U.S. Geological Survey Energy and 

Minerals Science Strategy—Public 

Review Release

By Richard C. Ferrero, Jonathan J. Kolak, Donald J. Bills, Zachary H. Bowen, 

Daniel J. Cordier, Tanya J. Gallegos, James R. Hein, Karen D. Kelley, Philip H. 

Nelson, Vito F. Nuccio, Jeanine M. Schmidt, and Robert R. Seal

Open-File Report 2012–1072

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

KEN SALAZAR, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Marcia K. McNutt, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2012

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living 

resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS.

For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, 

visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the 

U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to 

reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report.

Suggested citation:

Ferrero, R.C., Kolak, J.J., Bills, D.J., Bowen, Z.H., Cordier, D.J., Gallegos, T.J., Hein, J.R., Kelley, K.D., Nelson, P.H., 

Nuccio, V.F., Schmidt, J.M., and Seal, R.R., 2012, U.S. Geological Survey energy and minerals science strategy: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2012–1072, 35 p.
iii

Foreword

In 2007, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) published a Bureau Science Strategy Facing Tomorrow’s 

Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017. It provided a view of the future, 

establishing science goals that reflected the USGS’s fundamental mission in areas of societal impact such 

as energy and minerals, climate and land use change, ecosystems, natural hazards, environmental health, 

and water. Intended to inform long-term program planning, the strategy emphasizes how USGS science 

can make substantial contributions to the well-being of the Nation and the world. 

In 2010, I realigned the USGS management and budget structure, changing it from a structure associated 

with scientific disciplines—Geography, Geology, Biology and Hydrology—to an issue-based organization 

along the lines of the Science Strategy. My aim was to align our management structure with our mission, our science priorities, our metrics for success, and our budget. An added benefit was that the USGS 

immediately appeared relevant to more Americans and it became easier for those outside the agency to 

navigate our organizational structure to find where within the USGS they would find the solution to their 

problem. External partners rarely approached us with a problem in “geology,” but they might need help 

with an issue in climate change or energy research. 

The new organization is focused on seven science mission areas:

•	Climate and Land Use Change

•	Core Science Systems

•	Ecosystems

•	Energy and Minerals

•	Environmental Health

•	Natural Hazards

•	Water

The scope of each of these new mission areas is broader than the science directions outlined in the USGS 

Science Strategy and together cover the scope of USGS science activities. 

In 2010, I also commissioned seven Strategic Science Planning Teams (SSPTs) to draft science strategies 

for each USGS mission area. Although the existing Bureau Science Strategy could be a starting point for 

this exercise, the SSPTs had to go well beyond the scope of the existing document. What is of value and 

enduring from the work of the programs that existed under the former science disciplines needed to be 

reframed and reinterpreted under the new organization of the science mission areas. In addition, new 

opportunities for research directions have emerged in the five years since the Bureau Science Strategy 

was drafted, and exciting possibilities for cooperating and collaborating in new ways are enabled by the 

new mission focus of the organization.

Scientists from across the Bureau were selected for these SSPTs for their experience in strategic planning, broad range of experience and expertise, and knowledge of stakeholder needs and relationships. 

Each SSPT was charged with developing a long-term (10-year) science strategy that encompasses the 

portfolio of USGS science in the respective mission area. Each science strategy will reinforce others 

because scientific knowledge inherently has significance to multiple issues. Leadership of the USGS and 

the Department of the Interior will use the science vision and priorities developed in these strategies 

for program guidance, implementation planning, accountability reporting, and resource allocation. These 

strategies will guide science and technology investment and workforce and human capital strategies. 

They will inform our partners regarding opportunities for communication, collaboration, and coordination.

The USGS has taken a significant step toward demonstrating that we are ready to collaborate on the most 

pressing natural science issues of our day and the future. I believe a leadership aligned to support these 

issue-based science directions and equipped with the guidance provided in these new science strategies 

in the capable hands of our scientists will create a new era for USGS of which we can all be proud.

Marcia McNutt 

 Director
iv

Contents

Foreword ........................................................................................................................................................iii

Mission and Vision.........................................................................................................................................1

Executive Summary.......................................................................................................................................1

Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................1

Core Strengths................................................................................................................................................4

Mandates and Authorizations .....................................................................................................................5

Goals for Energy and Mineral Resources Science..................................................................................6

Goal 1.—Understand Fundamental Earth Processes That Form Energy and Mineral 

Resources.................................................................................................................................6

Introduction...................................................................................................................................6

1–1. Geologic and Tectonic Framework Studies ....................................................................7

Major Questions..................................................................................................................7

Strategic Actions ................................................................................................................7

1–2. Evolution of Energy and Mineral Systems.......................................................................7

Major Questions..................................................................................................................9

Strategic Actions ................................................................................................................9

1–3. Frontier Studies..................................................................................................................10

Major Questions................................................................................................................13

Strategic Actions ..............................................................................................................13

Goal 2.—Understand the Environmental Behavior of Energy and Mineral Resources 

and Their Waste Products ...................................................................................................13

Introduction.................................................................................................................................13

Major Questions.........................................................................................................................14

Strategic Actions .......................................................................................................................14

2–1. Fundamental Studies ...............................................................................................16

2–2. Applied Investigations .............................................................................................16

2–3. Synthesis Activities..................................................................................................17

Goal 3.—Provide Inventories and Assessments of Energy and Mineral Resources..............17

Introduction.................................................................................................................................17

Energy 18

Major Questions.........................................................................................................................18

Strategic Actions .......................................................................................................................18

3–1. Undiscovered Geologically Based Energy Resources.......................................18

Minerals.......................................................................................................................................19

Major Questions.........................................................................................................................21

Strategic Actions .......................................................................................................................21

3–2. Discovered Nonfuel Mineral Resources ..............................................................21

3–3. Undiscovered Nonfuel Mineral Resources..........................................................21

Goal 4.—Understand the Effects of Energy and Mineral Development on Natural 

Resources...............................................................................................................................22

Introduction.................................................................................................................................22

Major Questions.........................................................................................................................25

Strategic Actions .......................................................................................................................25
v

4–1. Spatial Analysis of Energy and Mineral Resources Occurrence and 

Development ........................................................................................................25

4–2. Exploring Interdisciplinary Approaches for Assessing Effects of 

Energy and Mineral Resources Development................................................25

Goal 5.—Understand the Availability and Reliability of Energy and Mineral 

Resource Supplies ................................................................................................................26

Introduction.................................................................................................................................26

Major Questions.........................................................................................................................26

5–1. Emerging or Longer Term Issues Affecting Resource Availability...................26

5–2. Short-Term Fluctuations Affecting Reliability of Resource Supplies...............27

Strategic Actions .......................................................................................................................30

5–1. Emerging or Longer Term Issues Affecting Resource Availability...................30

5–2. Short-Term Fluctuations Affecting Reliability of Resource Supplies...............30

Energy and Minerals Linkages Across the U.S. Geological Survey....................................................31

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................34

Figures

1. Diagram and map showing the magnitude and distribution of mineral resource 

production activities across the Nation....................................................................................2

2. Map showing areas of historical oil and gas exploration and production in the 

conterminous United States through 2006 ...............................................................................3

3. Conceptual diagram that depicts a resource lifecycle for energy and minerals ..............4

4. Geologic model output showing a south-to-north cross section at present day 

and 300 million years ago and a three-dimensional model of thermal maturati

on using Woodford Shale transformation ratio .......................................................................8

5. Map showing average oil yield for the Mahogany Zone, Uinta and Piceance 

Basins in Utah and Colorado ....................................................................................................11

6. Map showing the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone and photographs showing 

nodules .........................................................................................................................................12

7. Photograph showing solar panels installed at the Denver Federal Center in 

Lakewood, Colorado...................................................................................................................15

8. Matrix showing where the U.S. Geological Survey provides assessment and 

information for energy resources and mineral resources by geographic region 

and resource category ..............................................................................................................17

9. Map showing the extent of the Marcellus assessment units within the 

Appalachian Basin geologic province ....................................................................................19

10. Photographs of the Lemhi Pass thorium district in Idaho and Montana...........................20

11. Photograph showing the Kanab North Mine, one of several breccia-pipe 

uranium mines in northern Arizona .........................................................................................23

12. Flow chart showing an example of an integrated assessment ..........................................23

13. Screen capture showing the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative 

integrated assessment Web interface for which the U.S. Geological Survey 

provided assessment data for southwestern Wyoming ......................................................24

14. Diagrams showing examples of materials flows...................................................................28

15. Map showing the locations of mines and mineral facilities in Japan ...............................29
vi

Tables

1. Summary of goals and actions for the U.S. Geological Survey energy and 

minerals science strategy...........................................................................................................5

2. Principal mandates and authorizations related to U.S. Geological Survey 

energy and minerals activities and their intersection with each of the five 

goals in the energy and minerals science strategy................................................................6

3. U.S. Geological Survey energy and minerals science strategy actions and 

intersections with other mission areas...................................................................................32

Highlights

The Advantages of Three-Dimensional Models and Visualization........................................................8

Oil Shale: Evaluating an Energy Resource and Its Extractive Effects.................................................11

Minerals in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone ......................................................................................12

Renewable Energy and Nonrenewable Mineral Resources................................................................15

Thorium: Why and Where?.........................................................................................................................20

Uranium in the Grand Canyon: A Case Study in Integrated Research and Assessment.................23

Integrated Assessment for Southwestern Wyoming.............................................................................24

Materials Flow Analysis: Illustrating Global Commodity Supply Vulnerabilities...............................27

Energy and Minerals Contributions to Disaster Response Following the 2011 Japan 

Earthquake and Tsunami...............................................................................................................29
U.S. Geological Survey Energy and Minerals Science 

Strategy

By Richard C. Ferrero, Jonathan J. Kolak, Donald J. Bills, Zachary H. Bowen, Daniel J. Cordier, 

Tanya J. Gallegos, James R. Hein, Karen D. Kelley, Philip H. Nelson, Vito F. Nuccio, Jeanine M. Schmidt, 

and Robert R. Seal

Mission and Vision

Reflected by and consistent with the 2010 realignment of 

the U.S. Geological Survey, the energy and mineral resources 

mission is to provide impartial science and information for 

understanding the occurrence and distribution of national 

and global energy and mineral resources that may contribute 

to supplies, the potential environmental and other effects 

stemming from resource use, and the global supply and flow 

of non-fuel mineral commodities. A more integrated, unified 

approach to energy and mineral resource issues will enhance 

the Nation’s ability to consider viable resource options and 

better make informed decisions.

Executive Summary

The economy, national security, and standard of living 

of the United States depend heavily on adequate and reliable supplies of energy and mineral resources. Based on 

current population and consumption trends, the Nation’s use 

of energy and minerals can be expected to grow, driving the 

demand for ever broader scientific understanding of resource 

formation, location, and availability. In addition, the increasing importance of environmental stewardship, human health, 

and sustainable growth place further emphasis on energy and 

mineral resources research and understanding. Collectively, 

these trends in resource demand and the interconnectedness 

among resources will lead to new challenges and, in turn, 

require cutting-edge science for the next generation of societal 

decisions.

The contributions of the U.S. Geological Survey to 

energy and minerals research are well established. Based on 

five interrelated goals, this plan establishes a comprehensive 

science strategy. It provides a structure that identifies the most 

critical aspects of energy and mineral resources for the coming 

decade.

• Goal 1.—Understand fundamental Earth processes that 

form energy and mineral resources.

• Goal 2.—Understand the environmental behavior of 

energy and mineral resources and their waste products.

• Goal 3.—Provide inventories and assessments of 

energy and mineral resources.

• Goal 4.—Understand the effects of energy and mineral 

development on natural resources.

• Goal 5.—Understand the availability and reliability of 

energy and mineral resource supplies.

Within each goal, multiple, scalable actions are identified. 

The level of specificity and complexity of these actions varies, consistent with the reality that even a modest refocus can 

yield large payoffs in the near term whereas more ambitious 

plans may take years to reach fruition. As such, prioritization 

of actions is largely dependent on policy direction, available 

resources, and the sequencing of prerequisite steps that will 

lead up to the most visionary directions. The science strategy 

stresses early planning and places an emphasis on interdisciplinary collaboration and leveraging of expertise across the 

U.S. Geological Survey.

Introduction

Energy and mineral resources are essential to society. 

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), as the Nation’s principal 

natural science agency, advances the science of energy and 

mineral resources and provides statistical information and 

analysis on the global flow of minerals and mineral materials. 

The Organic Act of 1879 (20 Stat. 394; 43 U.S.C. 31) defines 

the role of the USGS as “... the classification of the public 

lands and examination of the geological structure, mineral 

resources, and products of the national domain.” Understanding the science, quality, and spatial distribution of energy 
2 U.S. Geological Survey Energy and Minerals Science Strategy

and mineral resources has thus been a core function of the 

USGS since its inception. Today, the USGS is recognized by 

industry, nongovernmental organizations, and international, 

Federal, State, and local governments for its reliable, highquality energy and minerals science, information, fundamental 

research, and expertise. This plan describes the USGS role and 

suggests steps that can be taken in the next 10 years to provide 

the Nation with energy and minerals science and information on both current and emerging issues. Collectively, the 

understanding gained from these activities provides a basis 

for informing decision-making with respect to such issues as 

economic vitality, environmental health, national security, 

and responsible resource management and protection on U.S. 

Department of the Interior (DOI) and other lands.

The United States uses substantial amounts of energy and 

mineral resources each year. In 2011, industries that consumed 

processed mineral materials added about $2,230 billion to the 

U.S. gross domestic product (fig. 1A), and the Nation’s mines 

and quarries produced raw materials with an estimated value 

of $74 billion (U.S. Geological Survey, 2012, p. 5; fig. 1B). 

Domestic energy resource production activities also occur 

across the Nation (such as oil and gas production, fig. 2). In 

2010, the United States consumed 7 billion barrels of oil, 

24 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and 1 billion short tons 

of coal (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2011). To 

meet these needs, energy and (or) mineral resource production 

(extraction) occurs in every State, with significant additional 

amounts imported from other countries.

The United States faces challenges in meeting its current and future energy and minerals needs. These challenges 

range in scale from global competition for resources to local 

decisionmaking about the appropriate use of individual land 

parcels. Decisions on every scale may affect the availability of 

energy and minerals and have far-reaching economic, geopolitical, and social consequences. For example, the increasing 

demand for both traditional and emerging energy and mineral 

resources is driving exploration and production into geological 

settings for which there may be relatively little data available, 

such as in the Arctic, deeper in the Earth’s crust, and beneath 

deeper regions of the oceans, and which may pose considerable technical and engineering challenges or be co-located 

with sensitive environments or other natural resources of 

importance. At the same time, consideration of alternative 

sources of energy and minerals is increasing, which may 

involve mining of deposits of lower concentration, recovering resources from waste and recycling streams, and sourcing 

A. Total gross domestic product in the 

United States in 2011, $15,1000 billion

B. Value of nonfuel mineral production in the United States in 2011 (preliminary)

15%

Mineral production value, 

in billion dollars

>5.0

2.5–5.0 

1.0–2.4

0.5–0.9 

<0.5

Value added by major 

industries that consume 

processed mineral materials

EXPLANATION

Figure 1. Magnitude and distribution of mineral resource production activities across the Nation. A, Pie chart depicting the estimated 

value added to the U.S. gross domestic product by major industries that consume processed mineral materials; major consuming 

industries of processed mineral materials are construction, durable goods manufacturers, and some nondurable goods manufacturers. 

B, Map showing the [preliminary] value of nonfuel mineral production (raw materials from mining) in the United States in 2011. Data are 

from the U.S. Geological Survey (2012).
Introduction 3

EXPLANATION

Oil

Gas

Oil and gas

Dry or unknown

Figure 2. Areas of historical oil and gas exploration and production in the conterminous United States through 2006; from Biewick 

(2008).

from countries with political systems and environmental sensitivities dissimilar from our own. The USGS serves the national 

interest by providing impartial information across this range of 

scales and about alternatives, thereby enabling decisionmakers and society at large to make informed decisions and better 

understand the potential outcomes of those decisions.

An additional challenge facing the Nation is the need to 

balance the availability and reliability of energy and mineral 

supplies with other considerations, including the availability 

of other natural resources, the viability of energy and mineral 

development amidst changes in climate, natural hazards, and 

demand, and the need to prevent or mitigate environmental 

degradation (Gundersen and others, 2011). This challenge is 

especially noteworthy given the long-term nature of resource 

development and associated infrastructure and the comparable 

or longer recovery times stemming from any adverse effects. 

