Search USGS⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · b2178

Potential minability and economic viability of the Antaramut-Kurtan-Dzoragukh coal field, north-central Armenia; a prefeasibility study

Douglas W. Huber·Brenda S. Pierce
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) conducted a coal resource assessment of several areas in Armenia from 1997 to 1999. This report, which presents a prefeasibility study of the economic and mining potential of one coal deposit found and studied by the USGS team, was prepared using all data available at the time of the study and the results of the USGS exploratory work, including core drilling, trenching, coal quality analyses, and other ongoing field work. On the basis of information currently available, it is the authors? opinion that a small surface coal mine having about a 20-year life span could be developed in the Antaramut-Kurtan-Dzoragukh coal field, specifically at the Dzoragukh site. The mining organization selected or created to establish the mine will need to conduct necessary development drilling and other work to establish the final feasibility study for the mine. The company will need to be entrepreneurial, profit oriented, and sensitive to the coal consumer; have an analytical management staff; and focus on employee training, safety, and protection of the environment. It is anticipated that any interested parties will be required to submit detailed mining plans to the appropriate Armenian Government agencies. Further development work will be required to reach a final decision regarding the economic feasibility of the mine. However, available information indicates that a small, economic surface mine can be developed at this locality. The small mine suggested is a typical surface-outcropstripping, contour mining operation. In addition, auger mining is strongly suggested, because the recovery of these low-cost mining reserves will help to ensure that the operation will be a viable, economic enterprise. (Auger mining is a system in which large-diameter boreholes are placed horizontally into the coal seam at the final highwall set as the economic limit for the surface mining operation). A special horizontal boring machine, which can be imported from Russia, is required for auger mining. Although auger-mining coal reserves do exist, the necessary development work will further verify the extent of these reserves and all of the other indicated reserves. The following items are based on the detailed study reported in this publication. Initial investment.?Following an investment of US $85,000 over a 12-month period in mine development drilling and other activities, a decision must be taken regarding further investment in an ongoing mining operation. If the new data support the opening of the surface mine, __________________________ 1Consultant, 6024 Morning Dew Drive, Austin, TX 78749. 2 U.S. Geological Survey, 956 National Center, Reston, VA 20192 1 2 MINABILITY AND ECONOMIC VIABILITY, ANTARAMUT-KURTAN-DZORAGUKH COAL FIELD the $85,000 development cost is amortized over the first 10 years of mine production. If the new data do not support the opening of the mine, the $85,000 is considered a business development expense that may be written off against profits from other operations for income or other tax purposes or simply as a business loss. Total capital required.?The equipment costs will reach a total of $900,500 which will be amortized over a 7-year period to establish estimated coal mining costs. Estimated working capital costs are $300,000, which will be borrowed. Surface mining reserves.?Approximately 840,200 metric tonnes of surface minable coal reserves at 9.3 m3 of overburden per metric tonne of minable coal is indicated. Recovery of the minable coal at 85 percent will yield 714,000 recoverable metric tonnes of marketable as-mined coal. Auger mining reserves.?Auger-mining reserves of 576,000 metric tonnes are indicated. Recoverable auger-mining reserves of 202,000 metric tonnes (at 35-percent recovery) can be expected. Auger-mining production will vary according to the hole size being used, but, in either case, augering is a very profitable addition to the mining oper

Explore related subjects

BulletinReport

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Douglas W. Huber, Brenda S. Pierce. 2000. Potential minability and economic viability of the Antaramut-Kurtan-Dzoragukh coal field, north-central Armenia; a prefeasibility study. https://doi.org/10.3133/b2178

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2017

Groundwater flow model for the Little Plover River basin in Wisconsin’s Central Sands

