of geophysical methods applied to groundwater exploration is given by Zohdy, Eaton, and Mabey (1974). 

Many geophysical methods used to define a brine-fresh 

water interface can be used in exploration for brines 

which may contain lithium. Basic textbooks describing 

geophysical theory and methods have been written by 

Parasnis (1962), Dobrin (1960) and Griffiths and King 

(1965).

SEARLES LAKE

Lithium is produced as a by-product of mining evaporite deposits at Searles Lake near Trona, California (fig. 

76). Gravity and siesmic surveys were made in this area 

in the 1950's by the U.S. Geological Survey in conjunction with exploration for, and evaluation of, evaporite 

mineral deposits. The objective of the gravity survey was 

to define the geometry of sediment-basement rock contact of the basin. Seismic reflection surveys were carried 

out to determine structure within the sedimentary sequence. An interpretation of these data is given in figure 

77. Much of the structure within the sedimentary sequence was interpreted from the seismic data since the 

density contrasts within the sedimentary sequence are 

not sufficiently large to interpret their internal structure 

solely from the gravity data. The sedimentary structure 

shown in figure 77 proved to be essentially correct by 

information obtained from subsequent commercial drilling. This success can be directly attributed to the combined use of geophysical methods integrated with 

geological work.

One feature of the structure of the Searles Lake is that 

the thickest accumulation of sediments is not located at 

the geometric center of the basin. We have observed

110°

35°-

FIGURE 76.—Location of Searles Lake, Clayton Valley, and Willcox Playa.

s -no

(-1.2 KM)

5 KILOMETRES

FIGURE 77.—Geological interpretation of gravity data from Searles 

Lake, Calif.

that generally the thickest accumulation of sediments 

does not coincide with the geometric center of many of 

the basins within the Basin and Range Province. Under 

favorable geologic conditions, a thick sequence of sediments may constitute a favorable target area for the occurrence of lithium bearing sediments. Geological aspects of the Searles Lake Valley are described by G.I. 

Smith (this report) and the lithium production is described by Rykken (this report).
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 149

The geophysical data and their interpretation presented above have not directly indicated the presence or 

absence of lithium. However, the interpretation given in 

figure 77 does provide a geologocal setting for the area 

which could only be obtained otherwise by extensive 

drilling.

CLAYTON VALLEY

Clayton Valley, near Silver Peak, Nevada (fig. 76) is 

the only area in the free world where lithium is the 

major product of brine production from sediments. 

Consequently we will examine the area in detail.

The U.S. Geological Survey has conducted a largescale gravity survey in Clayton Valley and Big Smoky 

Valley to the northeast of Clayton Valley. The complete 

gravity map is given in figure 78 (Wilson, 1975). The 

gravity map incorporated data from a small-scale survey 

in the area of Clayton playa made available by the Foote 

Mineral Company.

The first general feature of the gravity data is that 

there is a gravity low trending from Big Smoky Valley 

into Clayton Valley. This gravity low trends through the

=1 MILLIGALS

- 178

Area of present 

lithium 

production

10 KILOMETRES

FIGURE 78.—Regional Bouguer gravity map of Clayton Valley,

Nev.

topographic high which separates the two valleys. Consequently, at some point in the geologic history of the 

area, the two basins may have been connected hydrologically and a connection may exist now. The major implication of this general interpretation is related to the 

problem of determining the source of the lithium. The 

possible hydrologic connection between Big Smoky and 

Clayton Valley suggests that rocks marginal to both basins should be considered as potential source rocks. This 

interpretation of the gravity data also makes Big Smoky 

Valley a potential target area for lithium brines.

A second feature of the gravity map given in figure 78 

is the gravity lows at the south end of Clayton Valley. 

The lows indicate a thick sequence of sediments associated with the paleostructure of Clayton Valley which 

are not coincident with the topographic center of the 

basin. This sequence of sediments constitutes a potential 

target for evaporite deposits which may have associated 

lithium deposits.

The most interesting feature of the gravity map (fig. 

78) is the location of current lithium production in relation to the gravity anomalies. Present lithium production is approximately located by the hachured area of 

figure 78. The mineralized area is terminated to the 

north in the same geometrical pattern as the gravity 

contours. The steep gravity gradient adjacent to the 

area of the lithium production probably reflects a major 

normal fault. Generally faults may be sites of introduction of hydrothermal waters which could contain 

lithium and (or) influence the circulation of waters containing lithium.

The Foote Mineral Company recognized that surface 

geophysical data could be useful in their development 

program and contracted for a number of different 

geophysical surveys. A portion of the electrical sounding 

data taken in the area of current lithium production has 

been released by the company for this report.

The electrical sounding data were collected with the 

Wenner d.c. resistivity array. This is one of two popular 

arrays used in groundwater exploration problems. The 

other array is termed the Schlumberger array. Figure 79 

illustrates the geometry of the two arrays. Basically, a 

reading of the resistivity of the earth is obtained by 

transmitting a current through the transmitter electrodes (A,B) and measuring a voltage across the receiving electrodes (M,N). Once a measurement has been 

made, the distance between the transmitter electrodes is 

increased. For the Schlumberger array, the distance between receiving electrodes is increased only when the 

voltage becomes too small to measure. For the Wenner 

array, both the transmitting and receiving electrodes are 

moved to maintain the value "a" (fig. 79) as one third the 

distance between the transmitting electrodes. Generally 

as the distance between transmitting electrodes is in-
150 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

THE SCHLUMBERGER ARRAY

TRANSMITTER 

——— RECEIVER

THE WENNER ARRAY

FIGURE 79.—Wenner and Schlumberger arrays used in d.c. resistivity

sounding.

creased, the resistivity measurements reflect deeper 

parts of the earth. Since the resistivity measurements are 

not always the true resistivity of the earth, they are 

termed apparent resistivity values. Zohdy, Mabey, and 

Eaton (1974) give an excellent discussion of d.c. resistivity measurements.

One set of Wenner d.c. resistivity measurements 

taken in the Clayton Valley area is given in figure 80. 