The concept of sustainability, defined as “development that 

meets the needs of the present without compromising the 

ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (United 

Nations World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987, p. 54), underpins many land-use and environmental policies that address this challenge. From the perspective 

of nonrenewable energy and mineral resources, sustainability 

focuses on the stewardship of lands and protection of the environment and on identification of alternative sources.

To provide society with the knowledge needed to 

consider these factors, there is growing recognition that it 

is incumbent on “earth scientists to redirect their scientific 

research, to assemble data that are usable in policy analysis and decisionmaking, and ultimately transmit their findings more clearly to policymakers and the public” (National 

Research Council, 1996, p. 5). The USGS conducts research 

and monitoring studies to address these challenges and provide 

a scientific foundation for decisionmaking with respect to sustainable resource use, protection, and adaptive management. 

In this strategy, we identified a set of overarching questions 

that drive the science needed to address energy and minerals 

resource use issues during the coming decade. All parts of 

this strategic plan are designed to reflect one or more of these 

challenges:

• How or where might we obtain the energy and mineral 

commodities to meet present and future needs?

• What economic, environmental, geopolitical, and 

health consequences must also be considered in both 

the short- and the long-term?

• How can decisions more effectively incorporate the 

scientific complexity and uncertainty associated with 

these issues?

• What science is needed to anticipate and respond to 

future challenges?
4 U.S. Geological Survey Energy and Minerals Science Strategy

Using these questions as a guide, we constructed five 

interdependent goals that collectively provide the needed 

scientific research, information, and analysis:

• Goal 1.—Understand fundamental Earth processes that 

form energy and mineral resources.

• Goal 2.—Understand the environmental behavior of 

energy and mineral resources and their waste products.

• Goal 3.—Provide inventories and assessments of 

energy and mineral resources.

• Goal 4.—Understand the effects of energy and mineral 

development on natural resources.

• Goal 5.—Understand the availability and reliability of 

energy and mineral resource supplies.

The overarching concept for these goals is a resource 

lifecycle for energy and minerals (fig. 3), which traces the flow 

of these resources from generation and occurrence through 

interaction with society and the environment and ultimate 

disposition and disposal.

Each goal addresses one or more stages of the resource 

lifecycle. Through targeted research, the first two goals expand 

our basic knowledge of the formation of energy and mineral 

deposits and their interaction with the atmosphere, biosphere, 

and hydrosphere. The next two goals build on this research 

foundation and develop additional science and information 

products. The final goal extends beyond current concerns to 

focus and deliver science on emerging issues and unanticipated events affecting energy and mineral resource supplies.

Together, these goals form a dynamic science strategy for 

advancing USGS science to a new level of understanding and 

effectiveness in the next 10 years (table 1). Each goal presents 

several specific “actions,” intended to fill the highest priority 

needs and address key gaps in data and understanding. Actions 

range from those that incrementally build on existing USGS 

capabilities and core strengths to new, ambitious efforts. In 

the majority of cases, successful achievement of these actions 

cannot be accomplished solely within the energy and minerals 

mission area but rather depends on collaboration and leveraging of expertise and capabilities across the USGS and among 

stakeholders and partners.

Core Strengths

As an agency without regulatory or resource stewardship 

responsibilities, the USGS is able to provide essential science 

products that complement the missions of other Federal agencies. The USGS performs research ranging from microscopic 

to global scales and collects and maintains long-term monitoring data that enable study of how systems change over time 

as well as facilitate construction of predictive models. Having 

an impartial, global perspective, the USGS can work across 

agency and jurisdictional boundaries to collect and interpret 

disparate information.

USGS scientists working on energy and minerals collectively have broad experience in energy and minerals research, 

resource assessment, environmental characterization, data collection, and analysis. A wide variety of customers and stakeholders, each with unique demands for information—from the 

Secretary of the Interior requesting scientific evaluation for 

decision support on uranium mining issues to resource evaluations for Congress, Federal agencies, and others—all rely on 

the vast breadth and quality of information USGS scientists 

provide, underscoring the importance of maintaining a robust 

foundation of scientific expertise.

Geologists, geophysicists, geochemists, physical scientists, and economists at science centers are conducting energy 

and minerals research and analysis in such areas as igneous 

and metamorphic petrology, isotopic and organic geochemistry, marine and economic geology, mineralogy, mineral commodity analysis and materials flow studies, sedimentology, 

sequence stratigraphy, and tectonics and structural geology. 

This research is applied to the understanding and assessment 

of fossil fuels and selected nonhydrocarbon energy sources 

and mineral deposits. Specific examples of energy and minerals research include development of new assessment methodologies; geochemical and mineralogical analyses; geophysical 

data acquisition and interpretation; minerals information 

collection, synthesis, and delivery, including development and 

maintenance of online databases; and dissemination, education, and outreach. In addition, working across the USGS, 

scientists conduct research on the potential environmental and 

Figure 3. Conceptual diagram that depicts a resource lifecycle 

for energy and minerals. Society faces key questions within 

each stage of the resource lifecycle. Scientific understanding is 

essential to providing information for these decisions.

Geologic setting

and source

Exploration

Use

Processing

Extraction

Recycling

and disposal
Mandates and Authorizations 5

human health effects of energy and mineral resource utilization. With a solid foundation in basic research and a recognized flexibility to apply that understanding to contemporary 

issues, the USGS is well positioned to provide cutting-edge 

energy and mineral resources and environmental research on 

current and future issues.

Mandates and Authorizations

The USGS was established on March 3, 1879, under the 

Organic Act of March 3, 1879 (20 Stat. 394; 43 U.S.C. 31), 

for “classification of the public lands, and examination of the 

geological structure, mineral resources, and products of the 

national domain.” This legislation stemmed from a report of 

the National Academy of Sciences, which had been tasked by 

Congress in June 1878 to provide a plan to secure the most 

cost-efficient surveying of the territories of the United States. 

The USGS component stemmed from the need to survey the 

mineral and water resources of the United States. The USGS 

responsibility and core capabilities for energy and minerals 

research and information have evolved considerably since the 

original legislation as the Nation’s information and resource 

needs have increased. Today, the United States is the world’s 

largest user of energy and mineral commodities. Further, 

with globalization and international demand for energy and 

minerals, the USGS works outside the borders of the United 

States as well.

Numerous congressional mandates and authorizations 

and presidential proclamations that required action by the 

USGS relative to energy and mineral resources have been 

enacted (table 2). Many of these mandates and authorizations 

recognize, support, and encourage research and assessments 

developed by the USGS and around which the current USGS 

workforce is formed. For example, the Energy Independence 

and Security Act of 2007 authorized the USGS to conduct 

storage capacity assessments of carbon dioxide (CO2

) for the 

purposes of evaluating geologic sequestration potential. This 

authorization is a recognition of USGS experience in conducting oil and gas resource assessments and established expertise 

in Earth sciences, methodologies, and unbiased assessments.

The USGS also operates under a number of memorandums of understanding (MOU) and interagency agreements 

that specify roles and responsibilities. Based on an MOU that 

provided the guidelines for coordinating geoscience studies 

among USGS, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 

and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), the USGS was deemed 

responsible for providing resource assessments and inventories, identifying environmental attributes and hazards associated with resources, and conducting studies and research on 

energy and mineral resources and reserves for the USFS.

Table 1. Summary of goals and actions for the U.S. Geological Survey energy and minerals science strategy.

Focus area Actions

Goal 1: Understand fundamental earth processes that form energy and mineral resources

1–1 Geologic and tectonic framework studies 1–1a; 1–1b; 1–1c

1–2 Evolution of energy and mineral systems 1–2a; 1–2b; 1–2c; 1–2d; 1–2e

1–3 Frontier studies 1–3a; 1–3b; 1–3c

Goal 2: Understand the environmental behavior of energy and mineral resources and their waste products

2–1 Fundamental studies 2–1a; 2–1b; 2–1c

2–2 Applied investigations 2–2a; 2–2b; 2–2c; 2–2d

2–3 Synthesis activities 2–3a; 2–3b

Goal 3: provide inventories and assessments of energy and mineral resources

3–1 Undiscovered geologically based energy resources 3–1a; 3–1b

3–2 Discovered nonfuel mineral resources 3–2a; 3–2b; 3-2c; 3-2d; 3-2e

3–3 Undiscovered nonfuel mineral resources 3–3a; 3–3b

Goal 4: Understand the effects of energy and mineral development on natural resources

4–1 Spatial analysis of energy and mineral resource occurrence and development 4–1a; 4-1b; 4-1c

4–2 Exploration of interdisciplinary approaches 4–2a; 4–2b; 4-2c; 4-2d; 4-2e; 4-2f

Goal 5: Understand the availability and reliability of energy and mineral resource supplies

5–1 Emerging or longer term issues affecting resource availability 5–1a; 5–1b; 5-1c; 5-1d; 5-1e

5–2 Short-term fluctuations affecting reliability of resource supplies 5–2a; 5–2b
6 U.S. Geological Survey Energy and Minerals Science Strategy

Goals for Energy and Mineral 

Resources Science

Goal 1.—Understand Fundamental Earth 

Processes That Form Energy and Mineral 

Resources

Introduction

From the Earth’s crust, we extract the energy and mineral 

resources that are needed for use in our daily lives and that 

support our economy and national security. Comprehensive 

studies of the Earth’s fundamental processes are necessary to 

understand the formation and distribution of energy and mineral resources from the surface of the Earth to depths of many 

kilometers. To achieve this understanding, future research 

efforts under goal 1 are grouped into three areas:

• Geologic and tectonic framework studies.

• The evolution of energy and mineral systems.

• New research in frontier areas.

The following sections present key scientific questions for 

each of these three areas and strategic actions to address these 

questions. These targeted research actions, which illuminate 

the conditions under which reservoirs and deposits form and 

where they occur, also lead to clearer identification of those 

aspects of formation and accumulation that may cause problems when exposed at the Earth surface or extracted (goal 2) 

and allow clearer delineation of the amount, location, and 

character of resources potentially available (goal 3).

Table 2. Principal mandates and authorizations related to U.S. Geological Survey energy and minerals activities and their intersection 

with each of the five goals in the energy and minerals science strategy.

Legislation or presidential action providing authority Goal 1 Goal 2 Goal 3 Goal 4 Goal 5

Organic Act of 1879 * * * * *

Strategic and Critical Materials Stock Piling Act of 1946 † † †

Department of Agriculture Organic Act of 1956 † †

Wilderness Act of 1964 * *

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 **   ** 

Mining and Minerals Policy Act of 1970 † † †

Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 ** **

Geothermal Energy Research, Development, and Demonstration Act of 1974 * *

Federal Coal Leasing Amendments Act of 1976 * *

Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 * *

National Materials and Minerals Policy, Research, and Development Act of 1980 * * * * *

Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 * *

Deep Seabed Hard Minerals Resources Act of 1980 ** **

Nuclear Waste Repository Act of 1982 ‡ ‡

Geothermal Steam Act Amendments of 1988 * *

Executive Order 12656—Assignment of Emergency Preparedness Responsibilities †

Energy Policy Act of 1992 *

[Transfer of functions from U.S Bureau of Mines, 1996 (Public Law 104–3019)] * * *

Energy Policy and Conservation Act Amendments of 2000 * *

Methane Hydrate Research and Development Act of 2000 *

Energy Policy Act of 2005 * * *

Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 * *

Executive Order 13603—National Defense Resources Preparedness †

*

Specifically mentions the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and (or) the U.S. Bureau of Mines, whose functions were partially transferred to the USGS in 

1996.

**Does not specifically mention the USGS; responsibility for tasks is derived from the Organic Act of March 3, 1879.

†

Authority is to Secretary of the Interior, not specifically to the USGS.

‡

The USGS is to be consulted by the U.S. Department of Energy.
Goals for Energy and Mineral Resources Science 7

1–1. Geologic and Tectonic Framework Studies

Regional-scale geologic studies integrate the tectonic 

and thermal evolution of basement and basin terranes, the 

occurrence and flow of subsurface fluids, and the fluid-rock 

interactions. Regional-scale geologic studies provide the geologic framework that will improve our understanding of the 

formation of oil and gas accumulations and mineral deposits 

at smaller spatial scales. Outcomes from these studies provide the scientific basis and guidelines for energy and mineral 

resource mapping and assessments (goal 3). The research 

activities on geologic processes expressed here and the assessment research activities considered in goal 3 are strongly 

interrelated because the outcomes of geologic research may 

alter assessment methodology, and questions uncovered during 

assessment work may spawn new geologic research activities.

Regional-scale geologic framework studies at the USGS 

have been limited by incomplete spatial coverage of seismic 

reflection, gravity, and magnetic data, which provide images 

of the subsurface and are a prerequisite to conducting structural analyses at the regional scale. With a few important 

exceptions, the seismic reflection data that the USGS has 

acquired are sparse and outdated and do not reflect the technological improvements of the past 30 years. Existing national 

gravity and magnetic datasets are composites of surveys 

acquired over many years at different scales of spatial coverage with consequent gaps in coverage. For example, in the oil 

and gas province of the Williston Basin in the northern Great 

Plains, which hosts one of the largest oil accumulations in 

the conterminous United States, no regional seismic lines are 

available for study, and widely spaced magnetic and gravity 

coverage data were acquired more than 40 years ago. Currently, new data are acquired by topical studies without a plan 

of systematic acquisition. While the main barrier to acquisition 

is cost (seismic data are usually purchased from vendors; augmentation of magnetic and gravity data requires new surveys), 

other avenues could be pursued to acquire data. Having access 

to a suite of deep-penetrating, crustal-scale geophysical data 

would improve views of the subsurface, and research based 

on these data will better reflect the “state-of-the-art” technologies than current efforts. Merging this new information with 

stratigraphic, structural, and other geophysical studies would 

support more accurate basin histories and better understanding 

of the formation of energy and mineral deposits.

The high data densities produced by studies on selected 

areas require new means of integrating multidisciplinary 

datasets. Interpretations of different datasets from separate 

analyses can produce incompatible results when viewed 

together. Thus, the attainment of consistent geological results 

benefits from mutual usage of a shared interpretive platform. 

Collaborative work is done more easily when viewed on 

interactive three-dimensional (3D) systems that provide the 

ability to slice and section 3D models at varying elevations 

and azimuths, complementing and gradually superseding 

the traditional presentations of selected map and cross sections (highlight 1). Incorporating a wide range of subsurface 

information, 3D models facilitate improved understanding of 

geologic processes. Such software systems will continue to 

evolve and provide improved capability for multidisciplinary 

collaboration.

Major Questions

• How does the thermal, magmatic, tectonic, and fluidflow history of the Earth lead to the formation and later 

modification of energy and mineral deposits?

• What enhancements to geophysical and geochemical 

data are required to support crustal- and deposit-scale 

geological interpretations?

• How can multidisciplinary studies of a region or terrane be consistently interpreted and presented to users?

Strategic Actions

• Action 1–1a.—Map regional-scale geologic features 

that control the timing and location of energy and 

mineral resources. Identify key areas for regional-scale 

structural and geologic mapping, and use geophysical, geochemical, and isotopic studies to determine 

areas with resource potential. This action will result 

in improved geologic models, maps, and cross sections, revealing those areas where energy and mineral 

resources are most likely to be found in the United 

States.

• Action 1–1b.—Acquire geophysical datasets at the 

regional scale. Such an effort would require a systematic, multiyear program to facilitate the acquisition of 

seismic data in sedimentary basins and upgrade the 

existing national magnetic and gravity datasets. The 

increased wealth of high-quality geophysical images 

of the Earth’s crust will extend and enhance geological 

interpretations.

• Action 1–1c.—Apply 3D models to areas of high 

potential for energy and mineral resources, incorporating geologic mapping, thermotectonic, fluid-flow, and 

geophysical interpretations. Such models will ensure 

compatibility of data and interpretations from multiple 

disciplines and broaden the user base because geological and geophysical interpretations may become more 

readily available in a user-friendly format.