The Little Plover River is a groundwater-fed stream in the sand plains region of central Wisconsin. In this region, sandy sediment deposited during or soon after the last glaciation forms an important unconfined sand and gravel aquifer. This aquifer supplies water for numerous high-capacity irrigation, municipal, and industrial wells that support a thriving agricultural industry. In recent years the addition of many new wells, combined with observed diminished flows in the Little Plover and other nearby rivers, has raised concerns about the impacts of the wells on groundwater levels and on water levels and flows in nearby lakes, streams, and wetlands. Diverse stakeholder groups, including well operators, Growers, environmentalists, local land owners, and regulatory and government officials have sought a better understanding of the local groundwater-surface water system and have a shared desire to balance the water needs of the he liagricultural, industrial, and urban users with the maintenance and protection of groundwater-dependent natural resources. To help address these issues, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources requested that the Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey and U.S. Geological Survey cooperatively develop a groundwater flow model that could be used to demonstrate the relationships among groundwater, surface water, and well withdrawals and also be a tool for testing and evaluating alternative water management strategies for the central sands region. Because of an abundance of previous studies, data availability, local interest, and existing regulatory constraints the model focuses on the Little Plover River watershed, but the modeling methodology developed during this study can apply to much of the larger central sands of Wisconsin. The Little Plover River groundwater flow model simulates three-dimensional groundwater movement in and around the Little Plover River basin under steady-state and transient conditions. This model explicitly includes all high-capacity wells in the model domain and simulates seasonal variations in recharge and well pumping. The model represents the Little Plover River, and other significant streams and drainage ditches in the model domain, as fully connected to the groundwater system, computes stream base flow resulting from groundwater discharge, and routes the flow along the stream channel. A separate soil-water-balance (SWB) model was used to develop groundwater recharge arrays as input for the groundwater flow model. The SWB model uses topography, soils, land use, and climatic data to estimate recharge as deep drainage from the soil zone. The SWB model explicitly includes recharge originating as irrigation water, and computes irrigation using techniques similar to those used by local irrigation operators. The groundwater flow model uses the U.S. Geological Survey’s MODFLOW modeling code which is freely available, widely accepted, and commonly used by the groundwater community. The groundwater flow model and the SWB model use identical high-resolution numerical grids having model cells 100 feet on a side, with physical properties assigned to each grid cell. This grid allows accurate geographic placement of wells, streams, and other model features. The 3-dimensional grid has three layers; layers 1 and 2 represent the sand and gravel aquifer and layer 3 represents the underlying sandstone. The distribution of material properties in the model (hydraulic conductivity, aquifer thickness, etc.) comes from previous published geologic studies of the region, updated by calibration to recent streamflow and groundwater level data. The SWB model operates on a daily time step. The groundwater flow model was calibrated to monthly stress periods with time steps ranging from 1 to 16 days. More detailed time discretization is possible. The groundwater model was calibrated to water-level and streamflow data collected during 2013 and 2014 by adjusting model parameters (primarily hydraulic conductivity, storage, and recharge) until the model produced a conditionally optimal fit between field observations and model output, subject to consistency with previously published geologic studies. Calibration was performed under both steady and transient conditions, and used a sophisticated parameter-estimation procedure (PEST) for the calibration process and to identify important model parameters. For the Little Plover River, the two most important parameters are the global recharge multiplier and the hydraulic conductivity of the stream bed. The calibrated model produces water-level and mass-balance results that are consistent with field observations and previous studies of the area. The completed model is a powerful tool for testing and demonstrating alternative water-management scenarios. Example model applications described in this report include simulating how the cumulative impacts of pumping and land-use change have affected average baseflow in the Little Plover River. Depletion-potential mapping represents a method for predicting which wells and well locations have the greatest impact on nearby surface-water resources. The completed model is publicly available, along with a companion user’s guide to assist with its operation, at http://wgnhs.org/littleplover- river-groundwater-model.

Wisconsin↗
USGS2016

The 2016 groundwater flow model for Dane County, Wisconsin

A new groundwater flow model for Dane County, Wisconsin, replaces an earlier model developed in the 1990s by the Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey (WGNHS) and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This modeling study was conducted cooperatively by the WGNHS and the USGS with funding from the Capital Area Regional Planning Commission (CARPC). Although the overall conceptual model of the groundwater system remains largely unchanged, the incorporation of newly acquired high-quality datasets, recent research findings, and improved modeling and calibration techniques have led to the development of a more detailed and sophisticated model representation of the groundwater system. The new model is three-dimensional and transient, and conceptualizes the county’s hydrogeology as a 12-layer system including all major unlithified and bedrock hydrostratigraphic units and two high-conductivity horizontal fracture zones. Beginning from the surface down, the model represents the unlithified deposits as two distinct model layers (1 and 2). A single layer (3) simulates the Ordovician sandstone and dolomite of the Sinnipee, Ancell, and Prairie du Chien Groups. Sandstone of the Jordan Formation (layer 4) and silty dolostone of the St. Lawrence Formation (layer 5) each comprise separate model layers. The underlying glauconitic sandstone of the Tunnel City Group makes up three distinct layers: an upper aquifer (layer 6), a fracture feature (layer 7), and a lower aquifer (layer 8). The fracture layer represents a network of horizontal bedding-plane fractures that serve as a preferential pathway for groundwater flow. The model simulates the sandstone of the Wonewoc Formation as an upper aquifer (layer 9) with a bedding-plane fracture feature (layer 10) at its base. The Eau Claire aquitard (layer 11) includes shale beds within the upper portion of the Eau Claire Formation. This layer, along with overlying bedrock units, is mostly absent in the preglacially eroded valleys along the Yahara River valley and in northeastern Dane County. Layer 12 represents the Mount Simon sandstone as the lowermost model layer. It directly overlies the Precambrian crystalline basement rock, whose top surface forms the lower boundary of the model. The model uses the USGS MODFLOW-NWT finite-difference code, a standalone version of MODFLOW-2005 that incorporates the Newton (NWT) solver. MODFLOW-NWT improves the handling of unconfined conditions by smoothing the transition from wet to dry cells. The model explicitly simulates groundwater–surface-water interaction with streamflow routing and lake-level fluctuation. Model input included published and unpublished hydrogeologic data from recent estimates of aquifer hydraulic conductivities. A spatial groundwater recharge distribution was obtained from a recent GIS-based, soil-water-balance model for Dane County. Groundwater withdrawals from pumping were simulated for 572 wells across the entire model domain, which includes Dane County and portions of seven neighboring counties—Columbia, Dodge, Green, Iowa, Jefferson, Lafayette, and Rock. These wells withdrew an average of 60 million gallons per day (mgd) over the 5-year period from 2006 through 2010. Within Dane County, 385 wells were simulated with an average withdrawal rate of 52 mgd. Model calibration used the parameter estimation code PEST, and calibration targets included heads, stream and spring flows, lake levels, and borehole flows. Steady-state calibration focused on the period 2006 through 2010; the transient calibration focused on the 7-week drought period from late May through July 2012. This model represents a significant step forward from previous work because of its finer grid resolution, improved hydrostratigraphic discretization, transient capabilities, and more sophisticated representation of surface-water features and multi-aquifer wells. Potential applications of the model include evaluation of potential sites for and impacts of new high-capacity wells, development of wellhead protection plans, evaluating the effects of changing land use and climate on groundwater, and quantifying the relationships between groundwater and surface water.