The measurements are plotted as a function of increasing electrode separation or the value "a" as discussed 

previously. These data are then interpreted in terms of

10 i—

"0.1

0.01

Earth ModeK

Computed

10 100 

a SPACING (DEPTH), IN METRES

1000

FIGURE 80.—Wenner sounding data and interpretation from Clayton 

Valley, Nev

a horizontally layered earth with each layer having a 

certain thickness and true resistivity. The interpreted 

layered earth structure is also given in figure 80. The 

theoretical fit to the measured values of apparent resistivity is given by the solid curve.

A lithologic log of a drill hole near this sounding reveals that the geologic section consists of a number of 

layers of halite and clay. The lithologic log demonstrates 

that the lithology is much more complex than the interpreted resistivity variation given in figure 80, Consequently the resistivity data only reflect an average of 

the actual lithologic variation. However, the variations 

between different sets of resistivity measurements can 

and do imply important variations in the lithology.

An interpreted geoelectric cross section of the earth 

can be constructed from a number of d.c. resistivity 

soundings. Figure 81 illustrates a geoelectic cross section 

across the area of lithium production. Wenner sounding 

#2 is located well outside of the area of current lithium 

production. The interpreted sequence of conductive 

rocks is thinnest for this sounding. The resistive strata 

interpreted for all three of the soundings is not the bed 

rock or basement for the sedimentary sequence but is 

probably less permeable sediments than the conductive 

rocks.

In general there is a good correspondence between 

the thickness of very conductive sediments (low resistivity) and the reported area of lithium production. The 

d.c. resistivity data supplements the gravity data in that 

each set of data reveals particular aspects of the basin 

structure.

WILLCOX PLAYA

The Willcox area, near Tucson Arizona (fig. 76), has 

been identified by the U.S. Geological Survey lithium 

exploration group as an area with an above average potential for the occurrence of a lithium brine. Geophysical surveys consisting of a regional airborne magnetic

ELECTRICAL SOUNDINGS 

W2 W1

ZONE OF LITHIUM PRODUCTION

FIGURE 81.—Interpreted geoelectric section across the zone of lithium 

brine production in Clayton Valley, Nev.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 151

survey (Dempsey and others, 1963), a regional gravity 

survey (Peterson, 1966), a limited airborne electromagnetic survey, and a reconnaissance resistivity survey using the Schlumberger array were made. The 

Willcox playa is located at the south central end of Sulphur Springs Valley.

The location of the Schlumberger soundings is shown 

in figure 82. An additional electromagnetic sounding 

made by Wynn (1974) has been incorporated in the interpretation of the Willcox Playa structure. The interpretation of the d.c. sounding data is limited by a lack 

of subsurface control. Hence we have only interpreted 

the soundings in terms of minimum depth to resistive 

rocks. The strata above the resistive rocks have a resistivity on the order of 0.25 ohmmetres. This is the same 

order of resistivity as the corresponding section at 

Clayton Valley. Here again the resistive rock is not the 

crystalline or basement rock for the sedimentary sequence.

The minimum depth to the resistive rocks determined 

from each Schlumberger sounding is shown in figure 

82. The contours represent a minimum depth since the 

actual resistivity of the resistive sequence cannot be determined from the Schiumberger sounding. A further

FIGURE 82.—Location of d.c. resistivity soundings and interpretation 

of minimum depth to resistive rocks in metres. W denotes EM 

sounding by Wynn (1974).

complication is that the conductive strata above the resistive rocks probably consist of a number of alternating 

very thin layers. This situation creates an electrical 

anisotropy which in turn tends to make the depth estimates too large. However, the degree of electrical 

anisotropy probably does not vary significantly from 

sounding to sounding. Consequently the thickening of 

the conductive rocks by a factor of six in the southern 

portion of the playa is a real geological feature.

Although the resistivity data have indicated that there 

is a thickening of conductive sediments, there are not 

enough sounding stations to determine whether there is 

a closed basin favorable for the formation of brines. 

However, the airborne electromagnetic survey data can 

be used to answer this question. This geophysical 

method involves transmission of a half sine wave of current through a loop of wire transported by an airplane 

(Keller and Frischknecht, 1966). This signal is modified 

by the conductivity structure of the earth. The modified 

signal is measured by a receiver consisting basically of a 

loop of wire carried on the airplane. The distortion of 

the transmitted signal can be used as a measure of the 

ability of the earth to conduct electricity. The results of 

this airborne survey are shown in figure 83. Transmitted and received signals are shown in the lower right 

corner of figure 83. The contours depicted in figure 83 

are related to the conductivity of the earth as sensed by 

the electromagnetic measurements. The larger numbers 

indicate lower resistivities or a greater thickness of conductive rocks. Comparison of figure 82 and figure 83 

indicates that the airborne electromagnetic survey and 

the d.c. resistivity survey define the same conductive 

area of the playa. An important addition to the surface 

geophysical survey is that the airborne geophysical data 

indicates the conductive sediments form a closed basin.

The regional gravity survey provides the general 

geological setting of the Sulphur Springs Valley, within 

which Wilicox Playa is located. Figure 84 is a generalized 

gravity map of the valley (Peterson, 1966). The most 

prominent feature of the map is the 24 milligal gravity 

low northwest of Willcox. This gravity low is part of a 

generally northwest to southeast trending gravity low 

which is coincident with the Sulphur Springs Valley. 

Lesser gravity lows occur within this low trend on the 

northside of Wilicox Playa and to the southeast. Without 

additional geological evidence, we hypothesize that the 

gravity contours generally indicate basement topography. However, a consideration in this interpretation 

is the presence of volcanic flows in the exposed strata at 

the south end of the basin, which may occupy a significant portion of the sedimentary sequence. Consequently, the higher gravity values at the south end of 

the Sulphur Springs Valley may indicate a thicker volcanic sequence rather than a shallower basement.
152 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

EXPLANATION 

Bedrock

—4O— Ratio of amplitudesChannel 3 to 

Channel 2

Good 

conductor

Poor 

conductor

10 MILES

I

10 KILOMETRES

FIGURE 83.—Contoured airborne electromagnetic survey data for the Willcox Playa area, Arizona.