1–2. Evolution of Energy and Mineral Systems

Energy and mineral resources are usually, but not always, 

located in different geologic settings. The following background paragraphs, questions, and actions sequentially address 

research issues dealing with energy systems, mineral systems, 

and areas where energy and mineral systems are coupled.
8 U.S. Geological Survey Energy and Minerals Science Strategy

The Advantages of Three-Dimensional Models and Visualization

Traditional U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) geoscience 

products have been generated and distributed primarily 

through the medium of two-dimensional reports, maps, 

and cross-sections, limiting the ability to characterize and 

understand three-dimensional (3D) systems and how they 

change over time (4D). And yet, the intrinsic 3D and 4D 

nature of the interpreted results increases the need for the 

USGS to generate and distribute scientific information using 

3D and 4D visualization frameworks. In addition, Web-based 

delivery in 3D and 4D frameworks could open a new era in 

USGS publications.

Today, USGS scientists use 3D and 4D tools to visualize 

and interpret geologic information and to check the data, 

interpretations, and models (Jacobsen and others, 2011). 3D 

and 4D visualization can be a powerful quality control tool in 

the analysis of large, multidimensional datasets. Examples 

of geologic mapping in 3D include aquifer characterization, the interpretation of geophysical data with geological 

constraints, subsurface characterization of mineral systems, 

and oil and gas investigations. For example, a 3D geologic 

model served as input to a 4D computation of heating and 

oil generation during subsidence of the Anadarko Basin of 

Oklahoma (fig. 4). The transformation of kerogen to oil was 

computed as a function of geologic time and displayed on 

cross sections (at 300 million years ago (Ma) and 0 Ma). The 

transformation ratio was also color-contoured on the 3D 

surface of the source rock (Woodford Shale). Other useful 

displays (not depicted in figure 4) reveal the migration of oil 

and gas at different geologic times from the deep basin to 

reservoirs on the flanks of the basin.

2,000

0

0

0

50 100 150 200 250 300 350

-2,000

-4,000

-6,000

-8,000

-10,000

-12,000

-14,000

-10,000

S Distance, in kilometers N

Present

300 million years ago

Elevation, in meters

OK KS

OK KS

OKTX CO

A’

A’

A

A

A A’

KS

EXPLANATION

Transformation rate, in percent

0.1–0.9

1–9

10–24

25–49

50–74

95–98

75–94

99–100

Figure 4. Geologic model output showing a south-to-north cross section (A–A′) at (A) present day and (B) 300 million years ago 

and (C) a three-dimensional (3D) model of thermal maturation using Woodford Shale transformation ratio. Woodford Shale in the 

Anadarko Basin in Oklahoma is the source of much of the oil and gas in the basin. Yellow and pink dots are approximate locations 

of the Woodford Shale and Thirteen Finger limestone. Elevation is relative to sea level, and vertical and lateral scales are equivalent for the cross sections. The black line in the 3D model shows the location of the cross-section A–A′. Map image is transformation ratio on the Woodford Shale layer at present day and at 10 times vertical exaggeration. Modified from Higley (2011, fig. 8).

Highlight 1
Goals for Energy and Mineral Resources Science 9

An exploitable petroleum (oil, natural gas, and natural 

gas liquids) system encompasses the source rock, the rocks 

adjacent to source rocks, migration pathways, and conventional reservoirs. Source rocks that are the locus of petroleum 

generation may also house developable resources (shale 

gas and shale oil). Rocks adjacent to source rocks (such as 

found in tight gas systems), formerly not developed, are now 

routinely exploited in the conterminous United States. Thus, 

source rocks and tight rocks are two types of continuous 

petroleum systems supplying a rapidly expanding fraction of 

hydrocarbons, especially gas. Fluid migration pathways and 

charge mechanisms in these geologic settings continue to be 

elusive, poorly understood, and little studied. Despite advancements in seismic and well-logging technologies, the productivity of continuous petroleum systems is not readily predictable 

and must often be determined empirically. In contrast to the 

poorly understood nature of source rocks and tight rocks, the 

principles governing the occurrence of conventional (buoyant) 

oil and gas reservoirs are well understood and are not considered further here.

Energy resources currently contributing to the U.S energy 

mix (for example, oil, gas, coal, coalbed methane) are fairly 

well understood in terms of their geologic formation and 

occurrence. For these resources, we identify research priorities 

pertaining to environmental effects (goal 2) and assessments 

(goal 3). Other resources, such as oil shale, gas hydrates (also 

referred to as methane hydrates), and geothermal energy, 

which currently contribute little (or not at all) to the U.S. 

energy mix, are not well understood. Because these resources 

have the potential to make significant contributions to the 

energy mix in the future, we further identify research activities 

to address the many geologic and extractive questions pertaining to these emerging resources.

The concept of a mineral system is analogous to that of 

a petroleum system, but mineral systems are found in a wider 

range of rock types and structural settings. The formation of 

an ore deposit requires a source of metals, a mode of transport 

(often a hydrothermal fluid, but also magmatic, weathering, or 

sedimentary processes), and a site of deposition or accumulation where metals are concentrated to an extent that allows 

economically viable extraction. In a broad sense, the mineral 

system includes geologic and geodynamic factors, at many 

scales, that control the inception, evolution, and preservation 

of ore deposits. Mineral systems must be understood in their 

broadest possible context in order to support accurate resource 

assessments on regional, national, and global scales. For 

example, understanding the role of magmatic arcs in the geologic evolution of North America is critical for understanding 

the genesis and localization of hydrothermal and epithermal 

mineral deposits. Similarly, understanding the evolution of 

major sedimentary basins, including configuration, extent, and 

processes related to evolution, is critical for understanding the 

ore deposits associated with them. Such focus on the evolution 

of geologic entities and mineral systems on a geologic-systemscale will lead to more effective ore deposit models and 

resource assessments. The current state of knowledge varies 

considerably among deposit types; some deposit types that are 

becoming important owing to emerging national demand, such 

as platinum group elements, rare earth elements (REEs), and 

lithium, are not well understood, and focused research would 

benefit from deposit-scale studies. Other mineral systems, 

such as porphyry copper deposits, are well understood in 

terms of their origin and evolution, and future research would 

benefit from a broader approach, such as understanding the 

distribution and geologic evolution of magmatic arcs in which 

porphyry deposits form.

Energy and mineral systems are also linked in some 

cases. Examples are sedimentary basins that contain petroleum accumulations and base metal deposits, such as northern 

Alaska and the Appalachian Basin. Other examples include 

gold deposits associated with graphite and uranium enrichment in black shales and coals. Although the spatial associations of organic matter and petroleum on the one hand and 

specific mineral deposits on the other are well documented, 

the possible overlapping processes or genetic associations are 

not understood. These relationships may be passive (where 

petroleum and ore fluids use the same plumbing system but 

otherwise have no genetic association) or dependent (where 

organic matter or petroleum establishes proper conditions for 

ore deposition and (or) serves as a necessary component for 

transport of metals).

Major Questions

• What are the most important factors affecting the 

development of self-sourced and low-permeability 

(“tight”) petroleum systems, and how can this knowledge be applied to ongoing energy assessment needs?

• What areas of research will lead to advances in the 

usage of underutilized and high-priority mineral and 

energy sources?

• What are the primary controls on the timing and location of ore deposits, and in particular what are the 

factors that lead to formation of deposits of scarce 

commodities?

• What is the genetic association, if any, between petroleum systems and certain types of mineral deposits?

Strategic Actions

• Action 1–2a.—Investigate the geologic and geochemical factors regarding the genesis, evolution, and 

productivity of source rocks and low-permeability 

reservoirs (shale gas, shale oil, and tight gas). The 

improved understanding of the systematics of selfsourced and low-permeability systems can be used to 

improve resource assessments.
10 U.S. Geological Survey Energy and Minerals Science Strategy

• Action 1–2b.—Conduct research on emerging energy 

resources to address geologic and extractive questions. In particular, studies on the chemistry of oil 

shale (highlight 2) and the conditions under which gas 

hydrates accumulate would be useful.

• Action 1–2c.—Conduct deposit-scale studies of 

selected types of high-priority commodities. Examples 

include commodities, such as lithium and REEs, for 

which relatively little is currently known about the 

genetic factors that control the distribution of mineralization and the physicochemical processes leading 

to deposition. The genetic models that are generated 

by such studies will characterize the geologic setting 

and abundance of important materials on land and on 

the sea floor and aid in assessments of such resources 

(goal 3).

• Action 1–2d.—Determine broad-scale controls on the 

formation and preservation of mineral systems. These 

studies would target systems that are well understood 

in terms of how they form, such as porphyry copper 

deposits.

• Action 1–2e.—Investigate the processes that result in 

some sedimentary basins hosting both petroleum and 

ore systems, emphasizing relationships between the 

localization of hydrocarbons and metals occurrences.

1–3. Frontier Studies

Many of the mineral resources in the United States, at 

least those exposed at the surface, have been identified and 

many are being exploited. However, frontier geographic areas, 

such as the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ; highlight 3) and 

Alaska are largely unexplored, and many areas of the United 

States may contain resources that are not exposed at the 

surface. Such areas require novel or “frontier” approaches or 

methods for exploring and assessing the potential of undiscovered resources.

Exclusive Economic Zone.—The mineral potential of the 

vast area of the EEZ is little known. Research in the underexplored EEZ is needed because the marine deposits of the 

area host a wide variety of rare metals and REEs, which are 

essential to emerging, green, and high-technology applications. Fundamental research on processes instrumental in 

concentrating metals into ore deposits in the deep-ocean can 

be carried out while the type and distribution of the deposits are being surveyed. These research results could provide 

a framework to support future assessments of deep-ocean 

mineral potential. Collaborative work with USGS coastal and 

marine scientists, other Federal agencies, university scientists, 

and oceanographic institutions will improve the quality and 

utility of these studies.

Beyond the EEZ is the Extended Continental Shelf 

(ECS), as defined by the United Nations Convention on the 

Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) (United Nations, 1982). The 

ECS can be established by coastal nations based on specific 

geologic and geomorphologic criteria. The potential ECS 

of the United States could significantly increase the size of 

the already expansive EEZ, especially north of Alaska in 

the Arctic Ocean (for example, in the Beaufort Sea and the 

Canada Basin). In this area, the ECS may double the area of 

the present EEZ, placing the Nation’s seaward resource jurisdictional boundary about 1,000 kilometers (km) north of the 

Alaskan coast. The ECS of arctic Alaska is a poorly understood tectonic region for which fundamental crustal geological questions must be resolved for both territorial resolution 

and resource delineation. International collaborative studies 

can potentially optimize research on the geologic framework 

and the endowment of energy and mineral resources, which 

are currently unknown but likely to include oil and gas, gas 

hydrate, and rare and critical metals.

Alaska.—Similar to the ECS of arctic Alaska, some 

landward portions of Alaska are still relatively unexplored, 

with world-class mineral deposits still being discovered at the 

surface. Alaska contains vast resources of coal and other fossil fuels, significant potential for geothermal energy, some of 

the world’s largest zinc, copper, and gold deposits, as well as 

deposits of high-demand mineral commodities, such as REEs, 

indium, and tin. In general, Alaska has the potential to supply 

staple commodities that will be needed to maintain and grow 

the national infrastructure for many years to come. Alaskan 

baseline geoscience data are incomplete and of lower resolution, are available in smaller quantities, and are not as recent 

as corresponding data for the conterminous United States. 

The upgrading, updating, and maintaining of geoscience base 

data for Alaska are important for supporting USGS efforts to 

conduct energy and mineral resources assessments. Research 

on the spatial occurrence, geologic settings, structural and 

lithologic controls, and processes of formation for geothermal 

energy, heavy oil, shale gas, coalbed methane, and mineral 

deposit types that occur within Alaska will help evaluate 

the State’s potential for nontraditional energy supplies and 

commodities.

Concealed resources.—Most of the conterminous United 

States has been effectively explored on the surface for the 

presence of mineral resources. Undiscovered resources lie 

beneath cover (rocks, colluvium and alluvium, and water) 

that conceals a resource from recognition. One of the key 

challenges and opportunities the USGS faces in the future is 

assessing resources under cover and in deep settings (more 

than 1 km). Recent efforts by the USGS, industry, and academia have been initiated to develop methods for exploring 

beneath cover and to develop geologic frameworks (goal 1–1) 

that incorporate source, transport, and trap mechanisms to predict where deposits formed and where they should be today. 

In addition, there is work underway to develop better and 

more powerful deep-penetrating geochemical and geophysical 

methods and technology to help visualize those targets. However, there is no coherent protocol for estimating the possibility or probability of undiscovered resources beneath cover. 
Goals for Energy and Mineral Resources Science 11

Oil Shale: Evaluating an Energy Resource and Its Extractive Effects

Oil shale potentially can constitute a very large untapped oil 

resource. Decades of field work by U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS) geologists determined that the Green River Formation, which hosts the kerogen-rich shales, was deposited 

in a single large lake that covered the Piceance and Uinta 

Basins and the intervening Douglas Creek arch and that 

many rich and lean oil shale zones could be traced between 

the two basins. Combined with assay data, the correlation 

work was vital in establishing estimates of the total in-place 

oil shale resources, recently assessed by the USGS to be 

1.5 trillion barrels of oil in the Piceance Basin and 1.3 trillion 

barrels in the Uinta Basin (fig. 5). 

If the solid kerogen is to be converted into liquid oil, the 

rock must be heated to between 350 degrees Celsius (°C) 

and 500°C. To achieve a high enough temperature, the rock 

must either be mined and retorted or else heated electrically 

in the subsurface with the oil recovered from wells. Environmental issues include significant amounts of water for 

mining and retorting, surface disturbance (either for mining 

or for wells required for in-situ conversion), greenhouse 

gas emissions generated during retorting, the disposal 

and reclamation of spent solids if mining and retorting is 

employed, and the migration of groundwater contaminated 

with organic and metallic compounds if in-situ conversion 

is utilized. Laboratory research is underway at the USGS to 

document the chemistry of waste products. A major concern 

is the presence of metals, such as arsenic and mercury, and 

volatile and dissolved organic compounds.

Figure 5. Average oil yield for the Mahogany Zone, Uinta and Piceance Basins in Utah and Colorado. Oil yield (in gallons per 

short ton) is calculated from Fischer assay, formation thickness, and areal extent. Data are from U.S. Geological Survey Oil Shale 

Assessment Team (2010a,b).

RIO BLANCO

GARFIELD

MOFFAT

SUMMIT

UINTAH

UTAH

CARBON

WASATCH

DUCHESNE

MESA

DELTA

MONTROSE

EMERY

GRAND

§ ̈¦70

§ ̈¦70

£¤191

£¤325 £¤6

£¤40

£¤50

£¤191

£¤40 £¤87

£¤13

£¤6

£¤64

£¤191

Grand Junction

Fruita Fruita

Delta Delta

Battlement Mesa Battlement Mesa

Vernal Vernal

Roosevelt Roosevelt

Rifle Rifle

Price Price

Moab Moab

111°00' 110°00' 109°00' 108°00'

40°00'

39°00'

EXPLANATION

Mahogany ledge outcrop

Base of Parachute Creek Member

Mahogany zone—Average oil yield in gallons per ton

≤3

3.1 to 6

6.1 to 9

9.1 to 12

12.1 to 15

15.1 to 18

18.1 to 21

21.1 to 24

24.1 to 27

27.1 to 30

30.1 to 33

33.1 to 36

MAP LOCATION

UTAH COLORADO

0 10 20 5 MILES

0 10 20 5 KILOMETERS

UTAH COLORADO

Highlight 2
12 U.S. Geological Survey Energy and Minerals Science Strategy

substantial parts of the EEZ. The knowledge base of the 

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) combined with published 

and unpublished databases and collections of new data 

can be used for resource and environmental evaluation and 

development of deposit models. USGS resource assessment 

techniques developed for land-based deposits may have 

applications for offshore deposits once sufficient relevant 

data for the EEZ have been collected on research cruises 

specifically designed to study mineral deposits.

Minerals in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone

The U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) comprises all 

marine areas within 200 nautical miles of the nearest U.S. 

land, including Pacific islands of U.S. affiliation, a total area 

approximately 20 percent greater than the entire U.S. land 

area (fig. 6). The United States has sovereign rights for the 

purpose of exploring, exploiting, conserving, and managing 

natural resources in the EEZ. These resources include deepocean strategic and critical minerals essential for U.S. security and economic growth, especially in high-technology and 

green applications.

Deposit types that have promising resource potential 

are sea floor massive sulfides, ferromanganese crusts, 

manganese nodules, and phosphorite. Significantly, 

some of these deep-ocean mineral deposits have high 

concentrations of rare earth elements, precious metals, 

base metals, and many other resources, but the resource 

potential of these deposits is yet to be determined. In 

fact, reconnaissance minerals data do not exist for 

Figure 6. A, The U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ; dark 

blue shaded areas); from U.S. 

