DOCSLIB.ORG

Mineral Land Classification: Concrete Aggregate in the Greater Sacramento Area Production-Consumption Region

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mineral Land Classification: Concrete Aggregate in the Greater Sacramento Area Production-Consumption Region Special Report 245 MINERAL LAND CLASSIFICATION: CONCRETE AGGREGATE IN THE GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA PRODUCTION-CONSUMPTION REGION 2018 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDMUND G. BROWN JR. GOVERNOR THE NATURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AGENCY DAVID BUNN JOHN LAIRD DIRECTOR SECRETARY FOR RESOURCES CALIFORNIA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WILLIAM R. SHORT, ACTING STATE GEOLOGIST Copyright © 2018 by the California Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent of the California Geological Survey. “The Department of Conservation makes no warranties as to the suitability of this product for any particular purpose. SPECIAL REPORT 245 MINERAL LAND CLASSIFICATION: CONCRETE AGGREGATE IN THE GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA PRODUCTION-CONSUMPTION REGION By Matt D. O’Neal and Fred W. Gius (PG 7788) 2018 CALIFORNIA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY’S PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICES: Southern California Regional Office Library and Headquarters Office Bay Area Regional Office 320 West 4th Street, Suite 850 801 K Street, MS 14-31 1900 S. Norfolk St., Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90013 Sacramento, CA 95814-3531 San Mateo, CA 94403 (213) 239-0878 (916) 445-5716 (650) 350-7301 Table of Contents INDEX OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................ v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... vii PART I – INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1 HISTORY OF MINERAL LAND CLASSIFICATION IN THE GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA P-C REGION ............................................................................................................... 2 OVERVIEW OF CONCRETE-GRADE AGGREGATE ............................................................ 6 BACKGROUND OF CLASSIFICATION-DESIGNATION ........................................................ 6 OVERVIEW OF CLASSIFICATION ........................................................................................ 7 OVERVIEW OF DESIGNATION ............................................................................................. 7 LEAD AGENCY RESPONSE TO CLASSIFICATION ............................................................. 7 PART II – UPDATE OF MINERAL LAND CLASSIFICATIOON FOR CONCRETE AGGREGATE IN THE GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA P-C REGION ..................................11 MINERAL RESOURCE ZONES ............................................................................................11 CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA ...............................................................................................11 REEVALUATION OF MINERAL LAND CLASSIFICATION FOR CONCRETE AGGREGATE ...................................................................................................12 Geologic Map Compilation Used in New and Re-evaluated Mineral Land Classification ....12 Summary of Geology and Geography ................................................................................12 Geologic Controls on Aggregate Quality ............................................................................13 Areas within the P-C Region Reclassified to MRZ-2 for Concrete Aggregate .....................19 Areas within the P-C Region Reclassified from MRZ-2 to MRZ-1, -3 or -4 for Concrete Aggregate ...........................................................................................................20 DESCRIPTION OF AREAS NEWLY-SUBJECTED TO MINERAL LAND CLASSIFICATION.......................................................................................................21 PART III – REEVALUATION OF CONCRETE AGGREGATE RESOURCES IN THE GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA P-C REGION ......................................................................23 CONCEPTS USED IN IDENTIFYING AGGREGATE RESOURCE SECTORS .....................23 REEVALUATION OF PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED AGGREGATE RESOURCE SECTORS ........................................................................................................24 NEWLY-IDENTIFIED CONCRETE AGGREGATE RESOURCE SECTORS WITHIN THE GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA P-C REGION ..........................................................32 RECALCULATION OF AVAILABLE CONCRETE AGGREGATE RESOURCES ...................34 i PART IV – CONCRETE AGGREGATE PRODUCTION IN THE GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA P-C REGION ..................................................................................................................35 AGGREGATE PRODUCTION DATA.....................................................................................35 AGGREGATE CONSUMPTION ............................................................................................36 PART V – ESTIMATE OF THE 50-YEAR DEMAND FOR AGGREGATE IN THE GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA P-C REGION ........................................................................................39 HISTORIC POPULATION .....................................................................................................39 HISTORIC PER CAPITA AGGREGATE CONSUMPTION ....................................................41 POPULATION PROJECTION THROUGH THE YEAR 2066 .................................................43 PROJECTED AGGREGATE DEMAND THROUGH THE YEAR 2066 ...................................45 COMPARISON OF THE 50-YEAR AGGREGATE DEMAND WITH CURRENT AGGREGATE RESERVES ...................................................................................................46 ECONOMIC, SOCIETAL, AND ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS OF INCREASING