Figure 84 also shows the location of a prominent total 

magnetic field anomaly defined by the airborne magnetic survey referenced previously. This is a magnetic high 

of about 300 gammas whose contours define a ridgeshaped feature. The trend of the feature is oblique to 

the gravity and topographic trend of Sulphur Springs 

Valley. A general interpretation of the magnetic 

anomaly is that it is due to a volcanic intrusive dikelike 

feature related to the volcanic activity at the south end 

of the valley. We note that the local gravity contours 

transect Willcox Playa and tend to parallel the trend of 

the magnetic anomaly. The magnetic feature then is of 

significant dimensions to alter the main trend of the 

local gravity low.

The following statements summarize the important 

geological and geophysical features of the previous discussion and the implications for lithium occurrences.

1. A thick section of conductive sediments on the 

order of a few hundred meters is located at the

south end of Willcox Playa. Though the sediments 

occur within a gravity low they are not associated 

with closed gravity lows. This corresponds roughly 

to the relationship between the lithium occurrence 

at Clayton Valley and the associated gravity. The 

resistivities of the conductive rocks are the same 

generally as those associated with the lithium producing area at Clayton Valley.

2. A thick accumulation of sediments is indicated by 

the gravity low northwest of Willcox. This 

sedimentary sequence could be the site of evaporite deposits.

3. Volcanic activity seems to have been frequent in 

the southern portion of Sulphur Springs Valley.

4. The airborne magnetic survey indicates the presence of a dikelike volcanic body beneath the 

Willcox Playa. This volcanic body could be a source 

of hydrothermal solutions.

5. Base metal mining has taken place most intensively
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 153

FIGURE 84.—Generalized Bouguer gravity map for the Sulphur 

Springs Valley, Ariz.

within the exposed rocks at the south end of the

valley. Base metal mining has also been extensive

in the exposed strata adjacent to Clayton Valley.

The overall picture which emerges from this analysis

is that the south end of Sulphur Springs Valley seems to

be the most likely area for the occurrence of lithium.

The interpreted thick sequence of sediments north of

Willcox should be investigated for potential evaporite

deposits. An integrated electromagnetic survey and

seismic survey would provide the best information about

this sedimentary sequence.

DISCUSSION

The interpretation of geophysical surveys given in the 

previous discussion indicates areas for research in 

lithium exploration methods. As discussed in the introduction the most important general research objective is 

to define physical models for lithium deposits. We will 

concentrate on the geophysical aspects of this general 

research objective.

One aspect of a model for lithium exploration is the 

nature and character of basin sediments. Clearly an important question is how typical or atypical is Clayton 

Valley, the only valley of its kind producing lithium 

brine, in comparison to other sedimentary basins within 

the Basin and Range Province. The characteristics of the 

sedimentary sequence is a consideration in seeking an 

answer to this question. The previous examples of electrical surveys have shown that they are valuable tools in 

defining the nature of a sedimentary sequence. However, a very real limitation exists in their interpretation 

since only general conclusions can be made about the 

lithology itself. Fortunately the state-of-the art for electrical methods has made rapid advances in recent years. 

For example, using alternating electrical currents and 

measuring the resistivity as a function of the frequency 

has been advocated as a means to distinguish copper 

sulfides from noncopper sulfides (Zonge and Wynn, 

1975). We are currently starting a research program 

which will employ such a method to try to deduce more 

about the nature of the basin sediments. An important 

part of this research is the measurement of resistivity as 

a function of frequency in the laboratory for small rock 

samples whose mineralogy and geochemistry are relatively well known. We are confident that this laboratory 

study, when used in conjunction with field measurements, will enable a geophysical estimate to be made of 

the nature of the sedimentary sequence.

Another class of geophysical methods which can be 

applied in lithium exploration are the bore-hole logging 

techniques. These methods have an application in support of surface electrical measurements and in supplementing lithologic logging. For example, in situ measurements of the physical properties of a given sedimentary sequence greatly aids interpretation of geophysical 

surveys used to map the lithologic variations. Combined 

use of borehole logging methods and a surface geophysical survey has proven to reduce drilling costs significantly. Neutron activation methods are one recently developed class of borehole logging methods which have a 

potentially interesting application to lithium exploration. The use of lithium in shielding for nuclear reactors 

(for example, activation potential) may also prove to 

lead to a method for in situ detection of lithium.

Another broad class geophysical method which will 

prove useful in characterizing sedimentary deposits in 

the Basin and Range Province is the remote sensing 

method. One obvious application is thermal or infrared 

remote sensing. If indeed lithium has a hydrothermal 

origin or has a correlation with hydrothermal activity, 

then shallow lithium deposit target areas may be associated with thermal anomalies.

CONCLUSION

Lithium deposits will not be defined by a characteristic 

geophysical anomaly at least with present geophysical 

methods and interpretation techniques. Consequently 

geophysical methods cannot be thought of as a black box 

which produces a geophysical anomaly directly indicating the location or presence of a mineral deposit. 

Geophysics must be thought of as analogous to a tool 

box with each tool being a geophysical method appropriate to the geological problem at hand. The most sue-
154 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

cessful application of geophysical methods to any mineral exploration problems will involve integration of 

several geophysical and geological techniques.

REFERENCES

Dempsey, W. J., Fackler, W. D., and others, 1963, Aeromagnetic map 

of the Cochise quadrangle, Cochise County, Arizona: U.S. Geol. 

Survey Geophys. Inv. Map GP-413.

Dobrin, M. B., 1960, Introduction to geophysical prospecting [2d ed.]: 

New York, McGraw-Hill, 446 p.

Griffiths, D. H., and King, R. F., 1965, Applied geophysics for engineers and geologists: London, Pergamon Press, 223 p.

Keller, G. V., and Frischknecht, F. C., 1966, Electrical methods in 

geophysical prospecting: Oxford, Pergamon Press, 519 p.

Parasnis, D. S., 1962, Principles of applied geophysics: London, Methuen, 176 p. 

Peterson, D., 1966, Principle facts for gravity stations in Sulphur

Springs Valley, Arizona: U.S. Dept. Commerce Nad. Tech. Inf.

Service, Springfield, Va., Rpt. PB212-99, 12 p. 

Wilson, C. W., 1975, Bouguer gravity map of Clayton Valley, Nevada:

U.S. Geol. Survey open-file rept. 75-333. 

