Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Fact Sheet”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources

Developments in African industrial minerals for renewable energy

Introduction Africa is emerging as a leading source for minerals used in the manufacture of batteries for electric vehicles and in other renewable energy applications. New graphite, lithium, and rare-earth mines have or could be opened in African countries from 2017 through 2026. Estimates of production capacities for graphite, lithium, and rare-earth mines for 2023 and beyond are based upon supply-side assumptions, such as announced plans for new capacity construction and bankable feasibility studies, as well as projected trends that could affect current producing facilities in 2023 and planned new facilities projected to come online by 2026. Forward-looking information, including estimates of future production capacities, graphite flake distributions, and timing of the start of operations, are subject to risk factors and uncertainties that could cause actual events or results to differ significantly from expected outcomes. Projects listed in this report are presented as an indication of industry plans and are not a U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) prediction of what will take place. Only projects with planned startup dates are included in this report; ther graphite, lithium, and rare-earth projects in Africa without startup dates were known to be in various stages of development but are not included in this fact sheet.

Fact Sheet↗

Post-Wildfire Hydrologic Hazards in the Wildland Urban Interface of Colorado and the Western United States

Following a wildfire, such as the 2002 Missionary Ridge fire, a number of hydrologic hazards may develop that can have an important impact on water resources, businesses, homes, reservoirs, roads, and utilities in the wildland urban interface (areas where homes and commercial developments are interspersed with wildlands) in mountainous areas of the Western United States. This fact sheet describes these hazards and identifies approaches to quantify them, thus enabling land and resource managers to plan for and mitigate the effects of these hazards. The fact sheet has been produced in association with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Fire Science Thrust program and the Colorado Front Range Demonstration Project (CFRDP). The current (2007) focus of the CFRDP is on the Three Lakes watershed in Grand County, Colorado, which has applicability to many similar forested, mountain areas in the Western United States.

Fact Sheet↗

Redox Conditions in Selected Principal Aquifers of the United States

Reduction/oxidation (redox) processes affect the quality of groundwater in all aquifer systems. Redox processes can alternately mobilize or immobilize potentially toxic metals associated with naturally occurring aquifer materials, contribute to the degradation or preservation of anthropogenic contami-nants, and generate undesirable byproducts, such as dissolved manganese (Mn2+), ferrous iron (Fe2+), hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and methane (CH4). Determining the kinds of redox processes that occur in an aquifer system, documenting their spatial distribution, and understanding how they affect concentrations of natural or anthropogenic contaminants are central to assessing and predicting the chemical quality of groundwater. This Fact Sheet extends the analysis of U.S. Geological Survey authors to additional principal aquifer systems by applying a framework developed by the USGS to a larger set of water-quality data from the USGS national water databases. For a detailed explanation, see the 'Introduction' in the Fact Sheet.

Fact Sheet↗

Devils Hole, Nevada--A Primer

This fact sheet summarizes the multifaceted research of the U.S. Geological Survey—published in diverse outlets—that focuses on the subaqueous cavern Devils Hole in Nevada. Questions addressed in the fact sheet are: What is Devils Hole? Why is Devils Hole of interest to paleoclimatologists? How was the isotopic record from the Devils Hole vein calcite dated? What paleoclimate phenomena are recorded by the Devils Hole stable isotopic time series? Where can one find the isotopic records? What contributions has Devils Hole research made to the field of paleoclimatology, paleohydrology, and geochemistry? What does Devils Hole reveal about how long we can expect the present interglaciation to last? What are some practical applications of the Devils Hole findings? Why is Devils Hole of interest to zoologists?

Nevada↗

Public water-supply use in Kansas, 1987–97

Annual State reporting requirements yield data on public water-supply use in Kansas. data is essential for responsible and effective use of the information by various State agencies. This fact sheet describes water-use data evaluation, illustrates variations in public-supply water use from 1987 through 1997, and documents improvements in water conservation efforts among Kansas public water suppliers. This fact sheet is part of an ongoing study conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Kansas Water Office and is supported in part by the Kansas State Water Plan Fund.

