THE DIRECTOR's
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
UTAH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY SURVEY NOTES Volume 44, Number 1 January 2012 NORTHWEST UTAH UTAH'S NEWEST ENERGY HOTSPOT? The Director’s Perspective and gold production to contribute $3.3 billion and especially since the economic downturn to this figure. In addition, Utah continues that began in late 2008. The downturn has to be a strong net exporter of energy in the significantly affected the consumption of form of natural gas and electricity, largely industrial minerals such as aggregate (sand, generated from coal. Utah produces about gravel, crushed stone) and cement, which are 30 percent more energy than it consumes, down by over 30 percent since they peaked in a trend that has continued since the early 2007 (for a historical review, see “Director’s 1980s (see graphs of production and con- Perspective” in the September 2009 issue of sumption of energy in Utah). Declining coal Survey Notes). Similarly, the consumption of production since 2001 has largely been com- petroleum products in Utah has decreased by Richard G. Allis pensated for by increases in natural gas and by about 10 percent during this time, largely oil production. due to a decrease in diesel fuel use, with The Utah Geological Survey has recently motor gasoline demand remaining rela- Utah’s overall energy consumption has produced two important reports that will tively steady. As a result of this decline and help inform discussions about Utah’s grown at an average of 2.1 percent per year economic directions. One is a second edition since 1960, a figure very close to the state’s continued on page 5 of “Utah’s Energy Landscape” (UGS Circular average popula- 10,000 113, by Michael Vanden Berg), which shows tion growth over energy production and consumption trends that time (2.3 9,000 updated with 2010 data. The second is “Utah percent per year). 8,000 Mining 2010” (UGS Circular 114, by Mark Although elec- Gwynn, Ken Krahulec, and Michael Vanden tricity demand 7,000 Berg), which highlights recent trends in the growth along the mining of all geologic commodities in Utah. Wasatch Front 6,000 The take-away message from both reports is has been almost 5,000 that despite volatility in commodity prices in twice that rate, recent years, and a pattern of declining con- energy efficiency 4,000 nonfuel sumption of some key commodities since savings elsewhere 3,000 about 2008 due to the economic downturn, have compen- $) (million 2011 Mineral Production Value 2,000 crude oil the contribution of local energy and mineral sated for this. A natural gas production to Utah’s economy remains closer look at geo- 1,000 coal strong. The total value of energy and mineral logical commod- uranium 0 production in 2010 was $8.4 billion, the ity trends in Utah 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Years second-highest value in Utah’s history (after shows significant Source: Utah Geological Survey 2008). Strong metals prices during 2010 changes during Note: 2011 data are UGS estimate enabled copper, molybdenum, magnesium, the past decade, Total annual value of Utah's energy and mineral production, inflation-adjusted to 2010 dollars. Contents State of Utah Editorial Staff Vicky Clarke Energy and Minerals David Tabet Northwest Utah—Could it be Utah's Gary R. Herbert, Governor Lori Steadman, Stevie Emerson, Robert Blackett, Craig Morgan, Jeremy Gleason, Jay Hill Mike Laine, Jeff Quick, Department of Natural Resources Newest Energy Hotspot? .......................1 Taylor Boden, Thomas Chidsey, Michael Styler, Executive Director What is a Metamorphic Core Complex? ......3 Geologic Hazards Steve Bowman Cheryl Gustin, Tom Dempster, UGS Board Richard Giraud, William Lund, Brigitte Hucka, Stephanie Carney, Every Record Must Fall—An Update William Loughlin, Jack Hamilton, Greg McDonald, Jessica Castleton, Ken Krahulec, Brad Wolverton, on the Largest Arches in the World ........4 Tom Tripp, Sunny Dent, Gregg Beukelman, Chris DuRoss, Sonja Heuscher, Mike Vanden Berg, Mark Bunnell, Kenneth Puchlik, Tyler Knudsen, Corey Unger, Andrew Rupke, Mark Gwynn, Energy News ..............................................6 Marc Eckels, Adam McKean, Ben Erickson Christian Hardwick, Peter Nielsen Kevin Carter (Trust Lands Glad You Asked ..........................................8 Administration-ex officio) Geologic Information and Outreach Groundwater and Paleontology Sandra Eldredge Michael Lowe GeoSights .................................................10 UGS Staff Christine Wilkerson, Patricia Stokes, James Kirkland, Janae Wallace, Mark Milligan, Stephanie Earls, Martha Hayden, Hugh Hurlow, Survey News ............................................12 Administration Emily Chapman, Lance Weaver, Don DeBlieux, Kim Nay, Teacher’s Corner ......................................13 Richard G. Allis, Director Gentry Hammerschmid, Jim Davis, Paul Inkenbrandt, Lucy Jordan, Kimm Harty, Deputy Director Marshall Robinson, Randi Ryan Kevin Thomas, Rebecca Medina, New Publications .....................................13 John Kingsley, Associate Director Walid Sabbah, Rich Emerson, Starr