Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
INTRODUCTION
Alphabetic
The simplest approach, and certainly the most intuitive and accessible for those from outside the subject seeking commodity-specific
information, is nothing more complex than the alphabetical listing
of commodities. This has been adopted for systematic commodity
reviews in earlier editions of this book (e.g., Lefond 1975; Carr
1994). Indeed, as noted by Harben and Bates (1984), the alphabetic
treatment neatly sidesteps the vexatious matter of classification.
This edition in part adopts the same approach as it lends itself
to simple encyclopedic interrogation once a mineral or commodity
is identified. Approximately 60 commodities are typically included
in such a listing, but these are always under review. This simplistic
compositional approach works reasonably well for industrial minerals but requires a degree of clarification and consistency because
subdivisions are often necessary. For example, clays can be divided
into bentonites, which can in turn be divided into sodium or calcium smectites. Nomenclature for industrial rocks and other raw
materials can also be variable; for example, brick clay, common
clay, structural clay, and heavy clay are all common pseudonyms
and are based more on application than composition.
Unfortunately, the alphabetic approach to classification
obscures many important links between commodities, including
similar properties they possess, geological processes that led to their
formation, or applications in which they are used. For this reason,
the alphabetic classification employed in this edition is supplemented by important reviews of major markets and uses for industrial minerals and rocks. Although this approach may suit those
using a book format, other forms of classification have been developed that may be more useful for the consumer or the geologist.
CLASSIFICATION SCHEMES
A range of classifications based on a variety of commodity criteria
has been used over the past 50 years or more as tools for understanding the geological context, market uses, defining properties,
economic contribution, and statistical significance of industrial
minerals and rocks. Each approach has its strengths and weaknesses, and any durable scheme in such a dynamic industrial sector
will inevitably present only part of the picture. Bates (1975) examined a number of these schemes, and more extensive comparisons
have been undertaken by Kuzvart (1984), Noetstaller (1988), and
Smith (1999). All of these were drawn on extensively for this
review.
Berzelian
The world of systematic mineralogy has a number of classification
systems that have also been applied to industrial minerals. Most
museum mineral collections are catalogued by the Berzelian classification system, which is based on elements, ions, ionic groups, and
compounds such as halides, oxides, carbonates, and silicates,
among others. This system was used in early accounts of the nonmetallics (such as in Merrill 1904) and also hydrocarbons, but not
industrial rocks other than some siliceous and calcareous examples
under silica and calcium carbonate, respectively. The classification
did not cover waste materials, brines, or most manufactured prod-
Geological Processes
From the geologists perspective, there is much to be gained by trying to place a genetic classification on such a wide variety of materials (Bates 1960; Harben and Bates 1984). There are well-defined
categories of geological processes responsible for the formation of
all minerals and rocks, and industrial minerals and rocks encompass
the complete spectrum. Such a classification parallels standard geological understanding and has exploration relevance because a commodity may be found again in other places where these processes
Rhyolite Dome
Perlite
Lava Flow
Aggregate
Dimension Stone
Alluvial Fans
Aggregate
Fummaroles
Sulfur
Fore Arc
Basin
Fore Arc
Beach Sands
Olivine
Oceanic
Trench
Ophiolite:
Pillow Lavas and Sediments
Ochre, Umber
Figure 1.
End-Use Classifications
It is a common saying in the industrial minerals and rocks sector that
exploration begins with markets (Coope 1982). This highlights the
essential importance of understanding that the mineral or rock has
value only if there is a customer willing and able to pay for it. Minerals are, however, capable of being utilized in many different end
uses; limestone, for example, can provide more than 100 separate
products that are used in very different applications. Equally, some
consuming industries require a suite of different industrial minerals,
each of which alone would not meet the needs of the manufacturing
process. For these reasons, many classifications have concentrated
on either the end uses for minerals and relationships between them,
or combined end uses with other important parameters of the industrial minerals and rocks industry.
Following the work of Bates (1959) and Wright and Burnett
(1962), Fisher (1969) conducted a detailed analysis and defined six
major end-use groupings that were characterized by variation in
unit value, production volume, and associated parameters:
1. Bulk construction and building materials
2. Bulk ceramic raw material (in addition to lime and diversified
industry raw materials or products)
3. Specialty building products and principal refractories
4. Major industrial chemicals and fertilizer raw materials
5. Industrial minerals and rocks
6. Specialty-grade and precious minerals and rocks
For each group, Fisher also presented a series of graphs showing the
typical levels of capital and plant cost, place value, resource spread,
enrichment ratios, and fiscal treatment, based on deposits and companies in the United States. Although the groupings are defined on end
uses, this represents one of the earliest and most rigorous attempts at
a multifaceted classification for industrial minerals and rocks.