Wynn, J. C., 1974, Electromagnetic coupling in induced polarization:

Univ. Arizona, Ph.D. thesis, 150 p. 

Zohdy, A. A. R., Eaton, G. P., and Mabey, D. R., 1974, Application of

surface geophysics to ground-water investigations: U.S. Geol.

Survey Water-Resources Inv. Techniques, Book 2, Chapter Dl,

116 p. 

Zonge, K. L., and Wynn, J. C., 1975, Recent advances and applications

in complex resistivity measurements: Geophysics, v. 40, no. 5, p.

851-864.

LITHIUM—DATA BASES AND RESOURCE ESTIMATES: 

PROBLEMS AND POTENTIAL

By ALLEN L. CLARK, JAMES A. CALKINS, DONALD SINGER,

and MARY A. URICK, 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, RESTON, VA

ABSTRACT

Data files contain raw or disaggregated information on mineral deposits and commodities. Computerized data files offer the only means 

presently available by which all data items (fields) are individually addressable. One operational data file is CRIB (Computerized Resources 

Information Bank), which is a general purpose inventory and reference file on metallic and nonmetallic mineral deposits. Other files are 

being constructed for special purposes.

A computer file on lithium resources should contain detailed information related to the following main categories: record identification, 

name and location, description of deposit, analytical data, and production and (or) reserves.

The U.S. Geological Survey is developing improved methods for the 

handling of mineral resource data. These include computerized data 

files and predictive resource models.

A resource model is a system of postulates, data, and inferences 

which serves to predict the resource-related outcome when key variables affecting a mineral commodity are changed. The objective is to 

provide several different kinds of mineral availability estimates, including: geological availability (search and occurrence model), 

technological availability (exploration models), and economic availability (economics models).

Information on mineral resources should be organized more efficiently and made more easily accessible so that this information can be used to greater advantage by interested parties both in government and in 

the private sector. As stated by McKelvey (1972), "Better 

methods for estimating the magnitude of potential mineral resources are needed to provide the knowledge that

should guide the design of many key public policies."

The rapid changes in the lithium picture in recent 

years—new sources of supply from subsurface brines 

and the likelihood of greatly increased demand due to 

new uses—emphasize the general need for rapid access 

to current information relating to our position toward 

minerals and for long range mineral resource appraisals.

The U.S. Geological Survey is engaged in collecting 

and organizaing computerized information on mineral 

resources and in developing predictive resource models 

which will provide improved capability for making policy decisions on this subject.

This paper describes the methods being developed 

and suggests that some of these methods may be applicable to lithium resource studies.

Mineral resources data files, loosely called data bases, 

contain the basic raw or disaggregated information on 

mineral deposits and mineral commodities. This information is rigorously and logically organized down to the 

smallest unit of information for which computer access 

is desired; each individual datum is stored in a computer 

field, which is individually addressable. It is important to 

decide beforehand the smallest level of information that 

will be required because, while it is possible to aggregate 

small components of data into larger groups (grouped
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 155

data), it is not possible to do the reverse.

Although organizing the information into a computerized file is tedious, so is the use of a manual file. In 

the case of a subject as complex as mineral resources, the 

computerized operation offers some unique advantages 

not available elsewhere. For example, the computer file 

can be addressed down to the level of the individual 

field, plus those two or three fields within the record, 

that have been sorted in advance, whereas the manual 

file can only be addressed down to the level of the record (document). Therefore only the computer file can 

disassemble the record into its individual parts, and for 

most uses of data this disassembly process is an initial 

requirement.

One of the operational data files being used for the 

storage of data on mineral resources is called CRIB 

(Computerized Resources Information Bank) (Calkins 

and others, 1973). CRIB is a general-purpose inventory 

and reference file on metallic and nonmetallic mineral 

deposits. As of January, 1976, this file contained about 

49,000 records of varying quality and completeness; 

these records were supplied to the file voluntarily from 

various sources. Very few records specific to lithium had 

been contributed to the file. An example of a typical 

record stored in the CRIB file is shown in table 64. This 

record contains certain key information on the Spor 

Mountain beryllium district, which contains lithium as a 

potential resource. A second example, the printed output resulting from a search for lithium deposits in the 

United States, is shown in table 65. In this type of output, selected parts of the retrieved records are rearranged into fixedlength fields, sorted, and then passed 

to a report processing program which provides for 

specialized output arrangements.

Several other data files are being constructed to serve 

special purposes, including (1) a file specific to the mineral economics of metallic mineral deposits, (2) a special 

file on the 900 largest producing mines of the world, (3) 

a file on coal resources, and (4) a file on geothermal 

resources.

In order to use the computer to store and manipulate 

lithium data, it will be necessary to organize the data for 

a computer operation. In this regard we suggest the 

following as a preliminary list of important categories of 

information that should be organized and collected:

Record Identification 

Record number 

Deposit number 

Cross index number 

Date

Name and Location 

Deposit name 

Mining district/area/subdistrict

Country

State

County

Latitude

Longitude

Description of Deposit 

Commodities present 

Deposit type

Size of deposit (large, medium or small) 

Ore minerals

Status of exploration/development 

Property (active or inactive) 

Workings (surface, underground, or both)

Analytical Data

Production and (or) reserves 

Annual production 

Cumulative production 

Reserves 

Reserves and potential resources

The compilation of resource data into data bases provides information which can be used in resource models 

to create long-term-supply curves. This ultimate purpose is directly analogous to the ultimate purpose of 

geologic data collection, which is the historical interpretation of the earth and its phenomena. In both cases, it is 

imperative that the ultimate purpose be clearly established so that data collection and data banks do not become an end unto themselves; rather, they should be 

regarded as necessary building blocks of analysis, and 

used like any other tool of geologic studies.

Numerous steps must be taken, however, before one 

can produce the end product—a long-term-supply 

curve—and the first and most critical step is a mineral 

resource inventory. The most important reasons for 

such inventories are: (1) the increasing demands on 

world's resources by both the developed and developing 

nations; (2) the need for more accurate data for shortand long-range planning; (3) the need to assess national 

endowment in order to effectively allocate other scarce 

commodities such as manpower and capital; and (4) the 

need to ascertain the best trade-offs in terms of world 

food demands, environmental degradation, rational 

growth programs, and multiple land use within developed and developing nations.