TRANSPORT DISTANCE .....................................................................................................47 CHANGING MARKET DYNAMICS IN THE GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA P-C REGION .........................................................................................................................48 RECYCLED AGGREGATE ...................................................................................................50 PART VI – CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................51 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .........................................................................................................52 REFERENCES .........................................................................................................................53 APPENDIX A .......................................................................................................................... A-1 APPENDIX B .......................................................................................................................... B-1 APPENDIX C .......................................................................................................................... C-1 FIGURES FIGURE 1. BOUNDARY OF THE GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA P-C REGION ................. 2 FIGURE 2. GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA P-C REGION BOUNDARY AND PREVIOUS MINERAL LAND CLASSIFICATION STUDY BOUNDARIES. ............................................ 3 FIGURE 3. CONSTRUCTION AGGREGATE PRODUCTION (ALL GRADES) IN THE GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA P-C REGION ...............................................................37 FIGURE 4. CONSTRUCTION AGGREGATE PRODUCTION IN THE GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA P-C REGION FROM 1970 TO 2016 BY PRODUCING REGION ......................................................................................................38 FIGURE 5. ANNUAL HISTORIC POPULATION IN THE GSA P-C REGION............................39 FIGURE 6. ANNUAL PER CAPITA CONSUMPTION OF CONSTRUCTION AGGREGATE IN THE GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA P-C REGION ..................................................42 ii FIGURE 7. ACTUAL AND PROJECTED POPULATION OF THE GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA P-C REGION FOR YEARS 1970 TO 2066. ...................................44 FIGURE 8. HISTORICAL AGGREGATE CONSUMPTION AND PROJECTED ANNUAL AGGREGATE DEMAND IN THE GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA P-C REGION. .........46 TABLES TABLE 1. LEAD AGENCIES WITHIN THE GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA P-C REGION ...................................................................................................................... 8 TABLE 2A. RE-EVALUATION OF SECTORS FROM SR 132. .................................................25 TABLE 2B. RE-EVALUATION OF SECTORS FROM SR 156. .................................................26 TABLE 2C. RE-EVALUATION OF SECTORS FROM SR 164. ................................................27 TABLE 2D. RE-EVALUATION OF SECTORS FROM OFR 95-10. ...........................................28 TABLE 2E. RE-EVALUATION OF SECTORS FROM OFR 99-09. ...........................................30 TABLE 2F. RE-EVALUATION OF SECTORS FROM OFR 2000-03. .......................................31 TABLE 3. NEWLY-IDENTIFIED SECTORS .............................................................................33 TABLE 4. RESOURCE TOTALS FOR SOURCE REPORTS AND PRESENT REPORT. .........34 TABLE 5. CONSTRUCTION AGGREGATE PRODUCTION (ALL GRADES) IN THE GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA P-C REGION FROM 1970 TO 2016. ...........................36 TABLE 6. ANNUAL HISTORIC POPULATION IN THE GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA P-C REGION ............................................................................................................................40 TABLE 7. ANNUAL PER CAPITA CONSUMPTION IN THE GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA P-C REGION. ..........................................................................................................41 TABLE 8. 50-YEAR POPULATION PROJECTION FOR
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Division 300 Bases Section 304 Aggregate Base Course Description
    304.07 DIVISION 300 BASES SECTION 304 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE DESCRIPTION 304.01 This work consists of furnishing and placing one or more courses of aggregate and additives, if required, on a prepared subgrade. MATERIALS 304.02 Aggregate. The aggregates shall meet the requirements of subsection 703.03. Acceptance will be based on random samples taken from each lift. 304.03 Commercial Mineral Fillers. Portland cement shall conform to subsection 701.01. Hydrated lime shall conform to subsection 712.03. CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS 304.04 Placing. If the required compacted depth of the aggregate base course exceeds 6 inches, it shall be constructed in two or more layers of approximately equal thickness. The maximum compacted thickness of any one layer shall not exceed 6 inches. When vibratory or other approved types of special compacting equipment are used, the compacted depth of a single layer may be increased to 8 inches upon request, provided that specified density is achieved and written approval is given. 304.05 Mixing. The Contractor shall mix the aggregate by methods that insure a thorough and homogenous mixture. 304.06 Shaping and Compaction. Compaction of each layer shall continue until a density of at least 95 percent of the maximum density has been achieved as determined in accordance with AASHTO T 180 as modified by CP 23. The moisture content shall be at ± 2 percent of optimum moisture content. The surface of each layer shall be maintained during the compaction operations so that a uniform texture is produced and the aggregates are firmly keyed. Moisture conditioning shall be performed uniformly during compaction.
