survey notes, january 2014

8/13/2019 Survey Notes, January 2014

1/16

January 2014Volume 46, Number 1

U T A H G E O L O G I C A L S U R V E Y


2/16

State of Utah Gary R. Herbert, Governor

Department of Natural Resources Michael Styler, Executive Director

UGS Board

Mark Bunnell, ChairWilliam Loughlin, Tom Tripp,Sunny Dent, Kenneth Puchlik,Marc Eckels, Pete Kilbourne,

Kevin Carter (Trust Lands Administration-ex officio)

UGS Staff

Administration

Richard G. Allis, Director Kimm Harty, Deputy Director Starr Soliz, Secretary/Receptionist

Dianne Davis,Administrative Secretary Jodi Patterson, Financial Manager Linda Bennett,Accounting Technician

Michael Hylland, Technical Reviewer Robert Ressetar, Technical Reviewer

Editorial StaffVicky Clarke

Lori Steadman, Jay Hill, Nikki Simon,Elizabeth Firmage

Geologic HazardsSteve Bowman Richard Giraud, William Lund, Greg McDonald,

Jessica Castleton, Gregg Beukelman, Chris DuRoss,Tyler Knudsen, Corey Unger, Adam McKean,Ben Erickson, Pam Perri, Adam Hiscock

Geologic Information and Outreach Sandra Eldredge

Christine Wilkerson, Patricia Stokes, Mark Milligan,Lance Weaver, Gentry Hammerschmid, Jim Davis,Marshall Robinson, Bryan Butler, Robyn Keeling

Geologic MappingGrant Willis Jon King, Douglas Sprinkel, Kent Brown, Basia Matyjasik,

Donald Clark, Bob Biek, Paul Kuehne, Zach Anderson

Energy and Minerals David Tabet Robert Blackett, Craig Morgan, Jeff Quick, Taylor Boden,

Thomas Chidsey, Cheryl Gustin, Tom Dempster,Brigitte Hucka, Stephanie Carney, Ken Krahulec,Brad Wolverton, Sonja Heuscher, Mike Vanden Berg,Andrew Rupke, Mark Gwynn, Christian Hardwick,Peter Nielsen, Hobie Willis, Rebekah Wood

Groundwater and PaleontologyMike LoweJames Kirkland, Janae Wallace, Martha Hayden,Hugh Hurlow, Don DeBlieux, Kim Nay,Paul Inkenbrandt, Lucy Jordan, Kevin Thomas,Walid Sabbah, Rich Emerson, Stefan Kirby,Scott Madsen, Jennifer Jones, Diane Menuz,Galvan Haun

Survey Notesis 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 timescientific information about Utahs geologic environment, resources, and hazards. The UGS is a division of the Department of Natural Resources. Single copies of Survey Notesare distributed fof charge within the United States and reproduction is encouraged with recognition of source. Copies are available at geology.utah.gov/surveynotes.ISSN 1061-7930

ContentsMicrobial Carbonate Reservoirs and the Utah

Geological Surveys Invasion of London .... .... 1

Utah Still Supplying Gilsonite to the WorldAfter 125 Years ................................................4

Frack Sand in Utah? ............................................. 6

Energy News ........................................................8

GeoSights............................................................. 9

Glad You Asked ...................................................10

Teachers Corner ................................................12

Survey News ....................................................... 12

New Publications ................................................13

Design:Nikki SimonCover:Image on the left shows living and growingmicrobial mats exposed during low lake level in BridgerBay, Great Salt Lake, along the northwest part of

Antelope Island. Image on the right shows ancient(54 million years old) microbial heads, several feet indiameter, in the Green River Formation, Uinta Basin,south of Vernal. Photos by Michael D. Vanden Berg.

This issue of SurveyNotes has an Energyand Mineral theme.Included is the annualUGS tracking of thetotal value of Utahsenergy and mineralproduction (see side-

bar, page 13), whichfor 2012 is $8.2 bil-

lion. Although this is a 12% decline com-pared to 2011, it is still in the $810 billionrange that has occurred since 2004, andrepresents an important part of Utahseconomy. Oil is Utahs most valuablesingle natural commodity, and the $2.5billion value in 2012 is a record for Utah.The decline in total commodity value in2012 reflects generally lower prices forbase metals and natural gas.