Once an inventory of a mineral resource has been 

completed and a data base developed, a large number of 

studies can be undertaken utilizing this inventory. 

Within the U.S. Geological Survey and elsewhere in 

government and industry, much emphasis has recently 

been placed on resource models of various types. This 

emphasis has caused a great deal of confusion, contradiction, and controversy over the use of models.
156 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 

TABLE 64.—An example of a typical record stored in the U.S. Geological Sun'ey's CRIB file

CRIB MINERAL RESOURCES FILEt REVISION 8

RECORD IDENTIFICATION

RECORD NO............ W000026

RECORD TYPE.......... A U

COUNTRY/ORGANIZATION. US6S

FILE LINK ID......... RASS

DEPOSIT NO........... 496

REPORTER

NAME: WORLt RONALD 6.

DATE: 71 04

NAME AND LOCATION

STATUS OF EXPLOR. OR DEV. 4

DISTRICT/AREA............ SPOR MOUNTAIN

COUNTRY CODE............. US

STATE CODE............... 49

STATE NAME:

UTAH 

COUNTY................... JUA8

QUAD SCALE 

i: 62500

LATITUDE 

39-43-OON

QUAD NO OR NAME 

TOPAZ MOUNTAIN

LONGITUDE 

113-12-OOW

ALTITUDE

COMMODITY INFORMATION 

COMMODITIES PRESENT: F 8E U LI

SIGNIFICANCE:

MAJOR...... F

MINOR...... U BE

COPRODUCT.. 

BYPRODUCT.. 

POTENTIAL.. LI

ORE MATERIALS <MINERALS*ROCKStETC.): 

FLUORITE

DEPOSIT TYPES:

PIPESt VEINS

PRODUCTION 

YES

However, the purpose of data, data bases, and resource models is to provide an indication of the long 

term supply of a commodity. In this paper, we concentrate on lithium, but the general philosophy we present

can apply to almost any mineral or energy commodity.

The least that is required of any model is that it serve
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

TABLE 64.—An example of a typical record stored in the U.S. Geological Survey's CRIB file—Continued 

ANNUAL PRODUCTION (ORE AND COMMODITIES)

157

ITEM 

1 ORE

3 BE

4 U

ACC AMOUNT THOUS.UNITS YEAR GRADE OR USE

CUMULATIVE PRODUCTION (ORE AND COMMODITIES)

ITEM ACC AMOUNT THOUS.UNITS YEARS GRADE OR USE 

8 F ACC 00000144 TONS 1943-19621 75% CAF2

SOURCE OF INFORMATION.. DASCH* 1964

PRODUCTION COMMENTS.... U FROM YELLOWCHIEF* BE BY BRUSH BERYLLIUM CO.! SMALL 

FLUORSPAR OPERATIONS CONTINUING FROM 1962 TO PRESENT.

RESERVES AND POTENTIAL RESOURCES

ACC AMOUNT THOUS.UNITS GRADE OR USE 

EST 00000362 TONS 40% CAF2 

LGF LOW GRADE

ITEM

1 CAF2

2 BE

3 LI

4 U LGK LOW GRADE

SOURCE OF INFORMATION.. DASCH* 1964

COMMENTS............... LARGE LOW GRADE CAF2 (5%) ASSOC. WITH BE DEPOSITS,

GEOLOGY AND MINERALOGY

HOST AND/OR COUNTRY ROCKS AND AGE.. LIMESTONE

ASSOCIATED IGNEOUS ROCKS AND AGE... DIKES

AGE OF MINERALIZATION.............. TERTIARY

GEOLOGICAL DESCRIPTIVE NOTES....... FLUORITE IN IRREG PIPES AND VEINS IN

LIMESTONE. FLUORITE (5%) IN WATER-LAID TUFF WITH BE» Lit AND MN OXIDES.

REFERENCES 

1) STAATZ. USGS PROF. PAPER 415

to predict actual physical happenings in some way relevant to man, either by allowing him to anticipate future 

uncontrollable events or by demonstrating the possible 

consequences of various decisions. To date, many mineral resource models have been deficient in meeting this 

requirement.

Reasons for past deficiencies include misunderstandings between geologists and economists, inadequate resource data, and little research on certain fundamental 

relationships. Some of these deficiencies, however, may 

be resolved by working backwards from the policy questions to determine the type of information which is 

needed to answer the questions—the approach attempted here. This approach leads to an overview of the type 

of mineral resource data which should be gathered.

The purpose of resource estimates is to provide unbiased mineral resource information to decision makers, 

enabling them to make rational decisions which would 

insure the orderly supply of mineral materials without 

neglecting the proper use of land and the health and 

welfare of the people. Thus the need of the resource 

estimator to anticipate all future policy questions is im-
TABLE 65.—An example of a printed output for a search for lithium deposits in the United States 

LITHIUM DEPOSITS IN THE UNITED STATES

REC.ID.

M003610 

M003554 

M00341* 

M003396 

M0032H6 

M000983 

M000516 

M000151

REC.ID.

DEPOSIT NAME

DEPOSIT NAME

OC01970 BIG BOULDER PROSPECT 

OC01934 COJAOE 

DC0068S COMET GROUP 

DC01960 KINGS KANYON 

DC01933 RATTLESNAKE PARK

ARIZONA 

LATITUDE LONGITUDE TWP HNG SEC.

UN 04W 02 

07N 03W 09 

08N 03W 29 31 

07N 03W 16 

07N U5W 26 

24S 16E 11

17S 10E 25

COLORADO 

LATITUDE LONGITUDE TWP RNG SEC.

07N 72W 36 

05N 71W 36 

IPS 84W 24 

07N 72W 21 

05N 71 W 36

COMMODITIES

LI 

LI 

LI 

LI 

LI 

LI 

LI 

LI

COMMODITIES

BE GEM FLO RAE MIC PER LI 

BE LI NB TA 

LI BE GEM 

MIC F LI BE 

BE GEM LI

DEPO

TYP

DEPO

TYP

PEGMA

PEGMA

PEGMA

PEGMA

PEGMA

HEC.ID. DEPOSIT NAME

CONNECTICUT 

LATITUDE LONGITUDE TWP HNG SEC.