Kansas↗

U.S. Geological Survey National Water Census: Colorado River Basin Geographic Focus Area Study

Introduction The U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) concept of a national census (or accounting) of water resources has evolved over the last several decades as the Nation has experienced increasing concern over water availability for multiple competing uses. The implementation of a USGS National Water Census was described in the USGS 2007 science strategy document that identified the highest priority science topics for the decade 2007–17. In 2009, the SECURE Water Act (Public Law 111–11, subtitle F) authorized the USGS to create a Water Availability and Use Assess­ment Program for the Nation, and in 2012, the Department of the Interior WaterSMART initiative provided funding to begin implementation of the USGS National Water Census (NWC). Generally, the USGS NWC approaches water-availability assessment in terms of a “water budget.” The water-budget approach seeks to better quantify the inflows and outflows of water, as well as the change in storage volume, both nationally and at a regional scale and, by doing so, provides critical information to managers and stakeholders responsible for making water-availability decisions. The NWC has two primary components: Topical Studies and Geographic Focus Area Studies. Topical Studies do research on methods that can provide nationwide estimates of particular water-budget components at the subwatershed scale. Some examples of NWC Topical Studies include estimation of streamflow at ungaged locations; periodic quantification of evapotranspiration; and water use related to development of unconventional oil and gas. These efforts are planned to include additional topics in the future. Geographic Focus Area Studies (FASs) assess water availability and use within a defined geographic area, typically a surface-water drainage basin, to increase the understanding of factors affecting water availability in the region. In the FASs, local stakeholder input helps the USGS identify what components of the water budget are in most need of additional understanding or quantification. Focus Area Studies are planned as 3-year efforts and, typically, three FASs are ongoing in different parts of the country at any given time. The Colorado River Basin (CRB) and the Delaware and Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) River Basins were selected by the Department of the Interior for the first round of FASs because of the perceived water shortages in the basins and potential conflicts over water supply and allocations. After gathering input from numerous stakeholders in the CRB, the USGS determined that surface­-water resources in the basin were already being closely monitored and that the most important scientific contribution could be made by helping to improve estimates of four water­-budget components: evapotranspiration losses, snowpack hydrodynamics, water­-use information, and the relative importance of groundwater discharge in supporting streamflow across the basin. The purpose of this fact sheet is to provide a brief summary of the CRB FAS results as the study nears completion. Although some project results are still in the later stages of review and publication, this fact sheet provides an overall description of the work completed and cites the publications in which additional information can be found.

Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico,↗

Public-supply water use in Kansas, 1990-2012

This fact sheet describes water-use data collection and quantities of surface water and groundwater diverted for public supply in Kansas for the years 1990 through 2012. Data used in this fact sheet are from the Kansas Department of Agriculture’s Division of Water Resources and the Kansas Water Office. Water used for public supply represents about 10 percent of all reported water withdrawals in Kansas. Between 1990 and 2012, annual withdrawals for public supply ranged from a low of 121 billion gallons in 1993 to a high of 159 billion gallons in 2012. Differences in annual withdrawals were associated primarily with climatic fluctuations. Six suppliers distributed about one-half of the total water withdrawn for public supply, and nearly three-quarters of the surface water. Surface water represented between 52 and 61 percent of total annual withdrawals for public supply. The proportion of surface water obtained through contracts from Federal reservoirs increased from less than 5 percent in the 1990s to 8 percent in 2011 and 2012. More than 99 percent of the reported water withdrawn for public supply in Kansas in 2012 was metered, which was an increase from 92 percent in 1990. State population increased steadily from 2.5 million people in 1990 to 2.9 million in 2012. Recent estimates indicate that about 95 percent of the total population was served by public water supply; the remainder obtained water from other sources such as private wells. Average per capita water use as calculated for State conservation planning purposes varied by region of the State. The smallest regional average water use for the years 1990–2012 was 98 gallons per person per day in easternmost Kansas, and the largest regional average water use was 274 gallons per person per day in westernmost Kansas.

Kansas↗

Stream monitoring and educational program in the Red River Basin, Texas, 1996-97

This fact sheet presents the 1996–97 stream monitoring and outreach activities of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Red River Authority of Texas, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the City of Wichita Falls, the Wichita County Water Improvement District No. 2, and the Texas Water Development Board. The fact sheet was prepared by the USGS in cooperation with the Red River Authority of Texas.