An often-overlooked sector of Utahsextractive commodities is the industrialminerals. These contributed a total value

of $1.2 billion; saline minerals (potash,salt, and magnesium chloride) represent35% of the total, aggregate (sand, gravel,and crushed stone) represents 17%, andcement and lime products 16%. Thisissue of Survey Notesalso highlights twoindustrial minerals in Utah that are gain-ing increasing attention from the petro-leum exploration industry: gilsonite,which is unique to the Uinta Basin and isnow used as an additive to drilling fluid;and frack sand, which is used as a prop-pant during hydraulic fracturing. Utahmay have deposits of suitable sand orsoft sandstone that can complement thetraditional frack sand sources in the Mid-

west. A challenge will be finding a sourceclose to a rail line so it can be economi-cally transported to the areas of greatestdemand.

In contrast to energy and metal commodities, the production of industrial min-erals often reflects economic activity

This is particularly true of aggregatewhich underpins most building and infrastructure construction. It is interestingto compare the value of buildings constructed in Utah with the amount ofaggregate produced from quarries eachyear. The graph of trends since 1980shows an overall upward trend in bothbuilding value and aggregate production due to increasing population anddemand. However, there are two prominent spikes in the aggregate trend, onein the late 1990s, and another between2005 and 2007, although the building

value trend has only one spike during2005 to 2007. The aggregate spike duringthe late 1990s is likely due to the I-15reconstruction project prior to the 2002Winter Olympics when there was not acoincident housing boom. Between 2005and 2007 Utahs economy was growing at an annual rate of more than 5%The national financial collapse in 2008caused Utahs annual growth rate todecline to -1% in 2009, although it hadrecovered to more than 3% by 2012. Sofar, we have not seen a correspondingrecovery in either aggregate demand onew building construction.

The Director's Perspective

by Richard G. Allis


3/16

When British rock and roll bands, such as the Beatles and Roll-ing Stones, first came to America in the 1960s, it was referred toas the British Invasion. Last year it was our turn in a differenttype of rock invasion, on mini-scale, as we invaded Londonto represent Utah at a special symposium on microbial carbon-ates, sponsored by The Geological Society (of London). Microbialcarbonates are a distinctive type of oil reservoir rock that untilrecently was unrecognized in terms of oil potential and economic

importance on the global scale. New billion-barrel, microbial-car-bonate oil fields have been discovered offshore of Brazil, in theCaspian Sea region of Kazakhstan, and in other areas of the world.Research by the Utah Geological Survey (UGS) along with our col-league and carbonate expert, David Eby (Eby Petrography & Con-sulting, Inc., Denver, Colorado), revealed the presence of micro-bial rocks in Utah too, particularly in the Uinta Basin. We studiedoutcrops in the field, well cores stored at UGSs Core ResearchCenter (UCRC), and a modern example of microbial carbonatesforming todayGreat Salt Lake. Evaluation of the various micro-bial fabrics, environments of deposition (facies), petrophysicalproperties (porosity, permeability, etc.), changes to the rock overtime (diagenesis), and bounding surfaces is critical to understand-ing these unusual reservoirs.

by Thomas C. Chidsey, Jr., Michael D. Vanden Berg, and Michael D. Laine

Modern, living microbial mats in Bridger Bay, Antelope Island, Great Salt Lake,in October 2013 when the lake was nearly 5.5 feet below its historical average of 4200 feet.

Microbial Carbonate Reservoirs

and the Utah Geological SurveysInvasion of London

MicrobialCarbonates 101and Modern andAncient Examples

from Utah

Microbial carbonates are organic sedimentary deposits that formwhen microbial communities trap and bind sediment (mud andsilt) and/or form the locus of mineral precipitation, principally calcium carbonate (CaCO3). They develop in microbial mats, typicallycomposed of bacteria, fungi, protozoans, or algae, and are foundin fresh to hypersaline lake (lacustrine), brackish water (bay), omarine environments. Microbial carbonates take several formsthinly layered (stromatolites), clotted (thrombolites), spherica(oncolites), and precipitated from mineral-rich springs (tufa otravertine).

JANUARY 2014 1


4/16

Now imagine these deposits buried at depths of thousandsof feet for millions of years. If they are thick, contain intercon-nected pores capable of storing oil (reservoir rock), are sealedby impermeable layers of rock above and below, and are located

near organic-rich deposits that generated hydrocarbons at theright time, then all the major ingredients would be present forsignificant oil accumulations.

The Green River Formation in the Uinta Basin of eastern Utah wasalso deposited in a fresh to hypersaline lake54 million years ago(Ma) during the Eocene Epoch. Outcrops and cores of the GreenRiver display many of the features, vertically and horizontally as

All of the deposits described above are forming today in andaround Great Salt Lake. In fact, the lake is a microbial carbon-ate factorythe slimy muds, the rounded mounds (stromatoliteheads and microbial mats several feet in diameter) exposed at lowwater levels best observed at Rozel Point in the lakes north armand in Bridger Bay at the northwest end of Antelope Island, andassociated carbonate grains such as the oolites (small, smoothrounded sand) that form beaches and dunes near the lake, are allmicrobially related carbonates.