W000404 ANDERSON MICA MINF5 AND SWANSON LITHIA M 41-30-56N 072-31-16W

W001031 BRANCHVILLE MICA MINE 41-16-04N 073-26-22W

W000945 GILLETTE fiEM TOURMALINEt MINERAL SPECIME U-.?9-34N 072-30-40W

COMMODITIES

LI MIC FLD

MIC FLD QTZ BE FE LI

GEM FLD MIC BE F LI

REC.IO. DEPOSIT NAME

WOOOOS6 dARRUS PROPERTY LITHIA MINE 

W000060 CLARK LEDfiE LITHIft MINE 

W000061 MAC COMBEP LEDGE LlfHlA MINE 

W000058 MANNING LOCALITY LlTHlA MINE 

•1000055 NORWICH LITHIA MINE 

W000057 TAYLOR LEDGE LITHIA MINE 

W000059 WEST CHESTERFIELD LITHH MINE

MASSACHUSETTS 

LATITUDE LONGITUDE TWP RNG SEC.

42-28-07N 

42-25-12N 

42-25--50N 

42-28-1SN 

42-19-07M 

42-28-10N 

42-24-20N

072-50-25W 

072-52-25W 

072-52-25W 

072-48-45W 

072-&1-43W 

072-49-35W 

072-52-20W

COMMODITIES

LI 

LI 

LI 

LI 

LI 

LI 

LI

DEPO

TYP

PEGMA

PEGMA

PEGMA

DEPO

TYP

PEGMA

PEGMA

PEGMA

PEGMA

HEC.ID. DEPOSIT NAME

WOOOOP6

DC13199 ROADSIDE CLAIMS

UTAH

LATITUDE LONGITUDE TWP HNG SEC. 

39-43-OON 113-12-OOW

012 012

COMMODITIES 

F BE U LI 

BE LI

DEPO

TYP

PIPES

REC.ID, DEPOSIT NAME

DC07h02 BLACK MOUNTAIN SPOOUMENE PROSPECT 

DC06593 CARBONATE BELLE CLAIM 

DC06594 PACIEIC LODE

WYOMING

LATITUDE LONGITUDE TWP HNG SEC. 

033 089 36

COMMODITIES

LI 

AU AG TE U PB LI MN

PB SE U MN LI

DEPO

TYP

PEGMA

28 LITHIUM RECORDS PRINTED
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 159

plicit, but of course, this need cannot be fulfilled in 

many cases.

There are certain policy questions involving mineral 

commodities that have been prevalent in the past, and 

we may expect them to recur. Some of these questions, 

as they relate to resource estimates, are: What would be 

the change in reserves with a change in the price of the 

commodity? Should some particular area be excluded 

from mineral development? How much additional 

material would be available as a result of a technological 

breakthrough in some process or mining method? 

Where are the alternative sources of the commodity? Is 

it worthwhile to encourage domestic exploration for 

some mineral? Which mineral resources might be minable if improvements were made in highways and related 

facilities? Should we have a mineral stockpile?

Perhaps the objectives of resource estimates can be 

better defined after considering the following question: 

How much of each commodity is avilable under all conceivable future conditions? This new question may appear open-ended and unanswerable, and to some extent 

it is. Not all future mineral supply problems can be anticipated and, as a result, a broad base of resource information is needed to even attempt an answer. It is 

pertinent to discuss what type of information is required.

Suppose a robot were developed which could mine 

underground; many resource estimates based on today's 

technology would become useless. The point of this 

example is that, although resource estimates should be 

based on economics, technology, and geology, economics and technology should not be included explicitly in 

the data since they are subject to change over relatively 

short periods of time.

What should be specified in the raw data are estimates 

of the quality and quantity of the resources available 

with respect to the factors which economics and technology could affect. These variables would include the 

usual grade and tonnage estimates; the physical, chemical, and mineralogic features of the ore which could 

affect its metallurgical treatment and recovery; the 

thickness of the deposit; the geographical location; the 

geologic structure and hydrologic conditions; and the 

spatial distribution of the mineralization and the overburden. Recording such information for known mineral 

depsoits, updating the records when major changes 

occur within deposits, would provide a firm foundation 

from which the effects of changes in economics and 

technology could be estimated. This type of data base is 

hereafter described as "disaggregated."

Desposits which have not yet been found present 

other problems. Most people are reluctant to predict the 

occurrence of a rare event such as an unfound deposit. 

Although single rare events are unpredictable, the

statistical averages of large numbers of them are highly 

regular and predictable. Thus for the lead-zinc, porphyry copper, and sandstone uranium deposit types, for 

which there may be a large number of unfound deposits, the statistics of the known deposits of the same 

type provide an adequate predictive model. Resource 

estimates made by such statistical models must be tempered, of course, by the geological extrapolation which 

provides estimates of the numbers of the unfound deposits and by the extrapolated conditions such as depth, 

general location, ground water, and legal status, which 

could adversely affect the economics of recovery. Additionally, due to the nature of mineral searches, not all 

the deposits may be found. The effects of the search 

should be estimated separately from the resource estimates because of changes in the technology and economics of the search itself.

The precision of each estimate should also be estimated and expressed explicitly because of the probability that the actual resources amount to a quantity other 

than the expected value; this difference could have important implications for some policy decisions. An even 

more serious problem with present resource estimates is 

the tendency of estimators to be conservative, and, 

therefore, biased. The main reason for this appears to 

be a fear that the increasingly large numbers will tend to 

have proportionately less precision when they are extrapolated from reserve figures to unfound resources. 

Thus analysts have reacted by presenting lower estimates in which they have more confidence. Including 

confidence intervals with unbiased estimates would obviously alleviate much of this problem. Biased resource 

estimates cannot be tolerated in light of the possible adverse effects on policy decisions.

The major question that remains is: What would be 

the exact configuration of resource model that could 

generate resource estimates applicable to decision making? A general model for such analyses has been developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and is presented 

in figure 85.