Commission on Ocean Policy 

(2004). The area of the U.S. EEZ 

could increase once data are 

collected that address criteria 

in the Law of the Sea Convention defining the Extended 

Continental Shelf (ECS), 

especially in the Arctic Ocean 

north of Alaska, where the 

U.S. EEZ could double in size. 

B, Clockwise from upper left: 

13.6-centimeter (cm) diameter 

nodule from Marshall Island in 

the EEZ; three abyssal nodules, 

each 3 cm in diameter, from 

the Clarion-Clipperton prime 

nodule zone (international 

waters); cross-section of nodule from the Blake Plateau off 

the coast of Florida, Georgia, 

North Carolina, and South 

Carolina; diagenetic nodules 

in a box core from the Peru 

Basin; dense concentration of 

nodules rich in nickel, copper, 

lithium, and molybdenum from 

the Johnston Atoll EEZ, an area 

about 4 meters (m) by 3 m.

B

Hawaiian

Islands

Puerto Rico and the

U.S. Virgin Islands

Navassa Island Johnston Atoll

Midway

Islands

Howland Island

Baker Island

American

Samoa

Wake

Island

Guam

Northern

Mariana

Islands

Jarvis Island

Palmyra Atoll

Kingman Reef

Alaska

United States

U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone

Great Lakes

EXPLANATION

A

Highlight 3
Goals for Energy and Mineral Resources Science 13

Application of new methods and protocols for covered regions 

will give the USGS the ability to make more objective, repeatable, and reliable assessments of undiscovered resources. The 

identification of covered mineral resources, particularly in the 

western United States, also has important effects on environmental and hydrologic studies.

Major Questions

• What are the dominant processes that result in a concentration of metals in the deep ocean, and what are 

the geological, geochemical, and geophysical characteristics that distinguish these deposits?

• What are the geologic data needs in Alaska and the 

Arctic?

• What are the processes that enhance the surface expression of subsurface resources, and what are the geological, geochemical, biological, and geophysical characteristics that can be used to assess concealed resources?

Strategic Actions

• Action 1–3a.—Promote the collection of the geological, geophysical, and geochemical data within the U.S. 

EEZ. These data are needed to begin evaluation of the 

types and distribution of deep-ocean mineral deposits within the U.S. EEZ and globally. This effort will 

require collaborations with coastal and marine programs, oceanographic institutions, and other government agencies, such as the Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management (BOEM), on relevant oceanographic, 

geological, and geochemical process research.

• Action 1–3b.—Expand collection and evaluation of 

geological, geophysical, and geochemical field data for 

energy and minerals resources in Alaska and the Arctic 

offshore. Prioritize regions in Alaska in which significant upgrades in base data, satellite imagery (including 

multispectral and hyperspectral remote sensing data 

such as Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and 

Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) and Hyperion Imaging Spectrometer), and geophysical, geochemical, and 

geologic maps are required. This activity would benefit 

from coordination with the State of Alaska and other 

government agencies, the academic community, and 

industry.

• Action 1–3c.—Construct geologic frameworks for 

concealed deposits. These frameworks would be based 

on source, transport, and trap mechanisms to predict 

where deposits are formed, where they occur today, 

and what features can be detected at the surface. The 

frameworks will enable development of new methods 

for predicting terranes with potential for concealed 

resources and incorporate these into assessments of 

undiscovered resources.

Goal 2.—Understand the Environmental 

Behavior of Energy and Mineral Resources and 

Their Waste Products

Introduction

The research challenges associated with sustainability of 

energy and minerals resources and the environment are woven 

together in a complex tapestry that spans the entire lifecycle of 

resource development from formation and occurrence through 

exploration, discovery, permitting, construction, and operation 

to closure and beyond. A comprehensive understanding of the 

interactions between energy and mineral resources and environmental and biological receptors will enable the resource 

industries to identify efficient and cost-effective means of 

mitigating adverse environmental effects; land-use managers 

and regulators to insure proper stewardship and protection 

of the environment; and citizens to be educated about risks 

associated with resource extraction and benefits derived from 

these resources. This research will provide a basic scientific 

foundation needed to analyze and forecast the total benefits 

and costs of energy and mineral resources, sometimes referred 

to as a “full cost accounting,” with the aim of facilitating 

scientifically informed decisionmaking for all stakeholders 

for the sustainable development of conventional, emerging, 

and frontier nonrenewable resources and renewable energy 

systems. Because of the interdisciplinary nature of environmental research related to energy and mineral resources, future 

success will necessarily benefit from partnerships within the 

USGS and with numerous external collaborators. These collaborations will build on expertise from the respective mission 

areas within USGS and incorporate partner strengths as well. 

Global economic growth will maintain the demand for those 

commodities that have traditionally formed the staples of society, including aluminum, coal, copper, gas, gold, iron, lead, 

silver, uranium, and zinc. Continued production and possible 

exhaustion of existing energy and mineral reserves will likely 

lead to exploration in less accessible geologic environments, 

such as deeper in the Earth’s crust and offshore, production 

of larger deposits of lower grade, and technological advances 

in resource recovery methods that lead to the exploitation of 

energy and mineral resources from nontraditional sources. 

Collectively, these future trends in resource production will 

lead to a host of new environmental challenges requiring cutting edge scientific insights to solve in addition to the existing, 

unsolved environmental challenges associated with traditional 

resource recovery and use. For example, use of domestic coal 

supplies influences the production of greenhouse, mercury, 

nitrogen, and sulfur gas emissions, providing an impetus to 

understanding how decisions made during exploration are 

linked to the ultimate environmental effects. Additionally, 

most conventional production will provide significant challenges in managing the quantity and quality of water associated with resource development.
14 U.S. Geological Survey Energy and Minerals Science Strategy

Increased demand for emerging commodities (such as 

REEs used in permanent magnets for wind turbines and hybrid 

car batteries; lithium used in batteries for hybrid cars and other 

uses; cadmium, gallium, indium, and tellurium used in solar 

cells; PGMs used in fuel cells; and potash and phosphate in 

mineral fertilizers needed for biofuel production) will present 

additional unique environmental challenges and opportunities. These commodities fall into two main categories: those 

that are the primary target of mineral production, such as 

most REEs, lithium, PGMs, potash, and phosphate; and those 

that are produced as byproducts of other commodities, such 

as gallium, indium, cadmium, tellurium, and some REEs 

(highlight 4). In many cases, these commodities are derived 

from geologically and mineralogically unique deposit types 

that require specialized ore-processing techniques to extract 

the metals, which result in unconventional wastes. Byproducts associated with other commodities could have significant 

resource production potential from waste material found at 

existing or abandoned mines.

As the United States plans its energy and minerals future, 

it must be cognizant that past extraction and development of 

energy and mineral resources historically have led to adverse 

environmental effects. Research at legacy sites can not only 

provide alternative sources of resources through reprocessing of waste streams or beneficial reuse but can also provide 

opportunities to understand long-term biogeochemical processes influencing environmental signatures under worst-casescenario conditions that, in turn, could potentially provide 

insights into the naturally occurring or anthropogenic interactions with air, land, and water resources; provide insight into 

complex natural exposure routes to surrounding ecosystems 

and humans; and provide information needed for mitigation 

and remediation.

To contribute to the economic and environmental vitality 

and the overall security of the Nation, a more comprehensive 

view of the lifecycle of resource development that is firmly 

founded in objective science would be beneficial. The USGS 

has contributed to and maintains specialized core expertise 

needed to understand and evaluate the lifecycle stages of 

resource development. This goal is expected to be achieved 

through state-of-the-art, process-oriented research focused on 

the source, transport, and fate of contaminants associated with 

resource development and their interactions with the surrounding environment and ecosystems. This comprehensive, 

systematic approach can be applied to the landscape at various 

time and spatial scales, based on sound scientific principles, to 

better inform the decisionmaking process.

The strategic research actions presented in this section 

outline opportunities for the USGS that can be tailored to 

advance the state of knowledge of environmental research 

for a number of different commodities, highlight research 

opportunities throughout the resource lifecycle, emphasize the 

concepts that represent common denominators in energy and 

minerals research, and provide linkages with other mission 

areas. These strategic actions present numerous opportunities 

for partnering with other Federal agencies, including (but not 

limited to) resource stewardship and (or) regulatory agencies 

such as the BOEM, the BLM, the National Institutes of Health, 

the National Park Service, the Office of Surface Mining, 

Reclamation, and Enforcement, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, and the USFS. Likewise, partnership opportunities also exist at local, regional, and State levels, 

such as State geological surveys, as well as private industry 

for advancing our understanding of the relationship between 

energy and mineral development and the environment.

Major Questions

• What processes enhance or limit the migration of 

contaminants associated with energy and mineral 

resources in complex natural settings in terms of their 

source, transport, and fate, including toxicological 

effects?

• How can we best transfer insights gained from detailed 

controlled settings in the laboratory to large-scale field 

settings to improve the transfer of scientific insights 

from basic research to field applications?

• Are there chemical and physical characteristics of 

emerging energy and mineral resources that determine 

beneficial reusability, byproduct recovery, environmental effects, and (or) appropriate disposal options?

• How will climate change affect the environmental 

characteristics of energy and mineral resource waste 

associated with past, present, and future production?

• How significant are greenhouse gas emissions or 

removals associated with energy and mineral production relative to global greenhouse gas budgets?

• What is the natural endowment of inorganic and 

organic compounds in the vicinity of energy and 

mineral resources, how do these become mobilized 

and introduced to the surface environment naturally, 

and how does resource development alter pre-existing 

concentrations?

• Can we distinguish between natural backgrounds and 

concentrations of elements enhanced by human activities?

Strategic Actions

The questions outlined above will be addressed through 

three sets of actions:

• Fundamental studies designed to improve our understanding of basic biogeochemical processes as they 

relate to the environmental effects of energy and mineral resources at all stages of their lifecycles;
Goals for Energy and Mineral Resources Science 15

Renewable Energy and Nonrenewable Mineral Resources

Significant amounts of nonrenewable mineral resources 

will be needed to support the growing demand for domestic renewable energy, requiring knowledge about both the 

sources and the environmental effects of using these minerals. For example, many of these mineral commodities come 

from foreign sources; rare earth elements (REEs), which are 

used to manufacture magnets for wind turbines and hybrid 

car batteries, currently (2011) are mined almost exclusively 

in China. Diversifying REE supplies may prove challenging, 

as the mineral deposits that yield REEs are atypical with 

respect to environmental challenges associated with mining and are poorly understood. Similarly, the manufacture 

of new, higher efficiency or lower cost photovoltaic cells 

(fig. 7) relies on mineral commodities such as cadmium, 

gallium, germanium, indium, selenium, and tellurium, which 

typically are produced as byproducts of the mining of metals 

such as copper and zinc. Significant amounts of these technologically important commodities may occur in waste piles 

from historical mines where ore beneficiation techniques 

were not designed to recover these elements. Regardless 

of the source, environmental protection and stewardship 

of lands associated with future mining for all these mineral 

commodities will rely on a sound scientific understanding 

of the source, transport, and fate of all potential contaminants associated with the deposit types that will yield these 

commodities.

Figure 7. Solar panels installed at the Denver Federal Center in Lakewood, Colorado. Renewable energy sources such as solar 

energy from photovoltaic cells are reliant on a number of nonrenewable mineral commodities. Newer, lower cost and higher 

efficiency photovoltaic cells are made from mineral commodities, such as arsenic, cadmium, gallium, selenium, and tellurium. In 

addition, to transfer electricity generated by solar “farms” to market, an expanded electrical grid will be needed, spurring demand 

for copper wire.

Highlight 4
16 U.S. Geological Survey Energy and Minerals Science Strategy

• Applied investigations focused on applying basic 

research to the energy and mineral resource landscape; 

and

• Synthesis activities intended to integrate knowledge 

from critical aspects of energy and mineral environmental research at the USGS to inform decisionmaking 

related to legacy and future resource issues to facilitate 

sound resource stewardship.

2–1. Fundamental Studies

• Action 2–1a.—Investigate carbon sources and potential 

sinks associated with energy and mineral resource and 

renewable energy production to improve understanding of carbon cycling. Carbon dioxide release from 

limestone during cement manufacturing, CO2 in geothermal waters, and methane leakage from shale-gas 

production represent examples of sources of carbon. 

Likewise, magnesium and calcium-silicate minerals 

in mine waste represent sinks for atmospheric CO2. 

These examples represent poorly understood sources 

and sinks of greenhouse gases, and the magnitude of 

carbon cycling related to these sources and sinks is 

largely unknown.

• Action 2–1b.—Investigate perturbations to the natural 

landscape during the resource lifecycle. Use multidisciplinary studies at both legacy and current energy and 

mineral production sites. Geological, biogeochemical, and geophysical studies can be used to identify 

and quantify environmental factors, such as climate, 

geologic setting, and proximity to drainages and the 

water table, that influence changes to natural resources 

during energy and mineral resource development. 

This research will assist in discerning the differences 

between natural background and anthropogenic effects 

of energy and mineral development.

• Action 2–1c.—Develop studies to understand the role 

of climate in altering natural background environmental signatures of energy and minerals systems and the 

behavior of waste products from energy and mineral 

resource development. Seasonal or global changes 

or differences in temperature and precipitation can 

exacerbate or mitigate weathering of wastes, hence 

the growing recognition of the importance of climate 

in environmental investigations of energy and mineral 

systems. This understanding is essential for devising 

effective mitigation or remediation strategies for proposed, ongoing, or legacy mining activities, for establishing reasonable closure goals that will withstand 

future changes in climate, or for predicting behavior of 

wastes under variable climate regimes.

2–2. Applied Investigations

• Action 2–2a.—Characterize waste streams associated 

with energy and minerals production and processing. 

These studies will improve the understanding of the 

linkages between the energy and mineral resource 

characteristics and waste products, of opportunities 

for recycling and byproduct resource recovery, and of 

mitigation or management of contaminant releases to 

the environment from these wastes.

• Action 2–2b.—Conduct research on deep geologic reservoirs for disposal of wastes from energy and mineral 

resources development, extraction, and use. Deep, 

subsurface geologic formations are used for the disposal of wastes from energy and mineral extraction and 

production activities, including uranium-contaminated 

groundwater produced during in-situ recovery, highsalinity and poor-quality water coproduced with oil 

and gas, and CO2 generated from fossil fuels (geologic 

carbon sequestration). Likewise, spent nuclear fuel and 

high-level nuclear waste could potentially be energyrelated waste candidates for storage in such deep 

disposal units.

• Action 2–2c.—Investigate the environmental geochemistry of emerging energy- and mineral-resource 

production technologies. These technologies include 

a number of in-situ or leaching techniques such as 

hydraulic fracturing for shale gas production, in-situ 

conversion of oil shale (highlight 2), in-situ leach mining for copper and uranium recovery, and gas hydrate 

recovery using hot water, steam injection, and depressurization. All these techniques require alteration of the 

physical and (or) chemical characteristics of the ambient environment to extract the resource but likely also 

affect a wide variety of other constituents and geologic 

aspects of the area being developed. Such insights 

will be invaluable in designing methods to perform 

integrated assessments of future resource development 

(goals 3 and 4).

• Action 2–2d.—Expand USGS capabilities for research 

on the geologically based environmental effects of 

the construction and operation of renewable energy 

resources (geothermal, solar, wind, hydropower, 

and biomass) to provide information for assessment 

activities. Renewable sources of energy by necessity 

require nonrenewable mineral commodities for their 

construction and operation. A rigorous understanding 

of the processes that control the fluxes of these mineral 

commodities through the environment will advance 

comprehensive knowledge of geologically based environmental effects from renewable energy development.
Goals for Energy and Mineral Resources Science 17

2–3. Synthesis Activities

• Action 2–3a.—Create geologically based environmental models. These models, known as geoenvironmental 

models (duBray, 1995), address priority, conventional energy resources (such as coal and uranium) 

and emerging critical mineral and energy commodities (such as shale gas and rare earth elements). This 

extension of geoenvironmental models will assist in 

understanding the geological and geochemical controls 

on contaminant transport and fate, identifying potential 

environmental risks, identifying data gaps, and improving energy and minerals assessment activities.

