| |
|
|
|
|||||
| |
|
|
||||||
|
||||||||
Not too many years ago, mineral exploration and
minking were considered noble and beneficial pursuits, and the Vredefort
Dome in South Africa was widely believed to be the surface expression of
deep magmatic activity. Now, mining is widely condemned as an assault on
the environment, and compelling arguments suggest that the Vredefort Dome
is an impact structure.
This is extraordinary change over the brief span
of a few decades. Are our social values and our science really evolving
that fast? Can such rapid change be evolutionary, or was it revolutionary
or revisionary? Whatever the path, these changes are impacting earth scientists
just as earth scientists are contributing to these changes.
Given these new attitudes, Joe Briskey and colleagues
at the U.S. Geological Survey present a case in this issue for conducting
a global resource assessment of non-fuel mineral resources. Such an undertaking
would have been technically impossible only a few decades ago. But with
the development of mineral deposit models and techniques for characterizing
geologic terranes, assessments are now not only possible — they are also
noble and beneficial.
Whereas past exploration and mining have largely
been driven by a single value, profit, the global assessment suggested
here would also address environmental and social values. Ideally, global
assessments will guide future exploration and mining to areas where environmental
impact would be minimal, social value would be high and profit potential
sufficient to attract investment.
The Vredefort Dome, described in this issue by
Uwe Reimold, is a complex circular structure about 300 kilometers in diameter.
What makes its origin particularly interesting is its location adjacent
to the even more unusual Witwatersrand gold field, the largest gold deposit
on Earth. Vredefort is a reminder that few geological features aren’t related
in some way to mineral resources.
And some mineral resources have unique social
impacts, as illustrated by James Shigley and Barak Green in the Comment
on “conflict diamonds.”
A global assessment of mineral resources will
inevitably contribute to and draw from our evolving understanding of the
Vredefort Dome and thousands of other geologic features.
Historically, our initial encounters with virgin
parts of Earth’s surface have generally been driven by the value we place
on one mission: to explore and extract — whether it be first assaults on
great mountains, the search for precious minerals, clear-cutting of old
growth forests or archaeological digs. If we remain in an area, our values
will ultimately multiply and conflict over time. Our needs from Earth change
and we have to learn to live with our actions.
In exploration and mining, the initial pursuit
of precious metals gives way to a pursuit for industrial metals such as
iron, copper and molybdenum, and then to the need for infrastructure resources
such as limestone, sand and gravel.
The consequences and rewards of these stages
will benefit from global resource assessments just as they will from basic
earth science research on geological features such as the Vredefort Dome.
The evolution of our values will also lead to greater care for the environments
of Earth.
Trust your compass,
Samuel S. Adams
Geotimes Editor-in-Chief
 |
Geotimes Home | AGI Home | Information Services | Geoscience Education | Public Policy | Programs | Publications | Careers  |