Branching microbialcarbonates

(stromatolites) inthe Green RiverFormation fromthe Skyline 16research core.

Large microbial (thrombolite) head within the Green River Formation.The Green River Formation and stratigraphic section of microbialcarbonates exposed in the eastern Uinta Basin. Note the Mahoganybed, well known for oil shale, near the top of the outcrop.

Green RiverFormation,Uinta Basin andOther Potential

Targets

Great Salt Lake

well as microscopically, observed in and around Great Salt Lakeas well as in highly productive non-marine microbial reservoirsworldwidestromatolites, thrombolites, oncolites, tufa, andassociated grains such as oolites. One small oil field in the UintaBasin, West Willow Creek, produces from a microbial carbonatebuildup. Others may possibly be discovered now that there is abetter understanding of these reservoir types.

In addition, microbial carbonates are abundantly represented in

cores of marine reservoirs in various fields from the (1) Mississip-pian (340 Ma) and Pennsylvanian (307 Ma) of the Paradox Basin(2) Permian (260 Ma) and Triassic (250 Ma) of the KaiparowitsBasin, and (3) Jurassic (175 Ma) of the thrust belt, in southeast-ern, south-central, and northern Utah, respectively. In light ofour work, these areas can now be explored for new potentiamicrobial reservoirs and drilling targets.

0 3

2 SURVEY NOTES


5/16

Based on our work with Utahs microbial carbonates, The Geo-logical Society invited us to present papers at their 2013 sym-posiumMicrobial Carbonates in Space and Time: Implications

for Global Exploration and Production. The Geological Soci-ety was created in 1807 by the founders of modern geologicalthought and headquartered at Burlington House near PiccadillyCircus in downtown London since 1870. It is the oldest and mostprestigious geological society in the world. Past distinguishedmembers include William Smith, who made the first geologicmap published in 1815 (prominently displayed near the entrancehall in Burlington House); Charles Lyell, author of The Principlesof Geologyin 1830; Charles Darwin, most famous, of course, forhis groundbreaking concept of organic evolution published in1859, The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection; andUtahs own James E. Talmage (18621933)geologist, professor,

Mormon (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) scholar,and church general authority. The 2013 symposium was attendedby over 200 leading experts on microbial carbonates and repre-sentatives of oil companies exploring and developing these reser-voirs around the world.

Our participation in the microbial carbonate symposium affordedus a great opportunity to learn and exchange ideas with theattendees. Our papers were poster-type presentations where wehad one-on-one discussions about the research we conducted,specifically on the microbial carbonates in Great Salt Lake andthe Green River Formation. Unique from past Geological Soci-ety meetings and very different from the other papers were ourdisplays of representative cores and outcrop specimens of Utahmicrobial carbonates (carried to London in a suitcase!). In addi-tion, we had slices of reservoir-quality Green River microbialoutcrop samples and bags of Great Salt Lake oolitic sand for theattendees to take with them. However, the primary goal (and wehope, the result) of our presentations was to make the attend-ees and the oil companies they represent aware of the: (1) vastnew oil potential of Utah microbial carbonates, and (2) opportu-nity to come to Utah where they can examine microbial carbon-ates in cores at the UCRC, and visit ancient and modern analogsrepresented by outcrops and the environment in Great Salt Lake,respectively, as part of UGS-sponsored training core workshopsand field trips. Thus, our UGS invasion of London may lead tothe exploration and development of new discoveries of microbialcarbonate oil resources in Utah. In addition, revenue to the UGSand geotourism in the state may increase as geologists come fortraining and study to apply Utah examples to microbial oil fieldsthey operate elsewhere in the world.

Tom Chidsey and Mike Vanden Berg in front of the map thatchanged the world, William Smiths geologic map of Great

Britain, published in 1815. Displayed at the Geological Society(of London), this was the first geologic map ever created.

The SymposiumAcross the Pond

About the AuthorsTom Chidsey has been a geologist with the UGS since 1989, serves as the Petroleum Secon Chief in the Energy and Mine

Program. Besides microbial carbonates, other recent projects inclevaluaon of potenal Paleozoic shale-gas reservoirs, a compila

of Utahs major oil plays, analysis of the Mississippian ChainmShale of western Utah, and determinaon of best management to

for produced water in the Uinta Basin. He also conducts numerindustry and university workshops using the UGS core collecon

leads eld trips to areas studied as parts of various projects.