    [Show full text]
  • Mining's Toxic Legacy
    Mining’s Toxic Legacy An Initiative to Address Mining Toxins in the Sierra Nevada Acknowledgements _____________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The Sierra Fund would like to thank Dr. Carrie Monohan, contributing author of this report, and Kyle Leach, lead technical advisor. Thanks as well to Dr. William M. Murphy, Dr. Dave Brown, and Professor Becky Damazo, RN, of California State University, Chico for their research into the human and environmental impacts of mining toxins, and to the graduate students who assisted them: Lowren C. McAmis and Melinda Montano, Gina Grayson, James Guichard, and Yvette Irons. Thanks to Malaika Bishop and Roberto Garcia for their hard work to engage community partners in this effort, and Terry Lowe and Anna Reynolds Trabucco for their editorial expertise. For production of this report we recognize Elizabeth “Izzy” Martin of The Sierra Fund for conceiving of and coordinating the overall Initiative and writing substantial portions of the document, Kerry Morse for editing, and Emily Rivenes for design and formatting. Many others were vital to the development of the report, especially the members of our Gold Ribbon Panel and our Government Science and Policy Advisors. We also thank the Rose Foundation for Communities and the Environment and The Abandoned Mine Alliance who provided funding to pay for a portion of the expenses in printing this report. Special thanks to Rebecca Solnit, whose article “Winged Mercury and
    [Show full text]
  • Mineral Land Classification of the Powerhouse Aggregate Project Site
    SPECIAL REPORT 218 MINERAL LAND CLASSIFICATION OF THE POWER HOUSE AGGREGATE PROJECT SITE, BUTTE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA – FOR CONSTRUCTION AGGREGATE 2010 CALIFORNIA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER GOVERNOR THE RESOURCES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION LESTER A. SNOW DEREK CHERNOW SECRETARY FOR RESOURCES ACTING DIRECTOR CALIFORNIA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY JOHN G. PARRISH, Ph.D., STATE GEOLOGIST Copyright © 2010 by the California Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent of the California Geological Survey. “The Department of Conservation makes no warranties as to the suitability of this product for any particular purpose.” SPECIAL REPORT 218 MINERAL LAND CLASSIFICATION OF THE POWER HOUSE AGGREGATE PROJECT SITE, BUTTE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA - FOR CONSTRUCTION AGGREGATE By Joshua D. Smith & John P. Clinkenbeard (PG #4731) 2010 CALIFORNIA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY’S PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICES: Southern California Regional Office Library and Headquarters Office Bay Area Regional Office 888 Figueroa Street, Suite 475 801 K Street, MS 14-31 345 Middlefield Road, MS 520 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Sacramento, CA 95814-3531 Menlo Park, CA 94025 (213) 239-0878 (916) 445-5716 (650) 688-6327 ii Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................ v INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Results of Charitable Solicitation Campaigns Conducted by Commercial Fundraisers in Calendar Year 2016
    SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF CHARITABLE SOLICITATION CAMPAIGNS CONDUCTED BY COMMERCIAL FUNDRAISERS IN CALENDAR YEAR 2016 XAVIER BECERRA Attorney General State of California SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF CHARITABLE SOLICITATION BY COMMERCIAL FUNDRAISERS FOR YEAR ENDING 2016 (Government Code § 12599) TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGES SUMMARY 1 - 5 TABLE SUBJECT/TITLE 1 ALPHABETICAL LISTING BY CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION 2 LISTING BY PERCENT TO CHARITY IN DESCENDING ORDER 3 THRIFT STORE OPERATIONS – GOODS PURCHASED FROM CHARITY 4 THRIFT STORE OPERATIONS – MANAGEMENT FEE/COMMISSION 5 VEHICLE DONATIONS – ALPHABETICAL BY CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION 6 COMMERCIAL COVENTURERS – ALPHABETICAL BY CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION California Department of Justice November 2017 SUMMARY Every year Californians provide generous support to a wide array of charities, either directly or through commercial fundraisers that charities hire to solicit donations on their behalf. The term “commercial fundraiser” refers generally to a person or corporation that contracts with a charity, for compensation, to solicit funds. The commercial fundraiser charges either a flat fee or a percentage of the donations collected. By law, commercial fundraisers are required to register with the Attorney General’s Registry of Charitable Trusts and file a Notice of Intent before soliciting donations in California. For each solicitation campaign conducted, commercial fundraisers are then required to file annual financial disclosure reports that set forth total revenue and expenses incurred. This Summary Report is prepared from self-reported information contained in the annual financial disclosure reports filed by commercial fundraisers for 2016 and includes statistics for donations of both cash and used personal property (such as clothing and vehicles) for the benefit of charity. Only information from complete financial reports received before October 20, 2017 is included.