• Action 2–3b.—Enhance the ability to transfer insights 

between simple process-oriented, short term, and 

small-scale laboratory experiments and complex, 

longer term, and large-scale natural energy and mineral 

resource systems. The application of the fundamental 

properties of Earth and biologic (including microbial) 

materials derived from laboratory studies to modeling of complex natural systems can be complicated by 

synergistic or antagonistic effects or by heterogeneity. 

Approaches that span gaps in both temporal and spatial 

scales will improve predictive capacity for processes 

operating within Earth systems, which necessarily will 

require well-designed field studies in key settings.

Goal 3.—Provide Inventories and Assessments 

of Energy and Mineral Resources

Introduction

Where will the United States obtain the energy and 

mineral commodities necessary to support its future infrastructure and technology? Policymakers, the global financial 

sector, and industry rely on the USGS to provide the information they need to understand the global distribution of energy 

and mineral resources and the supply of and demand for those 

resources.

The USGS founding directive to examine the “... mineral 

resources and products of the national domain” includes fuel 

(coal, oil, uranium) and nonfuel mineral materials, as well as 

studies outside the national domain when such studies are in 

the national interest. The USGS is one of the principal Federal 

agencies that develop global information and comprehensive 

science for nonfuel minerals (fig. 8). The USGS provides 

key energy resource assessments but shares responsibility for 

many aspects of global energy data and science with other 

Federal agencies, such as the Department of Energy (DOE), 

the Energy Information Administration (EIA), and the BOEM. 

Responsibility for managing fuel and nonfuel resources and 

the lands on which they occur belongs to other agencies.

Figure 8. Matrix showing where the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) provides assessment and information (green areas) for (A) energy 

resources and (B) mineral resources by geographic region and resource category. Discovered resources are those accumulations 

known to exist. Undiscovered resources are those theorized to exist, based on local geology being permissive for a specific type of 

energy or mineral deposit. For energy, the USGS conducts assessments of undiscovered resources. For nonfuel minerals, the USGS 

provides scientific data and inventories of produced and discovered resources as well as conducts assessments of undiscovered 

resources. The regulatory and resource stewardship responsibilities for these resources reside with other agencies.

Resource category

Produced Discovered Undiscovered

World, 

excluding 

United States

U.S. onshore and 

State-owned 

waters

Federal 

offshore

Inventories Assessments

A. Energy B. Minerals

Resource category

Produced Discovered Undiscovered

Inventories Assessments
18 U.S. Geological Survey Energy and Minerals Science Strategy

The USGS uses a broad range of tools to provide accurate inventories and assessments of fuel and nonfuel minerals 

at scales ranging from global to regional. Both technological innovations (for example, improvements in extraction 

methods or new processing methods) and market changes can 

profoundly shift the U.S. energy and minerals supply mix (for 

example, such as from recent increases in gas production from 

shale and rising demand for REEs). Accurate assessment of 

previously unexploited resource types requires fundamental 

understanding of how these resources form and accumulate 

(goal 1) and how new technologies may affect the extraction 

environment (goal 4). Extending the economic information 

incorporated in inventories and assessments provides additional data on extraction, transportation, and potential environmental and related costs that may be useful to Federal, State, 

and other decisionmakers (goal 4). Depending on the scale 

and scope of innovation, iterative evaluations, new assessments (for newly significant elements or geographic regions, 

for example), or significant changes to assessment methodology may be required to adequately evaluate projected supply 

fluctuations (goal 5) and their effect.

Energy

The role of the USGS in evaluation of energy resources 

is focused on geologically based, undiscovered resources, 

exclusive of the Outer Continental Shelf. Periodic USGS 

assessments of technically recoverable, undiscovered oil, gas, 

and natural gas liquids in the United States and the world 

(Ahlbrandt and others, 2005) based on a systematic, vetted, 

probabilistic methodology are used by a wide variety of institutions around the world. The geologic reports (for example, 

U.S. Geological Survey Bighorn Basin Province Assessment 

Team, 2010) that accompany most domestic petroleum assessments are highly valued by customers and serve as longlasting geoscience compilations for sedimentary basins across 

the United States.

When geologic understanding and extraction technologies advance, assessments must be updated, and assessment 

methodologies must evolve. The rapidly expanding production 

of oil and gas from low-porosity and permeability reservoirs 

(tight gas, shale gas, and shale oil) requires innovation in 

assessment methods as well as improved understanding of the 

geologic and geochemical nature of the reservoirs (goal 1). For 

example, a recent assessment (Coleman and others, 2011) of 

the undiscovered oil and gas potential of the Marcellus Shale 

(fig. 9) used production data from shale gas accumulations 

in this and other U.S. sedimentary basins to more effectively 

visualize and understand the long-term production profiles that 

characterize shale gas production over time. The use of such 

analog data (U.S. Geological Survey Marcellus Shale Assessment Team, 2011) supplemented the data examination phase 

of the resource assessment methodology.

The USGS also assesses domestic undiscovered resources 

of several nonpetroleum sources of energy. Undiscovered coal 

resources in the United States have been assessed, and reserve 

estimates are currently underway (for example, Scott and 

others, 2011). Uranium, currently the subject of an ongoing, 

joint USGS–EIA study of undiscovered resources, is hosted 

in a variety of geologic environments, which complicates the 

assessment process. An effort to develop a uranium environmental assessment methodology would complement the 

ongoing resource assessment effort and provide the scientific 

understanding of the influences of uranium resources and 

their potential effects on the environment. Geothermal energy, 

gas hydrates, and oil shale currently contribute only a small 

amount of the U.S. energy supply but are expected to contribute increasingly more. Likewise, renewed interest in thorium 

may necessitate additional study of the domestic potential 

for this resource (highlight 5). Future assessments of these 

resources would benefit from an improved geologic understanding of their occurrence (goal 1) and consider technological advances in their use. Effective assessment methodologies 

must be tailored to the commodity under consideration, the 

range of geologic settings, the status of past production, and 

the evolution of extraction techniques and must portray the 

range of uncertainty of data and results at all stages of the 

assessment.

Major Questions

• What are the undiscovered resources of technically 

recoverable oil, gas, coal, uranium, and geothermal 

energy in the United States and in the world?

• What is the range of economic and environmental consequences of extraction and delivery of these energy 

resources?

Strategic Actions

3–1. Undiscovered Geologically Based Energy Resources

• Action 3–1a.—Conduct periodic assessments of technically recoverable undiscovered gas and oil resources of 

the United States and the world with increasing emphasis on reserve growth and unconventional resources 

(for example, tight gas reservoirs).

• Action 3–1b.—Complete the ongoing national assessment of undiscovered uranium resources.

• Action 3–1c.—Conduct targeted assessments of 

emerging energy resources (for example, gas hydrates, 

geothermal energy, oil shale) as warranted by research 

findings (goal 1) and by advances in extraction technology.

• Action 3–1d.—Develop additional components of 

economic and environmental analyses, where possible 

in cooperation with other bureaus, in the assessment of 

technically recoverable resources as needed for specific 
Goals for Energy and Mineral Resources Science 19

Figure 9. The extent of the Marcellus assessment units (AUs) within the Appalachian Basin geologic province. The Marcellus Shale is 

now exploited as a combination reservoir and source rock for natural gas and natural gas liquids. A probabilistic resource assessment 

conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey in 2011 estimated a range of 43 trillion to 144 trillion cubic feet of undiscovered, technically 

recoverable gas (not counted as reserves), with a mean estimate of 84 trillion cubic feet. Most of the undiscovered gas is within the 

Interior Marcellus AU. From Coleman and others (2011).

ATLANTIC

OCEAN

LAKE

MICHIGAN

LAKE

HURON

LAKE ERIE

LAKE ONTARIO

Area map

GA

SC

NC

VA

PA

IL IN OH

MI WI

WV

MD

DE

NJ

NY

MA

VT

NH

ME

CT RI

AL

MS

TN

KY

EXPLANATION

Appalachian Basin Province 

Western Margin Marcellus AU

Foldbelt Marcellus AU

Interior Marcellus AU

0 100 200 MILES

0 100 200 KILOMETERS

45° N

43° N

41° N

39° N

37° N

35° N

33° N

89° W 87° W 85° W 83° W 81° W 79° W 77° W 75° W 73° W 71° W

geographic areas. For example, build on completed 

coal assessments to evaluate the effects of coal composition on the effects of its extraction and use. The linking of these economic and environmental analyses with 

future integrated assessment approaches, as outlined 

in goal 4, will enhance the utility and relevance these 

analyses to resource stewardship agencies.

Minerals

The responsibility of the USGS for mineral materials includes evaluating the complete range of production 

data, reserves, resources, and undiscovered deposits (fig. 8) 

throughout the world and across the full spectrum of globally 

traded commodities. The agency’s responsibility for examining resources and products coupled with increased demand for 

information concerning these resources brings attention to the 

role of the USGS as a leader in developing a comprehensive, 

accurate, and reliable database of reserves and resources of 

fuel and nonfuel minerals.

The responsibility for tracking reserve and discovered 

resource information as well as global supply and demand 

requires a broad scope of USGS activities related to minerals. These range from collection and compilation of geologic, 

production, and economic data to inventories of domestic and 

global reserves and resources, analyses of spatial and temporal patterns and materials flow, and domestic assessments of 

undiscovered resources.

The USGS National Minerals Information Center 

(NMIC) collects, analyzes, and publishes data on domestic 

and global reserves. These domestic data collection activities are facilitated by cooperative agreements with State 

government agencies, and international minerals information 

is obtained annually by questionnaires and exchanges with 

organizations in approximately 100 countries. The USGS also 

tracks active mines, mineral operations, and facilities globally, 

and the Mineral Resources Data System (MRDS) provides 

limited geologic data for some domestic and global deposits, 
20 U.S. Geological Survey Energy and Minerals Science Strategy

Thorium: Why and Where?

Globally, thorium is experiencing much renewed interest 

and research investment as a potential fuel source because 

it provides a source of nuclear power that does not proliferate weapons-caliber plutonium, has the potential to 

generate electrical power with a low carbon footprint, and 

may have operational advantages compared with uraniumfueled reactors in terms of power density, cost, scale, and 

waste disposal. Major research and development efforts 

on thorium-based reactors are currently underway in China 

and India. U.S. research on thorium and molten-salt nuclear 

reactors was discontinued in 1969, but recent national 

energy policy discussions have renewed calls for research 

and development of thorium as an energy resource.

Geochemically, thorium and rare earth elements (REEs) 

coexist. The radioactivity of REE deposits is principally 

owing to thorium, which presents an environmental issue 

in the waste streams of REE mining and processing. Within 

the United States, thorium could be produced as a byproduct from the production of REEs, thereby converting a once 

undesirable waste into a valuable commodity.

The United States has some of the largest thorium 

resources in the world. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 

conducted a considerable amount of research on thorium 

geology (fig. 10) from the late 1950s to the late 1980s. Many 

thorium-bearing districts in the United States were studied, 

described, mapped, and sampled (Van Gosen and others, 

2009). Given the growing interest in thorium, an improved 

understanding of the geology, mineralogy, geochemistry, 

and resource potential of thorium-bearing systems could 

provide information needed for the development of comprehensive energy policies and consideration of alternatives 

during the next decade.

Figure 10. Photographs of the Lemhi Pass thorium district in 

Idaho and Montana. A, View to the north of the Lucky Horseshoe prospect (middle of photograph), which is one group 

of numerous exploration trenches, cuts, and short adits that 

explored thorium-rich vein systems of the Lemhi Pass thorium 

district in the 1950s through the 1980s. More than 200 thoriumrich veins in the Beaverhead Mountains form the Lemhi Pass 

district, which is thought to contain the largest concentration 

of thorium resources in the United States and is the site of 

renewed thorium exploration activity (Van Gosen and others, 

2009). B, Outcrop of the Wonder vein (between red lines) in the 

Lemhi Pass thorium district exposed in a mined bench. The vein 

is heavily oxidized and consists mainly of silica, likely some carbonate, and iron oxide minerals with thorite and altered thorite. 

The host rock is Precambrian quartzite and siltite (Van Gosen 

and others, 2009).

B

A

Highlight 5
Goals for Energy and Mineral Resources Science 21

prospects, and mineral occurrences, but comprehensive and 

systematically updated coverage of discovered deposits worldwide is not currently available through the MRDS. Public and 

private sectors rely on USGS minerals information for improving the understanding of how mineral materials are used 

within the economy and to forecast future supply and demand 

for these materials. This domestic and global information is 

subsequently used in the analysis of national and international 

policies, in formulating plans to deal with potential shortages 

and interruptions in mineral supplies, and in fostering the 

development of strategies for maintaining a competitive position within the global economy.

Assessments of domestic undiscovered minerals are 

amenable to probabilistic methodologies similar to those used 

for energy. However, mineral resources occur in a broader 

range of geologic settings and require an understanding of a 

much wider array of geologic frameworks and more expansive 

study of the geochemistry of Earth systems (goal 1). With 

such additional knowledge, more accurate geologic models of 

mineral resources can be built and used to constrain estimates 

of the location, quality, and quantity of potential undiscovered 

resources.

Major Questions

• What are the global reserves and annual production of 

nonfuel mineral materials, and what potential supply 

restrictions do these indicate?

• What are the discovered and potential undiscovered 

resources of nonfuel minerals in the United States that 

could bolster future supplies?

• What types of information are needed to provide unbiased assessments of undiscovered mineral resources 

and effectively portray their uncertainty, and at what 

scales?

Strategic Actions

3–2. Discovered Nonfuel Mineral Resources

• Action 3–2a.—Expand partnerships with governments, 

industry, and the Nation’s research and development 

sectors to ensure that the USGS has timely, accurate, 

long-term, and comprehensive global commodity data 

for all nonfuel mineral commodities.

• Action 3–2b.—Establish a periodic review, in consultation with governmental and industrial partners, of the 

range of commodities covered, process and scope of 

data collection, and the format, range, and availability 

of data products.

• Action 3–2c.—Expand due-diligence field studies to 

confirm the geologic characteristics and the resource 

and grade data for high-priority commodities. Work 

could include the tracking of reserve-growth characteristics of individual mineral deposit types.

• Action 3–2d.—Enhance the scope and functionality of 

the domestic discovered resources database. This spatially oriented, continuously updated national reference 

system ideally would contain geologic, production, 

reserve, and resource data for all mines, prospects, and 

mineral occurrences within the United States. This 

approach includes mechanisms for capturing updated 

reserve and resource information (for example, from 

NMIC, State, industry, and other sources) into a single 

point-of-entry database for USGS reporting, research, 

and assessments.

• Action 3–2e.—Strengthen and expand the analytical 

functions of the NMIC to provide more comprehensive 

overviews of changes to global nonfuel mineral supply 

and demand. In particular, expand spatially oriented 

analyses of global production, trade, manufacturing, 

and materials end-use to document global shifts.

3–3. Undiscovered Nonfuel Mineral Resources

• Action 3–3a.—Reevaluate the methodology, scale, 

scope, coverage, and output of undiscovered mineral 

resource assessments. Include consideration of base 

data, engineering (technology, processing), environmental, and mineral economics expertise in assessments and evaluate the uncertainty and effectiveness of 

qualitative and quantitative (probabilistic) methodologies.

• Action 3–3b.—Adapt the methodologies for assessment of undiscovered nonfuel mineral resources to 

frontier regions. Define the information needed to 

initiate assessments of undiscovered mineral deposits for selected high-priority commodities in remote 

and frontier regions of the United States, particularly 

Alaska, the EEZ, and the ECS, and for resources more 

than 1 km below the Earth’s surface. This activity 

would benefit from appropriate strong partners, including the BOEM, in the offshore realm. Assessments in 

remote regions can be linked to research (goal 1) on 

the scientific nature and character of potential minerals 

in these regions.
22 U.S. Geological Survey Energy and Minerals Science Strategy

Goal 4.—Understand the Effects of Energy and 

Mineral Development on Natural Resources

Introduction

Increased domestic energy and mineral production, use 

of new technologies, renewable energy development, and 

mandates to consider the cumulative effects of development 

present complex challenges for agencies responsible for 

managing natural resources in the United States. For example, 

refinements in directional drilling and hydraulic fracturing to 

produce unconventional hydrocarbon resources have increased 

the accessible resources in the United States, but these methods have potential subsurface and above-ground environmental effects that are only partially understood. Similarly, the 

current focus on reduction of greenhouse gas emissions has 

contributed to the growth of renewable energy sources, such 

as wind and solar, but the environmental effects of using these 

energy resources also warrant study. Recognizing the need for 

more comprehensive information, State, Federal, and nongovernmental organizations are increasingly interested in broader 

assessment, inventory, and research activities, especially for 

sizeable geographic areas. Large landscape initiatives—such 

as DOI landscape conservation cooperatives, BLM rapid 

ecoregional assessments, National Park Service vulnerability 

assessments, and the Western Governors Association wildlife 

corridors initiative—all incorporate these kinds of energy and 

minerals information but could benefit from additional sources 

and improved access to such information. Large landscape 

initiatives and assessments are currently providing valuable 

information at spatial scales suitable for supporting regional or 

cumulative effects analyses, but these initiatives will benefit 

from additional research and technical assistance.