Although figure 85 is extremely simplified in terms of 

both the amount of data required and the effort involved in developing such a model, it does provide a 

basic framework within which a resource estimate can be 

created. Such a model simultaneously allows for updating of the individual elements of the model and provides for a feedback of information as the data are generated. The initial phase of the model is an occurrence 

model for the resource, and it therefore provides the 

total quantity of the resource by aggregation. However, 

because the development of a resource is contingent 

upon first discovering its existence, the resource estimate should be revised to show that portion of the total 

that will be ultimately discovered. Therefore, aggrega-
160 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

/it\R

i

egion Fj 

k.

UDserved size 

Frontier or Mntiire x-TM<v distribution of 

partially Geologic ^aTure /!mm, deposits explored ——— ; ——— * re^ lon J ——————— * /mm^T9

expiorea analogy ,- m /mv***^ region, F, J > m Jmmmim^^

Assumed historical

distribut on for F

11

Feedback

Exploration drilling-- 

W=f(RC,d,S,l,--)

Governmental 

policies

Substitution 

effects

—— » NO. of D=f(w,N,— ) ——————— » £$mmm

Q=f (W,S,— )

NUMBER OF WELLS

World 

supply 

price

tLAfLHINH MUIN

Fj, Frontier region 

i , Number of regions 

m, One through any number

T, hunction 

Reserve accu- w Wp |,_ 

Feedback mulation and w' wens

construction ^i '•'nee 

costs C, Cost 

' —————————— ' d, Depth

S, Deposit size 

1 , Investment 

•£ \< No. of D, Number of discoveries

° Reserves and N ' Number of deP°sits 

^o resources Q ' Volume of resource

a recovery

CL TIME J

Occurrence model--Aggregation 

gives total resources

Search model—Aggregation gives 

• resource availability at present 

price and technology

Production model--Aggregation 

gives predicted production at 

various assumed socio-economic 

conditions

FIGURE 85.—General model for estimating resource availability.

tion of the data from the search-model portion of the 

model (fig. 85) gives the resource availability at present 

price and technology.

Finally, it is necessary to introduce the econometric 

model in order to devise a time-dependent production 

model. This aspect of the model is normally outside the 

expertise of the U.S. Geological Survey but must be integrated with the data from the search and occurrence 

submodels in order to develop a long-term supply 

model for use by decision makers.

In summary, decisions on mineral resource policy 

should reflect the major factors which affect the availability of resource commodities: (1) geological availability, (2) technological availability, (3) economic availability, and (4) alternate sources of supply. Reliable information on these factors should be developed through 

research on quantitative resource occurrence models,

models of the exploration process, mineral economics 

models, and gathering of resource data at a disaggregated level. Systems design and software development 

in progress should allow users without computer experience to use the system. Update procedures, along 

with retrieval and display capabilities should be provided for in the software being developed.

References

Calkins, J. A., Kays, Olaf, and Reefer, E. K., 1973, CRIB—The mineral resources data bank of the U.S. Geological Survey: U.S. Geol. 

Survey C ire. 681, 39 p.

McKelvey, V. E., 1972, Mineral resource estimates and public policy: 

Am. Scientist, v. 60, no. 1, p. 32-40. Repr. in Brobst, D. A., and 

Pratt, W. P., eds., 1973, United States mineral resources: U.S. 

Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 820, p. 9-19.
LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000

ANALYTICAL METHODS AND PROBLEMS OF LITHIUM 

DETERMINATION IN ROCKS, SEDIMENTS, AND BRINES

161

By ALLEN L. MEIER, U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, DENVER, CO

ABSTRACT

Exploration for lithium resources involves reliance on geochemical 

methods. In turn, the precision and accuracy of the analytical procedures determine the usefulness of the resultant data for exploration. 

Two published analytical methods and an experimental technique 

were applied to a variety of rocks, sediments, and brines to determine 

their relative precision and accuracy. The method used for analysis of 

brine showed good precision and accuracy. Improved precision and 

accuracy were obtained on rocks and sediments by an experimental 

technique that uses boric acid when compared to a method that does 

not use boric acid.

INTRODUCTION

Potential lithium deposits are not easily recognized by 

physical evidence alone. Chemical analysis must be used 

to detect and determine the distribution of the element. 

The success of lithium exploration depends on the ability of the analytical technique to provide the data necessary to recognize and evaluate a potential resource.

The most frequently asked question of an analyst is, 

"What is the precision and accuracy of the method 

used?" Precision and accuracy do not mean the same 

thing but are mistakenly used interchangeably.

Precision is a measurement of reproducibility when 

replicate analysis or measurements are made. Precision 

can be determined by repeating an analysis and examining the variability. Variability is usually expressed as 

standard deviation, relative standard deviation, confidence intervals, or range.

Accuracy is the nearness of a value to the true value. 

Comparison of a value obtained to an accepted value for 

a sample determines accuracy. A percentage of the true 

value is an expression of accuracy. A true or accepted 

value for the material under study is often unknown. 

Accuracy can be determined in this case, however, by 

the addition of a known amount of the element to the 

previously analyzed sample. The percent recovered in 

the re-analysis is an indication of the accuracy (Fletcher 

and Collins, 1974).

Precision and accuracy are difficult to determine in 

analysis of geologic material for the following reasons:

1. Each sample is unique.

2. Variability within the sample is unknown.

3. The matrix of each sample is different.

4. Interaction of the elements present is often unknown.

5. The element of interest normally occurs in trace

amounts. 

Therefore, an analytical technique that works well on

one sample type may not work on another.

In this work the precision and accuracy of two published analytical methods and an experimental 

technique were studied. Several representative samples 

of different types were analyzed for lithium. They included clays, tuffs, carbonates, water, and brine.

PROCEDURES

Atomic absorption was used for the determination of 

lithium in each of the methods.

The water and brine samples were analyzed by a procedure described by Brown, Skougstad, and Fishman 

(1970). Water samples were analyzed directly without 

dilution. Brine samples were diluted to concentrations 

of less than 15,000 mg/1 total dissolved solids. (Results 

are given in table 66.)