In a major review of nonmetallic mineral deposit assessment
criteria, Lorenz (1991) produced a detailed tabulation of commodity
uses in some 38 products or intermediate products. Highley (1994)
adopted a more straightforward graphical attempt to illustrate important sectors with a hierarchical chart of major end users. Chang
(2002) also produced an account of the industrial processes and end
uses for the main industrial minerals and rocks and noted that they
could be allocated into 16 groupings based on their function or final
product.
Although not an attempt at a rigorous classification, the end
uses for ground (filler and extender) minerals are examined from a
formulators viewpoint in Ciullo (1996). Although this represents
only a section of both consuming industries and industrial minerals
and rocks, it provides a useful way of examining the diverse roles
that different minerals play in products and their ability to substitute for each other.
Economic
As part of their objective to inform Californians about their states
geology, mineral deposits, and general usefulness of minerals and
rocks, Wright and Burnett (1962) proposed a threefold commercial classification of industrial minerals and rocks. Based on unit
price and production volumes, the groups were
1. Low pricelarge volume: materials used in construction such
as aggregates, gypsum, and common clay
2. High pricehigh volume: borates, potash, and salt
3. High pricelow volume: barite, kyanite, beryl, mica, and talc
Each group was also identified as having a number of common features in terms of their deposit size, distribution, location, mining
methods, and treatment.
Group 1
Group 2
Bulk
Large
Small
Unit value
Low
High
Place value
High
Low
Few
Many
Distribution
Widespread
Restricted
Geology
Simple
Complex
Processing
Simple
Complex
Industrial Rocks
Industrial Minerals
Igneous Rocks
Igneous Minerals
Beryl
Granite
Feldspar
Perlite
Lithium minerals
Pumice and
pumicite
Mica
Nepheline syenite
Metamorphic Rocks
Marble
Barite
Slate
Fluorspar
Magnesite
Sedimentary Rocks
Quartz crystal
Clay
Metamorphic Minerals
Gypsum
Asbestos
Limestone and
dolomite
Graphite
Talc
Phosphate rock
Vermiculite
Salt
Borates
Sandstone
Diamond
Diatomite
Nitrates
Potash minerals
Sodium minerals
Sulfur
10
REFERENCES
Anon. 1994. Minerals for Development. British Geological Survey
Technical Report WG/94/13. Nottingham: Natural Environment
Research Council (NERC).
Bates, R.L. 1959. Classification of the nonmetallics. Economic
Geology 1(54):248253.
. 1960. Classification. Pages 1519 in Geology of the
Industrial Rocks and Minerals. 1st edition. New York: Harper.
. 1969. Geology of Industrial Rocks and Minerals. New
York: Dover Publications.
. 1975. Introduction. Pages 37 in Industrial Minerals and
Rocks. 4th edition. Edited by S.J. Lefond. New York: AIME.
Carr, D.D., editor. 1994. Industrial Minerals and Rocks. 6th edition.
Littleton, CO: SME.
Chang, L.L.Y. 2002. Industrial Mineralogy: Materials, Processes
and Uses. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Ciullo, P.A., editor. 1996. Industrial Minerals and Their Uses.
Westwood, NJ: Noyes Publications.
Coope, B.M. 1982. Industrial mineralsexploration begins with
markets. Transactions of the Institution of Mining and
Metallurgy 91:B8B10.
Dunn, J.R. 1973. A matrix classification for industrial minerals and
rocks. Pages 185189 in Proceedings of the 8th Forum on the
Geology of Industrial Minerals. Public Information Circular 5.
Iowa Geological Survey.
Fisher, W.L. 1969. The nonmetallic industrial minerals: Examples of
diversity and quantity. Mining Congress Journal 55(2):120126.
Harben, P.W., and R.L. Bates. 1984. Geology of the Nonmetallics.
New York: Metal Bulletin.
. 1990. Industrial Minerals: Geology and World Deposits.
London: Metal Bulletin Plc.
Highley, D.E. 1994. The role of industrial minerals in the
economics of developing countries. In Industrial Minerals in
Developing Countries. Edited by S.J. Mathers and A.J.G
Northolt. Association of Geoscientists for International
Development (AGID) Report Series, Geosciences in
International Development, No. 18. Nottingham: British
Geological Survey/AGID.
Kline, C.H. 1970. Industrial minerals are big business. Mining
Engineering 22(12):4648.
Kuzvart, M. 1984. Industrial Minerals and Rocks. Developments in
Economic Geology 18. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Lefond, S.J., editor. 1975. Industrial Minerals and Rocks. 4th
edition. New York: AIME.
Lorenz, W. 1991. Criteria for the assessment of non-metallic
mineral deposits. Geologishe Jahrbuch A127:299326.
11