Texas↗

Water use in Kansas, 1990 and 1995

This fact sheet illustrates comparative water use from ground and surface sources for 1990 and 1995 for the largest categories of use in Kansas: public supply, irrigation, industrial and mining, livestock, and thermoelectric power generation. Total populations, including those served by public-water suppliers and those using private wells, also are illustrated. These data are organized by major river basin to provide perspective on trends in water use among geographic areas in Kansas. This fact sheet is produced as part of an ongoing cooperative study with the Kansas Water Office and is supported in part by the Kansas State Water Plan Fund.

Fact Sheet↗

Use of raw materials in the United States from 1900 through 2014

The economic growth of an industrialized nation such as the United States requires raw materials for construction (buildings, bridges, highways, and so forth), defense, and processing and manufacture of goods and services. Since the beginning of the 20th century, the types and quantities of raw materials used have increased and changed significantly. This fact sheet quantifies the amounts of raw materials (other than food and fuel) that have been used in the U.S. economy annually for a period of 115 years, from 1900 through 2014. It provides a broad overview of the quantity (weight) of nonfood and nonfuel materials used in the economy and illustrates the use and significance of raw nonfuel minerals in particular as building blocks of society. These data have been compiled to help the public and policymakers understand the changing annual flow of raw materials put into use in the United States. Such information can be helpful in assessing the potential effects of materials use on the environment, assessing materials’ intensity of use, and examining the role that these materials play in the economy. The data presented indicate the substitution and shift in materials usage from renewable to nonrenewable materials during the 20th century. The disaggregated quantities by commodity (not shown in this fact sheet) may be tested against supply adequacy and end of life issues.

Fact Sheet↗

Pyrrhotite distribution in the conterminous United States, 2020

In parts of Connecticut and Massachusetts, foundations of some homes are cracking and crumbling. Failing foundations can reduce the market value of a home and lifting a house to replace and repour a foundation is an expensive undertaking. In response, some homeowners are defaulting on their mortgages and abandoning their homes. The culprit is pyrrhotite, which occurs in construction aggregate (crushed stone) that was used as a filler in concrete. When pyrrhotite is naturally exposed to water and oxygen, it breaks down to produce sulfuric acid and secondary minerals, including gypsum, which have larger volumes than the pyrrhotite they replace. The expanded volume of the secondary minerals cracks and degrades concrete. Pyrrhotite occurs in rocks in many areas of the United States. To help assess the national risk of pyrrhotite in aggregate, the fiscal year 2019 appropriations bill for the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) Mineral Resources Program allocated funds to develop a map showing the distribution of pyrrhotite across the United States. The purpose of this fact sheet is to (1) present a nationwide map that shows where pyrrhotite may occur in rocks in the United States, (2) describe and discuss the factors that control the presence and abundance of pyrrhotite in rocks, (3) provide information on geographic information system datasets that deliver more detailed information on these distributions, and (4) describe U.S. and international standards on aggregate that are designed to prevent failing concrete. While this map and fact sheet provide general information about the possible distribution of pyrrhotite in the United States, they are no substitute for site-specific characterization and quality control programs designed to ensure that aggregate used in concrete is of appropriate quality for its intended purpose.

Conterminous United States↗

Changes in water levels and storage in the High Plains Aquifer, predevelopment to 2009

The High Plains aquifer underlies 111.8 million acres (175,000 square miles) in parts of eight States - Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming. The area overlying the High Plains aquifer is one of the primary agricultural regions in the Nation. Water-level declines began in parts of the High Plains aquifer soon after the onset of substantial irrigation with groundwater from the aquifer (about 1950 and termed "predevelopment" in this fact sheet). By 1980, water levels in the High Plains aquifer in parts of Texas, Oklahoma, and southwestern Kansas had declined more than 100 feet (ft) (Luckey and others, 1981). In 1987, in response to declining water levels, Congress directed the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in collaboration with numerous Federal, State, and local water-resources entities, to assess and track water-level changes in the aquifer. This fact sheet summarizes changes in water levels and drainable water in storage in the High Plains aquifer from predevelopment to 2009. Drainable water in storage is the fraction of water in the aquifer that will drain by gravity and can be withdrawn by wells. The remaining water in the aquifer is held to the aquifer material by capillary forces and generally cannot be withdrawn by wells. Drainable water in storage is termed "water in storage" in this report. A companion USGS report presents more detailed and technical information about water-level and storage changes in the High Plains aquifer during this period (McGuire, 2011).