Losee, Secretary/Receptionist Geologic Mapping Grant Willis Stefan Kirby, Scott Madsen, Dianne Davis, Administrative Secretary Design: Jeremy Gleason Jon King, Douglas Sprinkel, Toby Hooker, Gary Hunt Kathi Galusha, Accounting Officer Janice Hayden, J. Buck Ehler, Cover: Exposure of glassy Snake River Plain-type Linda Bennett, Accounting Technician Kent Brown, Basia Matyjasik, rhyolite near Goose Creek, Box Elder County. Michael Hylland, Technical Reviewer Donald Clark, Bob Biek, Paul Kuehne Photograph by Donald Clark. Robert Ressetar, Technical Reviewer Survey Notes is published three times yearly by Utah Geological Survey, 1594 W. North Temple, Suite 3110, Salt Lake City, Utah 84116; (801) 537-3300. The Utah Geological Survey provides timely scientific information about Utah’s geologic environment, resources, and hazards. The UGS is a division of the Department of Natural Resources. Single copies Surveyof Notes are distributed free of charge within the United States and reproduction is encouraged with recognition of source. Copies are available at geology.utah.gov/surveynotes. ISSN 1061-7930 NORTHWEST UTAH COULD IT BE UTAH’S NEWEST ENERGY HOTSPOT? by Grant Willis and Donald Clark Few people visit there, fewer people live there, and other than a thermal power plants. But this is only one good data point dry strip along I-84, few people have even seen most of north- in a vast area. If we want to accurately assess the resource, west Utah, yet this area may prove to be an important player in we need a better understanding of which sedimentary basins Utah’s energy future. The roughly 7000-square-mile area that have the best potential for high temperatures, and which host extends from the Wasatch Front, across Great Salt Lake to the rocks have the best permeability and porosity. Exploration Nevada and Idaho border, is remote and desolate, but it holds efforts are handicapped by the lack of detailed geologic maps a rugged beauty of its own. It hosts some of Utah’s most com- and limited subsurface data. Before spending millions of dol- plex, poorly exposed, and least understood geology; however, lars to drill exploratory holes, we first need to complete better a few intriguing clues suggest that vast geothermal resources geologic maps of the faults and rock exposures around the may lie beneath these desert basins. This potential, coupled basins, and to collect less expensive geophysical data to get with largely unknown potential for fresh water, a rapidly grow- a better handle on the depth, shape, and rock composition of ing building-stone and flagstone trade, a scarcity of accurate the basins. Over the past four years we have ramped up geo- geologic maps, and a lack of knowledge about earthquakes logic mapping and geophysical data acquisition in the area. and others hazards, induced UGS geologists to team up with USGS and university colleagues to improve surface maps and The Need for Better Geologic Maps subsurface knowledge of the four 30' x 60' quadrangles that The northwest part of the state has long stood out as an area cover this huge area. in need of better geologic maps. It has some of the most Over the past few years, the drive to develop alternative (non- complicated geology of any similar-size area in Utah. Key hydrocarbon) energy resources has focused much attention geologic and logistical challenges include: (1) it is cored by on Utah. Deep-seated faults, abundant warm and hot springs, a large metamorphic complex and as a result has the most high temperatures encountered in some drill holes, three oper- highly deformed and altered strata of any part of the state (see ating geothermal power plants, and much success passively sidebar), (2) due to generally poor exposures, formations in heating greenhouses and buildings all hint at large untapped the region are not well defined, making the highly deformed geothermal resources beneath parts of western Utah. The sections even more difficult to decipher, (3) much of the area northwest part of the state may have significant potential. It is masked by Lake Bonneville deposits, (4) structural basins has very young volcanic rocks (some less than 500,000 years are abundant, but they are not demarcated by the well-defined old), and the Indian Cove well in Great Salt Lake encountered normal faults that bound most basins in the Basin and Range temperatures of 430° Fahrenheit at 12,400 feet depth. This high temperature—about as hot as the highest setting on your kitchen oven—makes it very attractive for traditional-style geo- Track hoe perched atop an exposure of the Vipont granodiorite-phase intrusion (about 28 million years old). The hoe is used to remove slabs of the Neoproterozoic Quartzite of Clarks Basin from an active quarry operation USGS geologist Dave Miller (right) discusses the complicated geology of just out of sight. Intense deformation from the metamorphic core complex the Dove Creek Hills with UGS geologists Don Clark (left) and Grant Willis created strong foliation that causes the quartzite to break into flat slabs that (middle). Raft River Mountains in background. Photo by Bob Biek. are used in buildings, to face walls, and in landscaping all over the world.