The overarching approach of this goal is to develop the 

energy and minerals data, frameworks, analytical methods, 

and products to support the information needs of policymakers and decisionmakers who must “accommodate ecosystembased management practices as they face competing demands 

for recreation, transport, leasing, conservation, and economic 

growth” (U.S. Geological Survey, 2007, p. 26). Key first steps 

in this approach are designating liaisons to work with land 

and resource managers to better understand their needs and 

developing new targeted spatial products based on existing 

data and knowledge. This goal will bring together scientists 

across the USGS, researchers at other institutions, and public 

resource stewards to make better use of existing information 

and develop new methods and integrated approaches to inform 

energy and minerals decisions involving multiple resources.

Meeting these needs requires application of the research 

and foundational understanding developed through goals 1 

and 2, the reliable inventory products discussed in goal 3, 

and strong integration of research across the USGS. Together, 

these components provide science understanding and products 

that are applicable to the needs of public resource stewards. 

Achieving this goal will require dedicating resources to 

adaptation and integration of existing energy and minerals 

activities with the evolving adaptive management strategies 

developed by the DOI (Williams and others, 2009) and other 

users of USGS assessment products.

An integrated assessment (highlight 6) is a holistic 

approach that can be used by public resource stewards to 

study and evaluate resource development issues. Integrated 

assessment approaches provide an organizing framework for 

analysis and communication that is adaptable to the scope 

and complexity of the question or issue and can comply with 

parallel legal requirements for Federal land management and 

planning (for example, environmental impact statements). The 

common characteristics of integrated assessment approaches 

include collaboration between policymakers or managers 

and scientists, consideration of multiple resource values and 

societal needs, and development of relevant products based 

on the best available information and analytical methods. Collaboration and partnership between scientists and managers 

will advance the basis for informing natural resource stewardship decisions. The USGS will provide integrated research 

and technical assistance to policymakers and decisionmakers 

at scales relevant to their needs. This integrated approach will 

require capabilities that range from broad scales (for example, 

global scales to address worldwide resource abundance 

and use) to local scales (for example, local scales—tens of 

hectares—to inform leasing decisions on federally managed 

lands).

Conducting integrated assessments for energy and mineral resources is a multifaceted and interdisciplinary approach 

that leverages expertise across the USGS (highlight 7). 

USGS research on fundamental Earth processes, interactions 

between energy and mineral resources and the environment, 

and quantitative assessments of the distribution and abundance of resources (goals 1–3) form an essential scientific and 

technical foundation for integrated assessments. Improved 

scientific understanding and information on ecosystems, water 

resources, land use, and climate change will be developed 

through focused work across the USGS. Using multidisciplinary teams, the USGS can provide information (goal 2) 

on different classes or specific types of energy and mineral 

resources, such as uranium, wind energy, or coal, to inform 

integrated assessment and national energy policy questions. 

For example, what are the consequences of meeting a goal 

of 30 percent of projected electricity demand through wind 

energy by 2040? An integrated assessment approach could 

evaluate the potential environmental effects of wind energy 

on the landscape and how these might affect the development of other energy and mineral resources, while integrating 

information from across the USGS and other agencies and 

stakeholders.
Goals for Energy and Mineral Resources Science 23

Issues involving legacy environmental effects, such as 

those caused by historical mining activities, could challenge the availability of uranium for energy production by 

resulting in increased environmental costs, societal resistance to uranium mining, or restrictions on accessibility. 

For example, about 1 million acres of Federal land in the 

Grand Canyon region of Arizona (fig. 11) was temporarily 

withdrawn from new mining claims in July 2009 by the 

Uranium in the Grand Canyon: A Case Study in Integrated Research and Assessment

Secretary of the Interior because of concerns that uranium 

mining could have negative effects on the land, water, 

people, and wildlife.

As directed by the Secretary of the Interior, the Bureau of 

Land Management engaged the U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS) to assist in evaluating the effects of withdrawing 

these lands through multidisciplinary studies to provide 

estimates of uranium resources, examine the effects of 

previous breccia-pipe mining, summarize water-chemistry 

data for streams and springs, and investigate potential 

biological pathways of exposure to uranium and associated 

contaminants (Alpine, 2010). An integrated approach (fig. 12) 

and careful planning were needed to integrate data from 

various components of uranium lifecycle research across 

minerals, energy, environmental health, ecosystems, and 

water mission areas and to package data so that they could 

be used in an “integrated assessment” by social scientists 

and economists to assess alternative scenarios and thereby 

help decisionmakers weigh the tradeoffs of uranium mining 

in the Grand Canyon area. Working together, these USGS 

groups conducted a study that could become a model for 

integrated USGS studies in the future.

Figure 11. The Kanab North Mine, one of several breccia-pipe 

uranium mines in northern Arizona. The U.S. Geological Survey 

made field assessments of the mine where operations have been 

on standby since the 1980s.

Highlight 6

Figure 12. Example of an integrated assessment. Integrated 

assessments are carried out to 

answer a specific question, for 

example, “What are the effects 

of withdrawing lands in the Grand 

Canyon region from mineral 

entry?” The diagram shows 

a conceptual framework for 

integrating lifecycle research and 

science across multiple disciplines within the U.S. Geological 

Survey (points designated with 

“1”) and integrating assessments 

with additional socioeconomic 

considerations (point designated 

with “2”). Data generated during 

lifecycle research ultimately 

can be used to make decisions 

regarding land management or 

establish designs or design standards for resource development 

and protection (point designated 

with “3”). The data and information must be communicated so 

that they can be effectively used, 

exchanged, and combined at 

points 1, 2, and 3.

 Prohibitions? 

No

Data

Mineral

Air

Land

Water

Ecosystems

Human health

 Resources Mineral 

deposit 

models 

Geoenvironmental 

models 

Socioeconomic 

model

Accessible? 

Yes No

gical Biolo

models 

Indicators Metrics and data

Functions

and patterns Processes

Adaptive management and design standards

Yes 

Maybe 

Resources present? 

Accessibility 

assessments

Resource lifecycle

research and

assessments

Availability 

assessments

Resources not

accessible

Weighting factors

Data, spatial overlays

Probabilities, quantities, derived variables, risk factors 

Resources 

available Resources not

available

2

1 1 3
24 U.S. Geological Survey Energy and Minerals Science Strategy

Integrated Assessment for Southwestern Wyoming

Driven by local and regional leaders, the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative (WLCI) was officially launched 

in 2007 with support from the U.S. Department of the 

Interior. The mission of the WLCI is to implement a longterm, science-based program for assessing, conserving, 

and enhancing fish and wildlife habitats while facilitating 

responsible energy and other development through local 

collaboration and partnerships. Partners in the WLCI include 

the Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Wyoming 

Game and Fish Commission, the Wyoming Department of 

Agriculture, the U.S. Forest Service, six Wyoming county 

commissions, nine of Wyoming’s conservation districts, and 

the Pinedale Anticline Project Office.

The role of the USGS is to provide multidisciplinary scientific and technical assistance support to WLCI partners 

and to advance the overall scientific understanding of 

ecosystems in the southwestern Wyoming landscape. 

Working with WLCI partners, the USGS has developed an 

integrated assessment for southwestern Wyoming (fig. 13). 

The assessment is an integrated analysis of WLCI resources 

based on best available data and information and includes 

roads, energy development, mines, and urban areas along 

with aquatic and terrestrial natural resources and priority 

management areas designated by partners. Information is 

summarized by watershed using a transparent and hierarchical approach that facilitates understanding of multiple 

resources and their contribution to summary index scores. 

The integrated assessment is a support tool for landscapescale conservation planning and evaluation and a data and 

analysis resource for addressing specific agency management questions.

Figure 13. The Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative integrated assessment Web interface for which the U.S. Geological 

Survey provided assessment data for southwestern Wyoming. Information on key resources is summarized by watershed, and 

data used in the development of the assessment are available for download and further analysis (Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative, undated).

Highlight 7
Goals for Energy and Mineral Resources Science 25

Major Questions

• What science can the USGS provide to help assess the 

range of effects of energy and mineral resource development on other natural resources including wildlife, 

habitat, water resources, and sensitive areas?

• How can the USGS best characterize and evaluate the 

environmental footprints and environmental risks of 

renewable, fossil, and nuclear energy resources, taking 

into account the full life cycle of resource development, use, and disposal?

• What USGS data and information are needed by other 

Federal agencies and public resource stewards to 

implement best practices throughout the life cycle of 

energy or mineral resource development to lessen the 

effects to habitat and the environment?

Strategic Actions

4–1. Spatial Analysis of Energy and Mineral Resources 

Occurrence and Development

• Action 4–1a.—Designate liaisons and a network of 

energy and minerals resource experts within the USGS 

who work with land and resource managers, including 

those from DOI bureaus, to identify important information needs.

• Action 4–1b.—Provide information on energy and 

mineral development potential to large landscape 

conservation initiatives that are overlaying energy 

and mineral resource development with other priority 

natural resources.

• Action 4–1c.—Develop new nationwide spatial data 

products for energy and mineral resources. This 

activity could be coordinated with other agencies, as 

appropriate, to leverage use of existing datasets. These 

products could include existing areas of development 

for these resources and associated infrastructure, such 

as roads, pads, pipelines, ponds, compressor stations, 

and other facilities associated with natural gas development. 

4–2. Exploring Interdisciplinary Approaches for Assessing 

Effects of Energy and Mineral Resources Development

• Action 4–2a.—Identify metrics or indicators that reflect 

the effects and uncertainty of energy and mineral 

development on other natural resources. This information could assist stakeholders in considering environmental effects or provide a foundation for additional 

analyses to consider effects on ecosystem functions 

and services. Likewise, a method for evaluating water 

use and production associated with unconventional 

oil and gas resource development could improve the 

understanding of the potential effects of such development on the availability and (or) quality of water 

resources.

• Action 4–2b.—Develop and refine methods for incorporating social, cultural, economic, and ecosystem 

service metrics into integrated assessment approaches 

through collaboration with partners and stakeholders.

• Action 4–2c.—Develop methods to estimate potential 

land surface and seabed disturbance associated with 

potential development. These methods will draw on 

knowledge of the resource, including expanded use of 

USGS estimated ultimate recovery information for oil 

and gas resources and requirements for development.

• Action 4–2d.—Evaluate models, assumptions about 

effects, and the effectiveness of different mitigation 

strategies. This work ideally will be done in coordination with resource stewardship agencies, with particular emphasis on areas where resource conflicts exist, 

such as the potential effects of energy development and 

infrastructure on habitat use by mule deer, on surface 

water quality from coal bed methane development, 

and on treatment-discharge or deep-well injection of 

produced waters.

• Action 4–2e.—Develop decision analysis and support 

tools to address resource stewardship needs. Examples 

of such recognized needs include BLM work processes, such as inventory and assessment, planning, 

permitting and managing uses, and monitoring.

• Action 4–2f.—Conduct an assessment of potential environmental consequences associated with renewable 

energy development on DOI lands.
26 U.S. Geological Survey Energy and Minerals Science Strategy

Goal 5.—Understand the Availability and 

Reliability of Energy and Mineral Resource 

Supplies

Introduction

Challenges to national security, economic vitality, quality 

of life, and environmental well-being can arise suddenly and 

catastrophically or as a result of long-term trends. Therefore, 

our scientific enterprise must remain responsive and adaptable 

to meet new and evolving challenges. Goal 5 transitions from 

an emphasis in the first four goals on currently recognized 

science and its application to known societal concerns to an 

emphasis on proactive planning for the future. We emphasize 

in this section the application and adaptation of existing USGS 

expertise to address the future adequacy of energy and mineral 

supplies for the Nation.

Natural and societal factors affecting energy and mineral resources supply and demand over the next decade will 

test the limits of our current understanding and our ability to 

adjust to emerging priorities and directions. The human drivers of change are complex and diverse, including advances 

in technology, competition for natural resources, evolution 

of national and international policies and conflicts, land use 

change, effects on ecosystems, and shifting social mores 

and attitudes. Climate change and natural and anthropogenic 

disasters and emergencies can also affect energy and minerals 

resource supplies. Some of these events may trigger perturbations in the immediate reliability of energy and mineral supplies; other events may create perturbations in the longer term 

availability of supplies (National Research Council, 2008).

The USGS already provides information that is essential underpinning for policy, management, and stewardship 

decisions on resource extraction, use, regulation, and waste 

management but the magnitude and speed of world events 

and societal changes are placing a premium on flexibility and 

foresightedness. This section addresses modifications or additions to existing science capabilities to improve the capacity 

of USGS to respond to short-term, emergency and long-term 

developments in the supply of energy and mineral resources 

and to support national resiliency in the face of possible supply disruptions.

Major Questions

• How might the emergence of new technologies or 

patterns of resource use affect the mineral and energy 

requirements of the Nation, and what science and 

information are needed to meet these national requirements?

• What approaches can be used to identify vulnerabilities within the supply chain of mineral materials and 

energy resources?

• How can the USGS better prioritize energy and minerals research activities to address the most critical future 

issues?

• How can the USGS more effectively disseminate 

knowledge about energy and mineral resources to 

inform public discourse and decisionmaking?

5–1. Emerging or Longer Term Issues Affecting Resource 

Availability

The United States is likely to diversify energy sources to 

reduce dependence on imports from specific countries and to 

address issues of greenhouse gas emissions (U.S. Geological 

Survey, 2007, p. 25). As the Nation’s energy mix changes, the 

USGS will likely expand its research and assessment portfolio 

to include a more comprehensive suite of energy resources, 

including hydrocarbon- and nonhydrocarbon-based sources 

(U.S. Geological Survey, 2007, p. 25). Similarly, the United 

States will likely be involved in building new technologies 

based on novel mineral resource components. The USGS must 

include the minerals necessary for emerging technologies 

within its portfolio of minerals research and information collection activities.

The global increase in demand for energy and mineral 

resources, especially in countries undergoing rapid economic 

development, is in part a reflection of the need to build a 

modern infrastructure. For example, China has accounted for 

the majority of the global increase in mineral consumption 

from 2000 to 2010. Global mineral consumption is expected 

to increase in response to further development in China and 

economic development in countries with large populations, 

such as India.

The use of new technologies represents another factor that changes mineral consumption rates and patterns. For 

example, consumption may decrease in response to more 

efficiently designed goods or may increase through the use of 

new materials in goods that are consumed by large numbers 

of customers; the aerospace and light-vehicle transportation sectors are rapidly transforming construction design for 

structures, power sources, and size optimization, while still 

maintaining a large volume of the working fleet that uses older 

technologies. This transition in engineering design is steering 

a significant shift in consumption of high-technology materials 

(for example, aluminum alloys, avionics doped crystals and 

films, carbon-composite fibers, specialty metal blends of glass, 

stabilized ceramics, and titanium) and associated fuels (for 

example, high-octane fuels), all produced with different forms 

of metals and mineral materials. This rapid evolution in consumption patterns has highlighted the limits of our knowledge 

about the distribution and concentration of some of the raw 

materials that these industries use.

In order to respond to issues of energy and mineral supply, the USGS must understand the availability of energy and 

mineral materials at national and global levels. The USGS 

studies energy and mineral resource formation, distribution, 
Goals for Energy and Mineral Resources Science 27

capabilities, and location for all downstream infrastructure 

(processing and production facilities).

Supply-chain analysis can also account for energy usage at 

each step in the material’s flow. In turn, by using mathematical algorithms, the economic efficiency of each point in the 

usage cycle can be estimated. For example, network-flow 

models can show the lowest cost of supplying demand 

within current limits of capacity and market organization or 

the highest value use of a particular mineral resource. An 

analysis of supply chains for materials critical to the United 

States is required to identify economic vulnerabilities that 

could be precipitated by global trends and circumstances. 