Colorado;Kansas;Nebraska;New Mexico;Oklahoma;South↗

Selected applications of hydrologic science and research in Maryland, Delaware, and Washington, D.C., 2001-2003

One of the roles of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is to provide reliable water data and unbiased water science needed to describe and understand the Nation?s water resources. This fact sheet describes selected techniques that were used by the USGS to collect, transmit, evaluate, or interpret data, in support of investigations that describe the quantity and quality of water resources in Maryland (MD), Delaware (DE), and the District of Columbia (D.C.). These hydrologic investigations generally were performed in cooperation with universities, research centers, and other Federal, State, and local Government agencies. The applications of hydrologic science and research that were selected for this fact sheet were used or tested in the MD-DE-DC District from 2001 through 2003, and include established methods, new approaches, and preliminary research. The USGS usually relies on standard methods or protocols when conducting water-resources research. Occasionally, traditional methods must be modified to address difficult environmental questions or challenging sampling conditions. Technologies developed for other purposes can sometimes be successfully applied to the collection or dissemination of water-resources data. The USGS is continually exploring new ways to collect, transmit, evaluate, and interpret data. The following applications of hydrologic science and research illustrate a few of the recent advances made by scientists working for and with the USGS.

Fact Sheet↗

Using models for the optimization of hydrologic monitoring

Hydrologists are often asked what kind of monitoring network can most effectively support science-based water-resources management decisions. Currently (2011), hydrologic monitoring locations often are selected by addressing observation gaps in the existing network or non-science issues such as site access. A model might then be calibrated to available data and applied to a prediction of interest (regardless of how well-suited that model is for the prediction). However, modeling tools are available that can inform which locations and types of data provide the most 'bang for the buck' for a specified prediction. Put another way, the hydrologist can determine which observation data most reduce the model uncertainty around a specified prediction. An advantage of such an approach is the maximization of limited monitoring resources because it focuses on the difference in prediction uncertainty with or without additional collection of field data. Data worth can be calculated either through the addition of new data or subtraction of existing information by reducing monitoring efforts (Beven, 1993). The latter generally is not widely requested as there is explicit recognition that the worth calculated is fundamentally dependent on the prediction specified. If a water manager needs a new prediction, the benefits of reducing the scope of a monitoring effort, based on an old prediction, may be erased by the loss of information important for the new prediction. This fact sheet focuses on the worth or value of new data collection by quantifying the reduction in prediction uncertainty achieved be adding a monitoring observation. This calculation of worth can be performed for multiple potential locations (and types) of observations, which then can be ranked for their effectiveness for reducing uncertainty around the specified prediction. This is implemented using a Bayesian approach with the PREDUNC utility in the parameter estimation software suite PEST (Doherty, 2010). The techniques briefly described earlier are described in detail in a U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report available on the Internet (Fienen and others, 2010; http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2010/5159/). This fact sheet presents a synopsis of the techniques as applied to a synthetic model based on a model constructed using properties from the Lake Michigan Basin (Hoard, 2010).

Fact Sheet↗

Water quality of the Little Arkansas River and Equus Beds Aquifer before and concurrent with large-scale artificial recharge, south-central Kansas, 1995-2012

This fact sheet describes baseline water quality of the Equus Beds aquifer and Little Arkansas River and water-quality effects of artificial recharge by the city of Wichita associated with Phase I (2007–present) of the Aquifer Storage and Recovery project. During 1995 through 2012, more than 8,800 surface water and groundwater water-quality samples were collected and analyzed for more than 400 compounds, including most of the compounds on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s primary drinking-water standards maximum contaminant level list and secondary drinkingwater regulations secondary maximum contaminant level list. Water-quality constituents of concern discussed in detail in this fact sheet are chloride, arsenic, total coliform bacteria, and atrazine. Sulfate, nitrate, iron, manganese, oxidation-reduction potential, and specific conductance also are constituents of concern and are discussed to a lesser extent.