Michael Vanden Berg has been a geologist with the UGS Energy Minerals Program since 2003. Michaels research focuses primaon the petroleum-bearing units of the Uinta Basin, in parcular

Green River Formaon. Current research includes a detailed anal

of the unconvenonal Uteland Bue reservoir, characterizaon of

immature shales from the upper Green River, and examinaon of

microbial carbonate units with comparisons to modern microbialfound in Great Salt Lake.

Mike Laine was the UGSs UCRC curator/geologist from 2to 2012 before leaving to join his family in California. As curaMike managed general UCRC operaons, oversaw two major U

expansions, obtained many addional cores from wells drilled in U

hosted numerous industry and university core workshops annuand assisted with geologic research using the core collecon.

JANUARY 2014 3


6/16

UTAH STILL SUPPLYING

GILSONITETO THE WORLD AFTER

125 YEARS OF MININGby Taylor Bodenilsonite, one of Utahs earliest minedindustrial minerals, is currently

experiencing increased interest bythe oil and gas industry, which hasresulted in a significant increase indevelopment of the resource. TheUinta Basin of eastern Utah hosts theworlds largest deposits of gilsonite,and is the only place where gil sonite iseconomically produced in large quan-

tities. Gilsonite has a wide variety ofindustrial applications and is usedby companies worldwide.Major uses for gilsoniteinclude ink and paint, andas a performance additivefor the foundry and asphaltindustries, but the oil andgas industry has developedas a growth market for gil-sonite due to the expansionof various applications inwell drilling.

Gilsonite is a geologically

interesting and economicallysignificant resource, and itswide range of uses haschanged over time withnew technology and indus-trial needs. Gilsonites uniqueproperties make it importantfor many oilfield drillingluid products and the recentboom in oil and gas develop-ment has increased demand.When gilsonite is added to oil- andwater-based drilling luids, it partiallymelts or deforms, plugging off micro-frac-tures in the rock and smearing the inside

of the well bore to make a tight, toughilter cake that prevents luid loss.The dissolved gilsonite also increasesdrilling fluid viscosity, providinglubrication, and together with thesealing off and stabilization ofproblem rock around the well bore,helps prevent the drill pipe fromgetting stuck in the well. Gilsoniteis also used in cementing fluids as alost-circulation material due to itsplugging and binding properties, andas a slurry density reducer in some spe-cialty cementing luids.

Gilsonite is a member of the asphalt-ite group of hydrocarbon bitumens,and forms a swarm of subparallel,northwest-trending, near-vertical,laterally and vertically extensiveveins in the Uinta Basin of Utah andColorado. Gilsonite was generated fromthe Mahogany oil shale zone in theParachute Creek Member of the EoceneGreen River Formation, and is hosted

in the Tertiary-aged (about 57 to 36million years old) Wasatch, Green River,

Uinta, and Duchesne River Formations.The veins range from sub inch to asmuch as 22 feet wide, and formed intwo stages associated with thermal

maturation of the Mahogany oil shale.High pressures deep in the Uinta Basinled to expulsion of large quantitiesof hot water from the oil shale rocks,which hydrofractured the overlying andunderlying strata. Subsequently, thick,liquid gilsonite was expelled from theoil shale source beds, forcing open theexisting fractures in the overlying andunderlying strata. The gilsonite latersolidiied in these fractures, probablyprimarily through cooling. The gil-sonite veins are widespread acrossthe Uinta Basin, extending from Rio

Blanco County in western Colorado toDuchesne County in eastern Utah.

Gilsonite has a long, colorful mininghistory dating back to the late 1800sGilsonite, named after Samuel H. Gilsonwas discovered in the 1860s in UtahGilson was not one of the originadiscoverers, but his enthusiastidevelopment and promotional effort

linked the material to him, and thename gilsonite further solidifiedin common usage whenan early mining companyadopted and trademarkedthe name. The first regulashipments of gilsonite beganin 1888, from veins inthe Fort Duchesne areaEarly gilsonite mining wapredominantly by open-cumining with picks, shovelsand horse-powered hoist(for more background seeSurvey Notes v. 36, no. 3July 2004).