    [Show full text]
  • North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Co. Records: Finding Aid
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/tf2f59n5kg No online items North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Co. Records: Finding Aid Processed by The Huntington Library staff; supplementary encoding and revision supplied by Xiuzhi Zhou and Diann Benti. The Huntington Library, Art Collections, and Botanical Gardens Manuscripts Department 1151 Oxford Road San Marino, California 91108 Phone: (626) 405-2129 Email: [email protected] URL: http://www.huntington.org © 2000 The Huntington Library. All rights reserved. North Bloomfield Gravel Mining mssHM 51035-51130 1 Co. Records: Finding Aid Overview of the Collection Title: North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Co. Records Dates (inclusive): 1890-1891 Collection Number: mssHM 51035-51130 Creator: North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Company. Extent: 96 pieces in 1 box Repository: The Huntington Library, Art Collections, and Botanical Gardens. Manuscripts Department 1151 Oxford Road San Marino, California 91108 Phone: (626) 405-2129 Email: [email protected] URL: http://www.huntington.org Abstract: This collection consists primarily of letters from the secretary to the president of the North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Company of Nevada County, California, in 1890-1891 related to the company and hydraulic mining. Language: English. Access Open to qualified researchers by prior application through the Reader Services Department. For more information, contact Reader Services. Publication Rights The Huntington Library does not require that researchers request permission to quote from or publish images of this material, nor does it charge fees for such activities. The responsibility for identifying the copyright holder, if there is one, and obtaining necessary permissions rests with the researcher. Preferred Citation [Identification of item]. North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Co.
    [Show full text]
  • Aggregate and the Environment Was Prepared Under the Sponsorship of the AGI Environmental Geoscience Advisory Committee with Support from the U.S
    ooperative planning by developers, government, and citizens is the key to successful protection and utilization of aggregate resources. AGI gratefully acknowledges the AGI Foundation and the U.S. Geological Survey for their support of this book and of the Environmental Awareness Series. For more information about this Series please see the inside back cover. AGI ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS SERIES,8 William H. Langer Lawrence J. Drew Janet S. Sachs With a Foreword by Travis L. Hudson and Philip E. LaMoreaux American Geological Institute in cooperation with U.S. Geological Survey About the Authors William H. Langer has been a research geologist with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) since 1971, and has been the USGS Resource Geologist for Aggregate since 1976. He is a member of the Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration (SME), the American Society for Testing and Materials committees for Concrete Aggregate and Road and Paving Materials, and the International Association of Engineering Geologists Commission No. 17 on Aggregates. He has conducted geologic mapping and field studies of aggregate resources throughout much of the United States. He has published over 100 reports, maps, and articles relating to crushed stone and gravel resources including monthly columns about geology and aggregate resources Foreword 4 It Helps To Know 7 in Aggregates Manager and Quarry. Preface 5 Why Aggregate Is Important 9 Lawrence J. Drew has nearly 40 years of experience working on mineral and petroleum What the Environmental assessment and environmental problems in private Concerns Are 12 industry and with the federal government. Since joining the U.S. Geological Survey in 1972, he has How Science Can Help 12 worked on the development of assessment techniques for undiscovered mineral and petroleum resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Basic Aggregate Properties Section 1