Rock and sediment samples were analyzed by a modified method reported by Ward, Nakagawa, Harms, and 

VanSickle (1969). Decomposition was accomplished by 

a mixture of nitric and hydrofluoric acids. The use of 

perchloric acid was eliminated from the procedure for 

exploration and field use. Samples were taken to dryness on a hotplate, redissolved in 6-normal hydrochloric 

acid, and diluted. (Results are given in table 67.)

Rock and sediment samples were also analyzed by an 

experimental technique using boric acid. The method is 

essentially the same as the one previously described, except that 5 ml of a saturated boric acid solution was 

added after decomposition. (Results are given in table 

67; see columns that refer to boric acid method.)

To study precision, each sample was analyzed five 

times by each method. The mean and confidence limits 

at the 95 percent level, and the percent relative standard 

deviation are reported (tables 66 and 67).

Accuracy was determined by adding a known amount 

of lithium to each of the rock and sediment samples 

before the decomposition step. Percent recovery was 

calculated by using the mean of five replicate determinations of each sample with the addition and the mean of 

the sample as previously determined by each of the 

methods (Fletcher and Collins, 1974) (tables 66 and 67).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Results obtained on the water and brine samples show 

both good precision and accuracy by the method studied 

(table 66). Sample number MAP 810 has poorer preci-
162 LITHIUM RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS BY THE YEAR 2000 

TABLE 66.—Precision and accuracy of lithium determinations on brine and water samples

Sample No.

MAF 109 — __

115 —————

810 ___ .

797 -__.___.

798 —————

MAI 095 ._ _.

Sample 

type

._ __ do——————

._ - dO—— ______

._ __ do——————

._ - dO—— —— __

Specific

conductance 

(micromhos)

6,800

58,300

180,000

160,000

160,000

190,000

Low

0 99

6.8

10

65

68

300

Ranee 

(mg/1)

High

1 03

7.2

12

68

69

310

Mean and 

confidence

95 percent 

level (mg/1)

1.01+0.02

7 + .2

11 +1

67 +1

68 +1

308 +6

Relative

deviation 

(percent)

1.5

2.2

7.7

1.7

1 9

1 5

(percent 

recovery)

97

99

109

98

100

98

TABLE 67.—Comparison of precision and accuracy determinations on rock and sediment samples using a method without boric acid and

a method with boric acid

Method without boric acid Method with boric acid

Sample No.

MAI 180— _____

MAI 177 ________

MAI 445 __ _

MAF 432 _______

MAF 593— _____

MAH 429 ____

MAG 754——— ___

MAG 886_. _ __

MAG 714__ _ _

Sample type

Clay __ _ _ .

_. - do — _. _ ___.

Tuff ____ _.

_. - do ____________

__ ._ do ____________

__ __ do ____________

__ __ do ———— ———

Mean and 

confidence 

limits at 

95 percent 

level (ppm)

384+ 56

73+ 7

272+ 47

642 + 182

. 1620+ 56

QQQ +. 197

252+ 27

448+ 20

1210+494

Relative 

standard 

deviation 

(percent)

11.7

7.2

13 9

22.7

2.8

30.1

8.6

3.7

21.7

Accuracy 

(percent 

recovery)

66

95

80

71

95

48

62

100

108

Mean and 

confidence 

limits at 

95 percent 

level (ppm)

815+25

74+ 6

420 + 22

1233+54

1705 + 42

700+18

588 + 20

456 + 24

1467 + 54

Relative 

standard 

deviation 

(percent)

3.0

6.3

5.0

4.2

2.3

2.4

2.8

4.3

3.5

Accuracy 

(percent 

recovery)

100

106

99

95

98

99

96

97

100

sion and accuracy than the other samples, because of the 

high ratio of salinity to lithium concentration in the 

sample. Dilution was necessary to reduce the dissolvedsolids concentration for atomic absorption determination. The lithium concentration was also reduced by this 

dilution to near the detection limit. The precision and 

accuracy normally decrease as the detection limit is approached.

A comparison of the results obtained by the two 

methods for rocks and sediments indicates that the 

method using boric acid has better precision and accuracy than the method without boric acid (table 67). The 

mean values obtained by the boric acid technique are 

higher than the mean values obtained by the method 

without boric acid. Stable fluoride compounds can be 

formed when hydrofluoric acid is used for decomposition (Dolezal and others, 1968). Boric acid can be used 

to complex residual fluoride (Bernas, 1969). These factors explain the lower recoveries using the technique 

without boric acid and the higher recoveries with the use 

of boric acid.

CONCLUSIONS

The method used in this study for water and brine 

samples shows adequate precision and accuracy to be 

useful for exploration for lithium. An improved

technique for the determination of low concentrations 

of lithium in concentrated brines would be useful.

The poor accuracy of the method without boric acid 

indicates low recovery of lithium for some samples. The 

greater recovery observed for these samples using the 

method with boric acid suggests that the formation of 

stable fluorides does occur when hydrofluoric acid is 

used for dissolution. Boric acid inhibits this formation 

and improves the recovery. The use of boric acid with 

hydrofluoric acid is under study at the present time.

REFERENCES CITED

Bernas, Bedrich, 1968, A new method for decomposition and comprehensive analysis of silicates by atomic absorption spectrometry: 

Anal. Chemistry, v. 40, no. 11, p. 1682-1686.

Brown, Eugene, Skougstad, M. W., and Fishman, M. J., 1970, 

Methods for collection and analysis of water samples for dissolved 

minerals and gases: U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Resources Inv. 

Techniques, Book 5, Chapter Al, 160 p.

Dolezal, Jan, Provondra, P., and Sulcek, Z., 1968, Decomposition 

techniques in inorganic analysis: New York, Elsevier, 224 p.

Fletcher, G. E., and Collins, A. G., 1974, Atomic absorption methods 

of analysis of oilfield brines—Barium, calcium, copper, iron, lead, 

lithium, magnesium, manganese, potassium, sodium, strontium, 

and zinc: U.S. Bur. Mines Rept. Inv. 7861, 14 p.

Ward, F. N., Nakagawa, H. M., Harms, T. F., and VanSickle, G. H., 

1969, Atomic-absorption methods of analysis useful in geochemical exploration: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1289, 45 p.