The USGS is uniquely positioned to develop these tools. 

These models can be crafted to include early warning features that signal disruptions to material supply at individual 

points or used to illustrate propagation of problems to 

subsequent steps. Such an early-warning framework would 

allow U.S. agencies, foreign governments, and industrial 

sectors to target risk assessments and disaster response 

strategies to those disruptions most likely to affect specific 

interests.

Materials Flow Analysis: Illustrating Global Commodity Supply Vulnerabilities

Materials flow analysis is the systematic accounting of a 

material or commodity from extraction through processing, 

manufacturing, reuse, and ultimate disposal (Brown and 

others, 2000; National Research Council, 2004). The U.S. 

Geological Survey (USGS) National Minerals Information 

Center provides information on the demand for minerals 

and mineral materials across industry sectors and develops 

materials flow analyses for selected commodities.

Supply-chain analysis (fig. 14), a more comprehensive 

form of materials flow analysis, illustrates each step in the 

chain of use from source to disposal. Supply-chain analysis 

accounts for all steps of production and processing (mines, 

mills, smelters, refineries, fabricators, and the manufacture 

of final goods), inventories and stockpiles, costs (fixed, variable, and new capacity startup), and necessary transportation facilities. Fully developed models require extensive data 

on the economics of production and trade, values of processed materials, demand variations over time, knowledge 

of materials properties specific to individual sectors of the 

economy, information on the capacity and manufacturing 

character, and quality (goal 1), produces assessments of 

undiscovered domestic energy and mineral resources (goal 3), 

and collects global data on reserves, production, consumption, 

stocks, recycling, and trade for all nonfuel mineral materials 

(goal 3). In addition, the USGS collects and compiles information on an as-needed basis on material consumption by 

different industry sectors, data on corporate ownership (for 

example, in efforts to assist in U.S. Department of Justice 

evaluations of mergers and acquisitions), global manufacturing and trade data, and materials flow analysis for selected 

commodities. The next, more comprehensive step in tracking 

the movement of materials and their derivatives through the 

global economy are materials flow and supply chain analyses 

(highlight 8).

The methodologies for analyzing the materials flow of 

energy and mineral materials are evolving, yet the development of these methodologies is fundamental to understanding 

how natural and human systems interact with and influence 

global economies. USGS data on materials flows, in combination with energy-flow information from partners such as 

the EIA, can be used to monitor supply fluctuations, predict 

energy and material demands for different industry sectors, 

provide warnings of potential supply risks, and illuminate 

vulnerabilities in global production and manufacturing supply 

chains. Materials flow analyses and network models also provide an active, quantifiable mechanism (fig. 14) for prioritizing 

future USGS energy and minerals research and assessments.

Models of mineral supply chains can only be as good as 

the data and assumptions on which they are based. The depth 

and consistency of USGS databases on mineral statistics and 

mineral resources are a vital component in building viable 

models for minerals and mineral materials. Combining USGS 

minerals data with EIA energy data would provide the comprehensive databases needed to model the energy and minerals 

requirements for new materials technologies. The output of 

these models would be a platform for comprehensive planning and management of national resources and for identifying short- and long-term vulnerabilities in the supply chain of 

minerals critical to the national economy and defense.

5–2. Short-Term Fluctuations Affecting Reliability of 

Resource Supplies

Some future events will arrive with little warning and 

will require immediate responses that make the best use of 

existing information and capabilities. Disaster response precipitated by natural hazards, such as earthquakes, tsunamis, 

and floods, by terrorist acts, or by catastrophic human error 

requires the ability to provide relevant information almost 

instantaneously.

The ability of the USGS to respond rapidly and effectively to unforeseen disasters with energy and minerals 

expertise is dependent on leveraging a suite of existing 

geological, geochemical, geophysical, and mineral economics 

Highlight 8
28 U.S. Geological Survey Energy and Minerals Science Strategy

expertise and analytical capabilities. The existing regional 

and national scale datasets provide a snapshot of conditions 

prior to an environmental event or natural disaster. These 

data are essential for evaluating the extent of change that 

occurs during a natural or other disaster. This broad capacity enables the USGS to bring science to bear in responses to 

natural hazards, such as earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, and 

wildfires (highlight 9). Within the past decade, the USGS has 

responded to manmade disasters by providing remote sensing to environmentally map the World Trade Center (WTC) 

area with imaging spectroscopy (Clark and others, 2006) and 

chemical characterization of dusts generated by the WTC 

collapse (Plumlee and Ziegler, 2003); chemical measurements 

before and after wildfires to assess changes to soils and waters 

(Eppinger, 2002; Eppinger and others, 2003; Wolf and others, 

2010); inorganic, organic, and microbial characterization of 

Figure 14. Examples of materials flows. A, Conceptual framework for a material supply model; modified from Kostick (1996). 

B, Example flow model for sulfur in the United States. A derivative application of materials flow analysis is the ability to evaluate 

human influences on global biogeochemical cycling of elements, such as sulfur; data are reported in million metric tons (Mt) 

(Lori Apodaca, U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., April 4, 2012).

Total U.S. supply,

13.4 Mt

Sources

From stocks, 0.65 Mt

Petroleum refining, 7.12 Mt

Natural gas, 1.17 Mt

Byproduct sulfuric acid, 0.79 Mt

Imported sulfur, 2.95 Mt

Imported sulfuric acid, 0.69 Mt

Consumption (use)

Exports, 1.52 Mt

Total agricultural uses

Ore leaching, 0.46 Mt

Nitrogen fertilizers, 0.02 Mt

Other agricultural chemicals, 0.98 Mt

Other uses, 2.30 Mt

Phosphate fertilizers, 5.70 Mt

Petroleum refining, 2.41 Mt

Post-consumption

Exports, 1.52 Mt

Dispersive losses, 1.01 Mt

Deposited to landfill, 10.9 Mt

Sources Processing Consumption (use) Post-consumption

Recycling

Recycling

Examples

• Mines

• Imports

• Recycled

materials

Examples

• Fabrication

• Scrap recycling

• Ore concentrates

Examples

• Disposal

• Recycling

• Losses to 

environment

Examples

• Imports

• Products

• Exports

Supply
Goals for Energy and Mineral Resources Science 29

Energy and Minerals Contributions to Disaster Response Following the 

2011 Japan Earthquake and Tsunami

The devastating, magnitude 9.0 earthquake and subsequent 

tsunami that struck the eastern coast of Japan near Tohoku 

on March 11, 2011, required coordinated disaster response 

efforts, including significant science contributions. With 

at least 15,000 people killed and hundreds of thousands 

displaced from their homes, the humanitarian efforts were 

paramount, but determining the full effect of the disaster 

also involved assessing the local and global physical and 

economic effects. In addition to the damage to the nuclear 

reactors at Fukushima, there was widespread damage to 

the area’s industry and infrastructure. The U.S. Geological 

Survey (USGS) analyzed the effect of the earthquake and 

tsunami on mineral facilities in the region to assess potential 

disruptions to Japanese and global mineral and material 

supply chains (fig. 15). Nine cement plants in the affected 

area produced 30 percent of Japan’s cement; eight iodine 

plants in the same region accounted for 25 percent of the 

world’s iodine supply. The earthquake-affected zone also 

included nine metal refineries, four iron and steel plants, 

four limestone mines, and two titanium facilities.

The USGS briefed policymakers soon after the 

quake and published a 

report on the findings 

within 8 business days 

of the event (Menzie and 

others, 2011). This type of 

rapid data analysis immediately following a disaster 

is of major importance 

for response planning by 

governments and industry. 

As a result of the Tohoku 

effort, USGS minerals 

information and analyses 

are now being incorporated into disaster-planning scenarios, such as 

the U.S. regional ShakeOut 

earthquake exercises.

Figure 15. Locations of 

mines and mineral facilities 

in Japan, from Menzie and 

others (2011).

Highlight 9
30 U.S. Geological Survey Energy and Minerals Science Strategy

flood sediments immediately following Hurricane Katrina 

(Plumlee and others, 2006); and volume and flow rate measurements of oil from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill (Labson and others, 2010). Efforts such as these are important to 

characterizing the initial effects from catastrophic events and 

providing the foundational knowledge for informing damage 

assessment and recovery efforts.

In terms of anticipating and preparing for future events, 

USGS expertise and information can be used to underpin the 

development of scenarios and help inform response planning 

and recovery efforts. As one example, the southern California 

ShakeOut scenario (Jones and others, 2008) was the basis 

for a cooperative project to evaluate the physical, social, and 

economic consequences of a modeled large earthquake (magnitude 7.8 on the Richter scale), and provided a wide range of 

emergency response and other organizations with information 

for potential recovery efforts following such an event. A magnitude 7.8 earthquake as described in the ShakeOut Scenario 

would cause significant damage to buildings and infrastructure. Langer (2011) estimated that more than 6 million metric 

tons of newly mined aggregate would be needed for emergency repairs and for reconstruction within the study area in 

the 5 years following the event. This information is important for understanding both the potential magnitude and the 

duration of this perturbation on regional aggregate supplies. 

Greater emphasis on this type of follow-on study exemplifies 

the kind of research directions anticipated by this goal.

Strategic Actions

5–1. Emerging or Longer Term Issues Affecting Resource 

Availability

• Action 5–1a.—Develop approaches for identifying 

mineral materials that are strategic and critical to 

the U.S. economy, energy supply, infrastructure, and 

national security. This activity would benefit from consultation with partners, such as the U.S. Department 

of Defense, industrial manufacturers, the National 

Institute of Standards and Technology, the DOE, and 

the Office of Science and Technology Policy. USGS 

information and analytical capabilities are essential for 

evaluating which materials are critical and for estimating the risk of supply disruptions. Because the supply 

chains and end uses of mineral materials are dynamic, 

the suite of materials identified as strategic or critical 

are also dynamic and will require periodic reevaluation.

• Action 5–1b.—Conduct targeted studies on the global 

flow of a select number of critical mineral materials as 

identified in action 5–1a. Global materials flow analyses can be used to identify vulnerabilities in supply 

chain nodes caused by human and natural events and 

knowledge gaps in our current understanding of supply 

chain complexities. Supply disruption can be defined 

in terms of facility capacities along all segments of the 

chain. Opportunities to complement ongoing research 

and development of alternative material or energy 

sources, remanufacturing, reuse, or recycling could 

also be addressed as mitigation strategies for dealing 

with supply risk.

• Action 5–1c.—Conduct research to reduce the 

uncertainty and refine the understanding of how the 

endowment of undiscovered resources may contribute to future supplies. As one example, the extreme 

uncertainty regarding undiscovered Arctic oil and 

gas resources results from several factors, including 

data scarcity or disparate data density, environmental 

concerns, high development costs, and technological 

requirements. An important extension of an undiscovered resource assessment is the development of a fullcycle model that evaluates these economic and other 

factors to estimate the amount of resource that could be 

added to global supply.

• Action 5–1d.—Synthesize energy resource commodity 

assessments (for example, coal, geothermal, natural 

gas, and oil) into a global evaluation of the future 

energy mix. Although the thrust of this effort will be 

forward looking, it can also establish an historical 

basis (“lessons-learned”) for analysis, such as the age 

and decline rates of giant domestic fields from which 

a large proportion of our oil is produced. Furthermore, 

the results of such a synthesis may identify new fundamental research directions and could be used to refine 

approaches to resource assessments.

• Action 5–1e.—Develop an active, unified, and recurring mechanism for prioritizing USGS energy and 

minerals research, assessments, and other science 

and information products to address identified data 

gaps and emerging needs. For example, a new genetic 

model may be needed for a previously unrecognized 

deposit type (goal 1) or geochemical research may be 

required to trace the cycling of an element with emerging uses (goal 2).

5–2. Short-Term Fluctuations Affecting Reliability of 

Resource Supplies

• Action 5–2a.—Enhance capabilities for rapidly 

responding to events, such as natural disasters or manmade disruptions, that result in significant perturbations to resource supplies and (or) the release of energy 

resources or mineral materials to the environment. 

Enhancing these capabilities would require strengthening of coordination mechanisms to facilitate deployment of rapid-response science teams and equipment to 

collect time-sensitive data from the field and to extract 

scale-appropriate data or other information from existing databases (highlight 9). To support this endeavor, 
Energy and Minerals Linkages Across the U.S. Geological Survey 31

additional investments would be needed to establish 

mechanisms for timely sample and data analysis, 

interpretation, and delivery to the responders, decisionmakers, and the general public in understandable and 

needed formats.

• Action 5–2b.—Conduct research on coupled systems 

affecting energy and minerals availability, such as the 

complex relation between technology and resource 

economies, and develop scenarios of perturbations 

affecting the reliability of energy and mineral supplies. 

Such analysis and reporting could identify specific 

nodes and links in supply chains that are vulnerable 

to disruption. Scenarios incorporating such relations can be useful in estimating the consequences of 

an event on the availability of energy and minerals 

resources and will likely empower decisionmakers and 

responders to develop proactive measures to adapt to 

or mitigate potential consequences and accelerate the 

response and (or) recovery phases following an event.

Energy and Minerals Linkages Across 

the U.S. Geological Survey

The USGS science strategy (U.S. Geological Survey, 

2007) established a plan for linking scientific expertise and 

capabilities across USGS mission areas. The objectives are 

to encourage more studies that use integrated information 

resources and to create a highly accessible environment for 

application of data resources available from the USGS and 

other Federal agencies. From this emphasis on integration, the 

energy and minerals strategic plan mirrors the reality that complex societal issues demand diverse capabilities from every 

corner of the USGS. The potential linkages across mission 

areas are open ended and dependent on the particular blend of 

science a given issue demands; however, the following discussion provides a starting point for recognizing the possibilities.

Table 3 provides an initial evaluation of the energy and 

minerals mission area goals and actions that will require support of other mission areas. Placing an action at an appropriate 

intersection point with other USGS mission areas is the key 

to understanding table 3. For example, most of the energy and 

mineral actions of goal 2 on environmental effects, goal 3 on 

assessments, and goal 4 on land management point to the need 

for enlisting expertise from across mission areas to deliver 

research and assessment products from a variety of disciplines.

While this perspective focuses on opportunities for 

other mission areas to advance energy and minerals goals, we 

recognize that the converse is also true: efforts precipitated 

by the energy and minerals strategic plan will contribute to 

other goals across the USGS. When leveraged with expertise 

from other mission areas, the energy and minerals actions 

yield results that provide a more comprehensive and integrated 

understanding of natural resources. The use of pilot studies 

based on the concept of early integration of resources and 

personnel can help determine when and where collaboration 

among mission areas would be most successful. These pilot 

studies are scalable and could be used to leverage collaboration at regional and national levels within the DOI and among 

other Federal agencies.

The actions in this report reflect the importance of early 

planning so that integration of interdisciplinary Earth science 

research can be established across mission areas of the USGS. 

These actions further stimulate the creation of information and 

databases that, when combined with those of other Federal 

agencies and public resource stewards, lead to the type of 

integrated assessments that will further our understanding of 

the complexities of the energy and minerals resource lifecycle 

related to resource development issues.

Coordination across the USGS is important to fully 

understand the breadth and magnitude of interactions among 

energy and mineral lifecycles and air, land, soil, water, ecosystems services or functions, and human health from local, 

regional, national, and global perspectives. The science actions 

developed as part of this energy and mineral science strategy 

represent key components of integrated studies at multiple 

scales.

By linking the science resources and data from all USGS 

mission areas in the early stages of key integrated studies, the 

USGS could develop new abilities to identify science gaps and 

data needs from linked resources that a single mission area 

alone might not recognize or be able to develop on its own. 

Early integration of data from multiple mission areas could 

also generate information relevant to socioeconomic issues 

that are important to the understanding of complex energy 

and minerals lifecycles. The extent and implications of these 

linkages point to better data management and integration and 

new research and development methods as the two science 

directions that are essential to the success of the USGS science strategy in the coming decade. In a lifecycle or systems 

approach to science, the USGS can find ways to better manage 

and integrate data from all mission areas to facilitate a greater 

understanding of Earth science systems and provide new and 

innovative ways to make this information accessible across 

discipline and geographic boundaries. These data must be presented in ways that can reach a range of audiences that include 

scientists, cooperators, resource managers, policymakers, and 

the public, all of whom have diverse interests, data needs, 

backgrounds, and responsibilities for resource systems.
32 U.S. Geological Survey Energy and Minerals Science Strategy

Table 3. U.S. Geological Survey energy and minerals science strategy actions and intersections with other mission areas.