    Basic Aggregate Properties Section 1: Introduction 1 Aggregate Types Aggregates are divided into 3 categories based on particle size: • Coarse Aggregate Gravel or crushed stone Particle sizes larger than No. 4 sieve (4.75mm) • Fine Aggregate Sand or washed screenings Particle sizes between No. 4 and No. 200 sieve (4.75mm-75µm) •Fines Silt or clay Particle sizes smaller than No. 200 sieve (75µm) Coarse Aggregate Coarse Aggregate can come from several sources. Each of these sources can produce satisfactory aggregates depending on the intended use. Each parent material has advantages and disadvantages associated with it. 2 Coarse Aggregate Natural gravel Crushed stone Lightweight aggregate Recycled and waste products •slag • rubble •mine waste • asphalt and concrete pavement Important Properties of Aggregate All of these properties can have an affect on how the aggregate performs the tasks that are expected of it. •Shape • Surface texture •Gradation • Specific gravity • Absorption •Hardness • Soundness •Strength • Deleterious materials 3 The ideal aggregate is… Strong and hard to resist loads applied Chemically inert so it is not broken down by reactions with substances it comes in contact with Has a stable volume so that it does not shrink or swell Bonds tightly with asphalt and portland cement paste The ideal aggregate… Contains no impurities or weak particles Would be the perfect size and gradation for the application intended Would be locally available and economical 4 Aggregate in Practice There is a wide range in strength and hardness even among aggregates produced from the same type of parent material. Particles have pores that affect their absorption properties and how well they bond with asphalt and Portland cement.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2 the Solid Materials of the Earth's Surface
    CHAPTER 2 THE SOLID MATERIALS OF THE EARTH’S SURFACE 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 To a great extent in this course, we will be dealing with processes that act on the solid materials at and near the Earth’s surface. This chapter might better be called “the ground beneath your feet”. This is the place to deal with the nature of the Earth’s surface materials, which in later sections of the chapter I will be calling regolith, sediment, and soil. 1.2 I purposely did not specify any previous knowledge of geology as a prerequisite for this course, so it is important, here in the first part of this chapter, for me to provide you with some background on Earth materials. 1.3 We will be dealing almost exclusively with the Earth’s continental surfaces. There are profound geological differences between the continents and the ocean basins, in terms of origin, age, history, and composition. Here I’ll present, very briefly, some basic things about geology. (For more depth on such matters you would need to take a course like “The Earth: What It Is, How It Works”, given in the Harvard Extension program in the fall semester of 2005– 2006 and likely to be offered again in the not-too-distant future.) 1.4 In a gross sense, the Earth is a layered body (Figure 2-1). To a first approximation, it consists of concentric shells: the core, the mantle, and the crust. Figure 2-1: Schematic cross section through the Earth. 73 The core: The core consists mostly of iron, alloyed with a small percentage of certain other chemical elements.
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Summary
    Mining’s Toxic Legacy An Initiative to Address Mining Toxins in the Sierra Nevada Executive Summary Published March 2008 by The Sierra Fund The Sierra Fund’s Initiative to address legacy mining pollution has been made possible by the support of: The California Endowment The Richard and Rhoda Goldman Fund and True North Foundation Executive Summary ________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Is human health, water quality or the environment at risk from historic mining toxins? The Gold Rush changed California demographics as indigenous people were dislocated and mining towns appeared and disappeared across the Sierra Nevada Mountains. A less recognized consequence of the California Gold Rush was the massive environmental destruction that took place, which still plagues the Sierra today. Working with partners from state, federal, and tribal governments as well as from the academic, health, and environmental communities, The Sierra Fund’s report “Mining’s Toxic Legacy” is the first comprehen- sive evaluation of what happened during the Gold Rush, including: the cultural, health, and environmental impacts of this era; the obstacles that lie in the way of addressing these impacts; and a strategic plan for taking action on the longest neglected environmental problem in the Golden State of California. The California Gold Rush clawed out of the foothills of the Sierra Nevada considerable gold—93 tons or 2.7 million troy ounces in the peak year of 1853 alone... In the course of doing so, everything in the region and much downstream was ravaged. Wildlife was decimated. Trees were cut down to burn for domestic and industrial purposes and to build the huge mining infrastructure that was firmly in place by the 1870s.