Wisconsin↗
USGS2015

Geologic framework of the Alaska Peninsula, southwest Alaska, and the Alaska Peninsula terrane

The Alaska Peninsula is composed of the late Paleozoic to Quaternary sedimentary, igneous, and minor metamorphic rocks that record the history of a number of magmatic arcs. These magmatic arcs include an unnamed Late Triassic(?) and Early Jurassic island arc, the early Cenozoic Meshik arc, and the late Cenozoic Aleutian arc. Also found on the Alaska Peninsula is one of the most complete nonmetamorphosed, fossiliferous, marine Jurassic sedimentary sections known. As much as 8,500 m of section of Mesozoic sedimentary rocks record the growth and erosion of the Early Jurassic island arc. A thinner, but still thick (as much as 5,400 m), sequence of Tertiary sedimentary rocks that are predominantly continental overlies the Mesozoic section. A brief regression in early Tertiary time on the Alaska Peninsula and granodiorite plutonism in the Shumagin, Semidi, and Sanak Islands was followed by deposition of fluvial and minor marine clastic strata. This was followed by deposition of transgressive marine clastic strata and initiation of the Meshik arc, shown by an areally extensive outpouring of volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks and debris between late Eocene and earliest Miocene time. Late Miocene time was marked by another brief transgression and northwest- to southeast-directed compression, followed by renewed volcanism and plutonism which initiated the modern Aleutian magmatic arc. Extensive glacial and glaciomarine deposits of late Pleistocene age create an extensive lowland physiographic province on the northwest side of the Alaska Peninsula and join isolated mountain masses to the Alaska Peninsula on the southwest. Multiple active volcanoes and volcanic peaks dominate the skyline of the Alaska Peninsula and represent the continuation of magmatic activity that has formed the Aleutian arc since late Miocene time. The Alaska Peninsula has had a long and involved history since Paleozoic time. We propose that the Paleozoic and Mesozoic rocks that constitute much of the Alaska Peninsula be called the Alaska Peninsula terrane. Using the concept of subterranes, we divide the terrane into two distinct but tectonically related subterranes: the Chignik and Iliamna subterranes, which share a limited common geologic history. The Iliamna subterrane has served at most times as a source area for the Chignik subterrane; however, some rock units are in common across the subterranes. The Iliamna and Chignik subterranes are in part separated by the Bruin Bay fault system. The Iliamna subterrane is composed of moderately deformed early Mesozoic marine sedimentary and volcanic rocks and schist, gneiss, and marble of Paleozoic(?) and Mesozoic age, and plutonic rocks of the Alaska-Aleutian Range batholith. Characteristic of the Chignik subterrane are little-deformed, shallow-marine to continental clastic sedimentary rocks ranging in age from Permian to latest Cretaceous. However, deep-marine, volcaniclastic, and calcareous rocks form important components of the older rocks in the subterrane. The two subterranes of the Alaska Peninsula terrane are characterized by radically different structural and metamorphic styles. The nonplutonic rocks of the Iliamna subterrane are characterized by metamorphism up to amphibolite-facies grade and intense folding. In the Chignik subterrane, the structural style is dominated by large, open, en echelon anticlinal structures, normal faulting, and thrust and high-angle reverse faults that have minor displacement in a northwest to southeast direction. In the Outer Shumagin and Sanak Islands, rocks assigned to the Chugach terrane are characterized structurally by tight, generally northeast-trending folds. Dips in these rocks tend to be steep, rarely less than 35°, and overturned beds are locally common. The boundaries separating the Alaska Peninsula terrane from other terranes are commonly indistinct or poorly defined. A few boundaries have been defined at major faults, although the extensions of these faults are speculative through some areas. The west side of the Alaska Peninsula terrane is overlapped by Tertiary sedimentary and volcanic rocks and Quaternary deposits.

Alaska↗