[Gray-shaded rows denote actions for which the outcomes can be achieved largely through energy and minerals core expertise and capabilities. Red dots denote 

actions for which significant leveraging of expertise and capabilities from other mission areas will be needed to fully achieve desired outcomes. DOI, U.S. 

Department of the Interior; EEZ, Exclusive Economic Zone; NMIC, National Minerals Information Center; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey]

Focus area and action

Climate and 

land-use 

change

Core 

science 

systems

Ecosystems

Environmental 

health

Natural 

hazards Water

Goal 1. Understand fundamental earth processes that form energy and mineral resources

1–1. Geologic and tectonic framework studies:

1–1a. Map regional-scale geologic features ●

1–1b. Acquire regional-scale geophysical data ●

1–1c. Apply 3D models to areas of high resource potential ● ● ●

1–2. Evolution of energy and mineral systems:

1–2a. Investigate geologic and geochemical factors

1–2b. Conduct research on emerging energy resources ● ●

1–2c. Conduct deposit-scale studies

1–2d. Determine broad-scale controls on mineral systems ● ● ●

1–2e. Investigate sedimentary basin petroleum and ore formation

1–3. Frontier studies:

1–3a. Promote collection of U.S. EEZ data ● ● ●

1–3b. Expand data collection and evaluation of Alaska and Arctic 

offshore

● ● ● ● ●

1–3c. Construct geologic frameworks for concealed deposits

Goal 2. Understand the environmental behavior of energy and mineral resources and their waste products

2–1. Fundamental studies:

2–1a. Investigate carbon sources and sinks ● ●

2–1b. Investigate perturbations to natural landscape during 

resource lifecycle

● ● ● ●

2–1c. Understand climatic alteration of energy and minerals 

systems

● ● ●

2–2. Applied investigations:

2–2a. Characterize waste streams ● ● ●

2–2b. Conduct research on deep geologic reservoirs for waste 

disposal

● ● ●

2–2c. Investigate environmental geochemistry of resource 

production technologies

●

2–2d. Expand capabilities to research renewable energy 

development effects

● ● ● ● ● ●

2–3. Synthesis activities:

2–3a. Create geologically based environmental models ● ● ● ● ● ●

2–3b. Enhance transfer of insights between experiments and 

system-wide studies

● ● ●

Goal 3. Provide inventories and assessments of energy and mineral resources

3–1. Undiscovered geologically based energy resources:

3–1a. Conduct periodic assessments

3–1b. Complete uranium assessment

3–1c. Assess emerging resources

3-1d. Develop additional components of economic and environmental analyses● ● ●
Goals for Energy and Mineral Resources Science 33

Focus area and action

Climate and 

land-use 

change

Core 

science 

systems

Ecosystems

Environmental 

health

Natural 

hazards Water

3–2. Discovered nonfuel mineral resources:

3–2a. Expand partnerships

3–2b. Establish a periodic review

3-2c. Expand due-diligence field studies

3-2d. Enhance scope and functionality of domestic discovered 

resources database

3-2e. Strengthen and expand NMIC analytical capabilities

3–3. Undiscovered nonfuel mineral resources:

3–3a. Reevaluate methodologies for undiscovered mineral 

resources assessments

3–3b. Adapt methodologies for use in frontier regions ●

Goal 4. Understand the effects of energy and mineral development on natural resources

4–1. Spatial analysis of energy and mineral resources occurrence and development:

4–1a. Designate liaisons and energy and minerals resource experts 

in USGS

● ● ● ● ● ●

4-1b. Provide usable information to large landscape conservation 

initiatives

4-1c. Develop new nationwide spatial data products ●

4–2. Explore interdisciplinary approaches for assessing effects of energy and mineral resources development:

4–2a. Identify metrics or indicators ● ● ● ● ● ●

4–2b. Develop and refine methods for incorporating metrics ● ● ● ● ● ●

4–2c. Develop methods to estimate potential land surface and 

seabed disturbance

● ● ● ● ●

4-2d. Evaluate models, effects, and effectiveness of mitigation 

strategies

● ● ● ● ● ●

4-2e. Develop decision analysis and support tools ● ● ●

4-2f. Assess potential environmental consequences of renewable 

energy development

● ● ● ● ● ●

Goal 5. Understand the availability and reliability of energy and mineral resource supplies

5–1. Emerging or longer term issues affecting resource availability:

5–1a. Develop approaches for identifying strategic and critical 

mineral materials 

5–1b. Conduct targeted studies on global flow of critical mineral 

materials

5-1c. Conduct research on resource endowment contribution to 

future supplies

5-1d. Synthesize energy resource commodity assessments

5-1e. Develop mechanisms for prioritizing USGS energy and 

minerals research

5–2. Short-term fluctuations affecting reliability of resource supplies:

5–2a. Enhance capabilities for rapidly responding to events ● ● ● ● ● ●

5–2b. Conduct research on reliability of energy and mineral 

supplies 

●

Table 3. U.S. Geological Survey energy and minerals science strategy actions and intersections with other mission areas.—Continued

[Gray-shaded rows denote actions for which the outcomes can be achieved largely through energy and minerals core expertise and capabilities. Red dots denote 

actions for which significant leveraging of expertise and capabilities from other mission areas will be needed to fully achieve desired outcomes. DOI, U.S. 

Department of the Interior; EEZ, Exclusive Economic Zone; NMIC, National Minerals Information Center; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey]
34 U.S. Geological Survey Energy and Minerals Science Strategy

References Cited

Ahlbrandt, T.S., Charpentier, R.R., Klett, T.R., Schmoker, 

J.W., Schenk, C.J., and Ulmishek, G.F., 2005, Global 

resource estimates from total petroleum systems: American 

Association of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 86, 324 p.

Alpine, A.E., ed., 2010, Hydrological, geological, and biological site characterization of breccia pipe uranium deposits in 

northern Arizona: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2010–5025, 353 p., 1 pl., scale 1:375,000, 

available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2010/5025/.

Biewick, L.R.H., 2008, Areas of historical oil and gas exploration and production in the United States: U.S. Geological 

Survey Digital Data Series 69–Q, available at http://pubs.

usgs.gov/dds/dds-069/dds-069-q/.

Brown, W.M., III, Matos, G.R., and Sullivan, D.E., (comps.), 

2000, Materials and energy flows in the Earth science 

century—A summary of a workshop held by the USGS in 

November 1998: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1194, 

76 p., available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2000/c1194/.

Clark, R.N., Swayze, G.A., Hoefen, T.M., Green, R.O., Livo, 

K.E., Meeker, G.P., Sutley, S.J., Plumlee, G.S., Pavri, 

Betina, Sarture, Chuck, Boardman, Joe, Brownfield, I.K., 

and Morath, L.C., 2006, Environmental mapping of the 

World Trade Center area with imaging spectroscopy after 

the September 11, 2001 attack, chap. 4 of Gaffney, J.S., and 

Marley, N.A., eds., Urban aerosols and their impacts—Lessons learned from the World Trade Center tragedy: American Chemical Society Symposium Series, v. 919, p. 66–83.

Coleman, J.L., Milici, R.C., Cook, T.A., Charpentier, R.R., 

Kirschbaum, Mark, Klett, T.R., Pollastro, R.M., and 

Schenk, C.J., 2011, Assessment of undiscovered oil and gas 

resources of the Devonian Marcellus Shale of the Appalachian Basin Province, 2011: U.S. Geological Survey Fact 

Sheet 2011–3092, 2 p., available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/

fs/2011/3092/.

duBray, E.A., (ed.), 1995, Preliminary compilation of descriptive geoenvironmental mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 95–831, 272 p., available 

at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1995/ofr-95-0831/.

Eppinger, R.G., 2002, Pre-fire baseline stream-sediment and 

stream-water geochemical data from a recently burned 

area in central Idaho, and suggestions for application of 

geochemical data to wildfire science, in Coffelt, J.L., and 

Livingston, R.K., 2002, Second U.S. Geological Survey 

Wildland Fire Workshop; Los Alamos, New Mexico; October 31–November 3, 2000: U.S. Geological Survey OpenFile Report 2002–11, p. 51, available at http://pubs.usgs.

gov/of/2002/0011/report.pdf.

Eppinger, R.G., Briggs, P.H., Rieffenberger, Betsy, Van Dorn, 

Carol, Brown, Z.A., Crock, J.G., Hageman, P.H., Meier, 

Allen, Sutley, S.J., Theodorakos, P.M., and Wilson, S.A., 

2003, Geochemical data for stream sediment and surface 

water samples from Panther Creek, the middle fork of 

the Salmon River, and the main Salmon River, collected 

before and after the Clear Creek, Little Pistol, and Shellrock 

wildfires of 2000 in central Idaho: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 2003–152, 32 p., available at http://pubs.

usgs.gov/of/2003/152/.

Gundersen, L.C.S., Belnap, J., Goldhaber, M., Goldstein, A., 

Haeussler, P.J., Ingebritsen, S.E., Jones, J.W., Plumlee, G.S., 

Thieler, E.R., Thompson, R.S., and Back, J.M., 2011, Geology for a changing world 2010–2020—Implementing the 

U.S. Geological Survey science strategy: U.S. Geological 

Survey Circular 1369, 68 p. (Also available at http://pubs.

usgs.gov/circ/circ1369/.)

Higley, D.K., 2011, Undiscovered petroleum resources for 

the Woodford Shale and Thirteen Finger Limestone-Atoka 

Shale assessment units, Anadarko Basin: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 2011–1242, 3 sheets, available at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1242/.

Jacobsen, L.J., Glynn, P.D., Phelps, G.A., Orndorff, R.C., 

Bawden, G.W., and Grauch, V.J.S., 2011, U.S. Geological 

Survey—A synopsis of three-dimensional modeling, chap. 

13 of Berg, R.C., Mathers, S.J., Kessler, Holger, and Keefer, 

D.A., eds., Synopsis of current three-dimensional mapping 

and modeling in geological survey organizations: Illinois 

State Geological Survey Circular 578, p. 69–79, available 

at http://water.usgs.gov/nrp/proj.bib/Publications/2011/

jacobsen_glynn_etal_2011.pdf.

Jones, L.M., Bernknopf, Richard, Cox, Dale, Goltz, James, 

Hudnut, Kenneth, Mileti, Dennis, Perry, Suzanne, Ponti, 

Daniel, Porter, Keith, Reichle, Michael, Seligson, Hope, 

Shoaf, Kimberley, Treiman, Jerry, and Wein, Anne, 2008, 

The ShakeOut scenario: U.S. Geological Survey OpenFile Report 2008–1150 and California Geological Survey 

Preliminary Report 25, 312 p. (Also available at http://pubs.

usgs.gov/of/2008/1150/.)

Kostick, D.S., 1996, The material flow concept for materials: 

Nonrenewable Resources, v. 5, no. 4, p. 211–233.

Labson, V.F., Clark, R.N., Swayze, G.A., Hoefen, T.M., 

Kokaly, Raymond., Livo, K.E., Powers, M.H., Plumlee, 

G.S., and Meeker, G.P., 2010, Estimated minimum discharge rates of the Deepwater Horizon spill—Interim report 

to the Flow Rate Technical Group from the Mass Balance 

Team: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2010–

1132, 4 p., available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1132/.

Langer, W.H., 2011, The ShakeOut scenario—Meeting the 

needs for construction aggregates, asphalt, and concrete: 

Earthquake Spectra, v. 27, p. 505–520.
References Cited 35

Menzie, W.D., Baker, M.S., Bleiwas, D.I., and Kuo, Chin, 

2011, Mines and mineral processing facilities in the vicinity of the March 11, 2011, earthquake in northern Honshu, 

Japan: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2011–

1069, 7 p., available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1069/.

National Research Council, 1996, Mineral resources and 

sustainability—Challenges for earth scientists: Washington, 

D.C., The National Academies Press, 26 p.

National Research Council, 2004, Materials count—The case 

for materials flow analysis: Washington, D.C., The National 

Academies Press, 144 p.

National Research Council, 2008, Minerals, critical minerals, 

and the U.S. economy: Washington, D.C., The National 

Academies Press, 264 p.

Plumlee, G.S., and Ziegler, T.L., 2003, The medical geochemistry of dusts, soils, and other earth materials, in

Lollar, B.S., ed., Environmental geochemistry: Treatise on 

Geochemistry, v. 9, p. 1–61. (Also available at http://www.

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B0080437516090502.)

Plumlee, G.S., Meeker, G.P., Lovelace, J.K., Rosenbauer, 

R.J., Lamonthe, P.J., Furlong, E.T., and Demas, C.R., 2006, 

USGS environmental characterization of flood sediments 

left in the New Orleans area after Hurricanes Katrina and 

Rita, 2005—Progress report: U.S. Geological Survey OpenFile Report 2006–1023, 74 p., available at http://pubs.usgs.

gov/of/2006/1023/.

Scott, D.C., Haacke, J.E., Osmonson, L.M., Luppens, J.A., 

Pierce, P.E., and Rohrbacher, T.J., 2011, Assessment of coal 

geology, resources, and reserves in the northern Wyoming 

Powder River Basin: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 2010–1294, 136 p., available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/

of/2010/1294/.

United Nations, 1982, United Nations convention on the law 

of the sea: Montego Bay, Jamaica, United Nations, 202 p., 

accessed April 12, 2012, at http://www.un.org/Depts/los/

convention_agreements/convention_overview_convention.

htm.

United Nations World Commission on Environment and 

Development, 1987, Our common future: United Nations, 

374 p. (Also available at http://worldinbalance.net/

intagreements/1987-brundtland.php.)

U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, 2004, An ocean blueprint 

for the 21st century—Final report: Washington, D.C., U.S. 

Commission on Ocean Policy, 438 p. plus appendixes. (Also 

available at http://www.oceancommission.gov/documents/

full_color_rpt/000_ocean_full_report.pdf.

U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2011, Annual energy 

review 2010: U.S. Energy Information Administration 

DOE/EIA–0384(2010), 384 p., available at http://www.eia.

gov/totalenergy/data/annual/pdf/aer.pdf.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2007, Facing tomorrow’s challenges—U.S. Geological Survey science in the decade 

2007–2017: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1309, 67 p. 

(Also available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2007/1309/.)

U.S. Geological Survey Bighorn Basin Assessment Team, 

2010, Petroleum systems and geologic assessment of oil and 

gas in the Bighorn Basin Province, Wyoming and Montana: 

U.S. Geological Survey Digital Data Series 69–V, available 

at http://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds-069/dds-069-v/.

U.S. Geological Survey Oil Shale Assessment Team, 2010a, 

Oil shale and nahcolite resources of the Piceance Basin, 

Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Digital Data Series 69–Y, 

available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds-069/dds-069-y/.

U.S. Geological Survey Oil Shale Assessment Team, 2010b, 

Oil shale resources of the Uinta Basin, Utah and Colorado: 

U.S. Geological Survey Digital Data Series 69–BB, available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds-069/dds-069-bb/

U.S. Geological Survey Marcellus Shale Assessment Team, 

2011, Information relevant to the U.S. Geological Survey 

assessment of the Middle Devonian Marcellus Shale of the 

Appalachian Basin Province, 2011: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 2011–1298, 22 p., available at http://pubs.

usgs.gov/of/2011/1298/.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2012, Mineral commodity summaries 

2012: U.S. Geological Survey, 201 p. (Also available at 

http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/mcs/2012/mcs2012.

pdf.)

Van Gosen, B.S., Gillerman, V.S., and Armbrustmacher, T.J., 

2009, Thorium deposits of the United States—Energy 

resources for the future?: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 

1336, 21 p., available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1336/.

Williams, B.K., Szaro, R.C., and Shapiro, C.D., 2009, 

Adaptive management—The U.S. Department of the 

Interior technical guide: U.S. Department of the Interior, 72 p., available at http://www.doi.gov/initiatives/

AdaptiveManagement/TechGuide.pdf.

Wolf, R.E., Hoefen, T.M., Hageman, P.L., Morman, S.A., and 

Plumlee, G.S., 2010, Speciation of arsenic, selenium, and 

chromium in wildfire impacted soils and ashes: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2010–1242, 29 p., available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1242/.

Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative, [undated], 

Integrated assessment: Wyoming Landscape Conservation 

Initiative, accessed April 6, 2012, at http://www.wlci.gov/.