    [Show full text]
  • Scoping Comments of the San Juan Ridge Taxpayers Association (SJRTA)
    COM MENTS OF THE SAN JUAN RIDGE TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION ON THE PROPOSED SAN JUAN RIDGE MINE Submitted to the Nevada County Planning Department December 4, 2012 Sacramento Bee, December 31, 1997. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .....................................................................................................1 II. BACKGROUND.....................................................................................................................4 III. OUR LOCAL ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................8 A. SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................................8 B. ECOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT .............................................................................................10 IV. COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT .........14 A. THE EIR MUST CLEARLY DESCRIBE THE PROPOSED PROJECT; CEQA DEMANDS AN ACCURATE, STABLE AND FINITE PROJECT DEFINITION THAT ADDRESSES THE “WHOLE OF THE ACTION” UNDER REVIEW. ...........................................................................................................14 1. The Proposed Action Should Be Described in a Manner that Provides for Full Disclosure and Evaluation of Potentially Significant Impacts ..............................................15 2. Additional Information Is Needed ..................................................................................19 B. CEQA REQUIRES IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIALLY “SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
    [Show full text]
  • Stratigraphic and Earth System Approaches to Defining The
    Earth’s Future REVIEW Stratigraphic and Earth System approaches to defining the 10.1002/2016EF000379 Anthropocene Will Steffen1,2, Reinhold Leinfelder3, Jan Zalasiewicz4, Colin N. Waters5, Mark Williams4, Colin Key Points: Summerhayes6, Anthony D. Barnosky7, Alejandro Cearreta8, Paul Crutzen9, Matt Edgeworth10,Erle • Stratigraphy and Earth System 11 12 13 14 15 science have built a multidisciplinary C. Ellis , Ian J. Fairchild , Agnieszka Galuszka , Jacques Grinevald , Alan Haywood , Juliana Ivar approach for understanding Earth do Sul16, Catherine Jeandel17, J.R. McNeill18, Eric Odada19, Naomi Oreskes20, Andrew Revkin21, evolution, including the advent of Daniel deB. Richter22, James Syvitski23, Davor Vidas24, Michael Wagreich25,ScottL.Wing26, the Anthropocene. 27 28 • Both approaches provide strong Alexander P.Wolfe , and H.J. Schellnhuber evidence that human activities have 1 2 pushed the Earth into the Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Acton, Australia, Stockholm Resilience Anthropocene, starting from the Centre, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden, 3Department of Geological Sciences, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, mid-20th century. Germany, 4Department of Geology, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK, 5British Geological Survey, Nottingham, UK, • Potential scenarios for the future 6Scott Polar Research Institute, Cambridge University, Cambridge, UK, 7Jasper Ridge Biological Preserve, Stanford Anthropocene range from more 8 intense interglacial conditions to a University, Stanford,
    [Show full text]
  • Abstract and Presentation by Steve Evans, Friends of the River
    PRESENTATION ABSTRACTS Reclaiming the Sierra Green $olutions to Abandoned Mines Reclaiming the Sierra: Green $olutions to Abandoned Mines May 3 - 5, 2012 Miners Foundry Nevada City, California Presented by THE SIERRA FUND INSTALLATION AND OPERATION OF A PASSIVE TREATMENT SYSTEM TO TREAT MINING INFLUENCED WATER FROM THE MAGENTA DRAIN PORTAL AT EMPIRE MINE STATE HISTORIC PARK, GRASS VALLEY, CA James Gusek, Lee Josselyn, William Agster, Steve Lofholm, and Daniel Millsap Abstract. Empire Mine State Historic Park (EMSHP) near Grass Valley, CA contains historic mine workings that flooded with ground water since the Empire Mine closed in 1957. Mining influenced water (MIW) perennially flows from portions of the underground workings via the Magenta Drain portal located near the northwest corner of the Park and into an unnamed channel. The MIW water has a neutral pH (no acid mine drainage), but contains elevated concentrations of iron, arsenic, manganese, and various other trace metals. Design treatment flows vary significantly from 20 gallons per minute to a maximum 100 year storm event level of 1,200 gallons per minute. Several active treatment alternatives were evaluated including traditional lime dosing and green sand; passive treatment technologies, including biochemical reactors were also considered. However, bench scale test results indicated that simple settling of suspended iron oxy-hydroxide (with co-precipitated arsenic) and passive aerobic precipitation of manganese oxide could meet regulatory mandated effluent limits. Passive treatment methods are economical, with lower initial capital costs, lower long term operations and maintenance costs and smaller carbon footprint than active treatment methods. Keeping with California’s Dept. of Parks and Recreation (DPR) Mission Statement, “to preserve the State’s extraordinary biological diversity and protecting its most valued natural and cultural resources,” the technology is green and sustainable which is critical since the passive treatment system (PTS) will, in principle, operate into perpetuity.
    [Show full text]