Kansas↗

Water use in Kansas, 1990-2000

This fact sheet compares water use in 1990, 1995, and 2000 for the 12 major river basins in Kansas. Of these 3 years, irrigation water use was largest in 1990 and smallest in 1995, largely because of differing climatic conditions. Irrigation averaged about 85 percent of total water use in Kansas each year, and ground water pumped in the western part of the State provided most of the irrigation water used. Water use for public supply, industry, and livestock increased between 1990 and 2000. Total State population increased 8 percent between 1990 and 2000, and the number of people served by public water suppliers increased 12 percent. Surface water withdrawn for public supply increased 24 percent because of population growth in the northeastern and south-central parts of the State and decreasing reliance on ground water by the city of Wichita. From 1990 to 2000, ground-water withdrawals for livestock and meat processing increased in western Kansas, and surface-water withdrawals for sand dredging increased in eastern Kansas. This fact sheet was produced as part of an ongoing cooperative program supported in part by the Kansas State Water Plan Fund.

Fact Sheet↗

Desert basins of the Southwest

Ground water is among the Nation’s most important natural resources. It provides drinking water to urban and rural communities, supports irrigation and industry, sustains the flow of streams and rivers, and maintains riparian and wetland ecosystems. In many areas of the Nation, the future sustainability of ground-water resources is at risk from overuse and contamination. Because ground-water systems typically respond slowly to human actions, a long-term perspective is needed to manage this valuable resource. This publication is one in a series of fact sheets that describe ground-water-resource issues across the United States, as well as some of the activities of the U.S. Geological Survey that provide information to help others develop, manage, and protect ground-water resources in a sustainable manner. Ground-water resources in the Southwest are among the most overused in the United States. Natural recharge to aquifers is low and pumping in many areas has resulted in lowering of water tables. The consequences of large-scale removal of water from storage are becoming increasingly evident. These consequences include land subsidence; loss of springs, streams, wetlands and associated habitat; and degradation of water quality. Water managers are now seeking better ways of managing ground-water resources while looking for supplemental sources of water. This fact sheet reviews basic information on ground water in the desert basins of the Southwest. Also described are some activities of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) that are providing scientific information for sustainable management of ground-water resources in the Southwest. Ground-water sustainability is defined as developing and using ground water in a way that can be maintained for an indefinite time without causing unacceptable environmental, economic, or social consequences.

Arizona;California;Nevada;New Mexico;Utah↗

How Much Water Is in the Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint Rivers, and How Much Is Used?

Questions of how much water is in the Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint (ACF) Rivers and how much is used do not have simple answers. The answers depend on the location in the river basin and on the year and season (as discussed on the first two pages of this fact sheet). Location is important because as one moves from upstream to downstream in a typical river, additions to streamflow from tributaries plus ground water and subtractions of streamflow from consumptive use are cumulative, with increasing total amounts in the downstream direction. Time is important because streamflow and consumptive use can vary by hundreds of percent from year to year and season to season at a given location; consumptive use typically is highest during droughts and summer months when streamflow typically is low. Consumptive use is defined herein as the difference between the amount of water withdrawn from and the amount returned to a river. These amounts depend on several factors, particularly the type of water use, which varies from region to region (as discussed on the third page). Streamflow during low-flow periods comes primarily from ground water and can be affected by ground-water pumping (as discussed on the last page). This fact sheet uses detailed consumptive water-use data for 1994-2001 that are not available for most watersheds in Georgia (Fanning, 2003; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [USACE], 2004; James Hathorn, USACE, written commun., December 2006). The year 2000 is used herein for several examples because of the available consumptive-use data and because this was an extreme drought year. Additional research and information (as discussed on the last page) are needed to support reliable, fact-based water management and planning for the Georgia Comprehensive Statewide Water Management Plan (accessed March 2007 at http://www.gadnr.org/gswp/).

Alabama, Florida, Georgia↗