Historically, mining occurredat various veins and locationin the gilsonite ield, but it icurrently concentrated on thwidest known veins aroundBonanza, Utah. Permittedmining in this area occuron the Cowboy, IndependentLittle Bonanza, WagonHound, and Little Emma

veins. All the gilsonite produced todayfrom the Uinta Basin is by undergroundmining methods. Current miningconsists of two major phases: (1) shaft

are sunk at regular intervals alongthe veins, and (2) drifts and slopeare then extended laterally from thshafts. The top 30 feet of the gilsoniteis not mined for safety and reclamation reasons. Gilsonite mining is labointensive, because of its unusual modof occurrence in narrow (down to 18inches wide), deep, vertical veins; andthe explosive hazards associated withgilsonite dust. The mining of the ore istill done by hand, using air-poweredchipping hammers to carefully break thgilsonite while avoiding contaminating

Historical open-cut mining on the southeast end of the Cowboy vein.

G

4 SURVEY NOTES


7/16

the ore with broken wall rock, since productpurity is important to customers. The brokenore enters a vacuum tube at the bottom of theunderground mined area and is air lifted tothe surface, where it is deposited into a baghouse next to the shaft headframe and thentrucked to a plant for processing.

American Gilsonite Company (AGC) andZiegler Chemical and Mineral Company arethe only companies that mine and processgilsonite at their operations in southeast-ern Uintah County. Gilsonite productionin 2012 was about 82,000 short-tons,with AGC responsible for most of that pro-duction. Gilsonite production in 2012 isvalued at approximately $89 million, at anaverage price of about $1085 per short-ton(as reported by the U.S. Ofice of NaturalResources Revenue). Gilsonite value has sig-niicantly increased from oilield demand,and gilsonite sales to the oilield markethave increased over 150% since 2009. Inresponse to increased demand, AGC hasinitiated an approximately $20 millioninvestment program to open new mines, explore new minedevelopment methods, develop strategic long term reserves,and continue investment in health and safety. AGC expects todouble its current production capacity in the near future to

Gilsonite underground mining methods (from American Gilsonite Company).

American Gilsonite Company mine site shaft headframe andbag house.

Location of gilsonite veins with permitted mining and shaftlocations, and American Gilsonite Companys mill.

satisfy customer demand, and has opened three new mines inthe last 18 months, with ive more under active development.

Even though signiicant amounts of the approximately45-million-short-ton original gilsonite resource have beenmined, millions of tons of the valuable resource still remainThis resource tends to be in the deeper parts of the veins andin thinner, more remote veins that will likely be more expen-sive to mine than veins mined in the past. Recent mapping bythe Utah Geological Survey (Special Study 141) of the gilsonitedeposits in the Uinta Basin has located and described many ofthe more remote veins, which were previously only vaguelyknow. At the planned increased production rate, gilsonitecould continue to be mined in the Uinta Basin for decadesensuring a steady supply to world markets of this unique and

valuable Utah resource.

JANUARY 2014 5


8/16

By Andrew Rupke

Frack Sand in Utah?In recent years, hydraulic fracturing (or fracking) has become awidespread technique for extracting previously unrecoverable oiland gas from low-permeability rock formations. During hydraulicfracturing, fluid is pumped into a well at high pressure in orderto fracture the rocks containing oil or gas, thereby releasing thehydrocarbons. An important component of the fracturing fluidis proppant, a material that props open the fractures allowingthe oil or gas to be pumped out. Frack sand (or frac sand, as it isknown in industry) is the most common proppant used in the oiland gas industry. The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that about28 million metric tons of sand, valued at about $1.3 billion, wasproduced domestically in 2012 for use as proppant and relatedapplications.

Not just any sand or sandstone deposit is suitable for use as prop-pant. Frack sand must meet stringent specifications: it should benearly all quartz; grains must be round, equidimensional (spheri-cal), and the right size; and the sand must be able to withstandvery high pressures without breaking. One reason frack sandmust be nearly pure quartz is because mineral impurities, suchas feldspar, are commonly weaker and more prone to breaking.Spherical and round sand grains provide good porosity and per-meability, which allows the oil and gas to migrate through them;angular grains tend to pack together, which reduces permeabil-ity. The size of frack sand grains is also important, and frack sandis generally marketed and sold by size. Larger sand grains providebetter permeability, but smaller sand grains are typically stron-

ger. Therefore, the size of the proppant is generally chosen tomeet conditions in a specific well. The industry term for strength

of a proppant is crush resistance. Sand needs to have a highcrush resistance because if grains break and produce smaller fragments, those fragments can plug pore space and reduce permeability. The American Petroleum Institute and the InternationaStandards Organization provide standardized test procedures foevaluating frack sand.

The vast majority of domestically produced frack sand comefrom the Midwest (Illinois, Wisconsin, and Minnesota) and theSouth (Texas and Oklahoma) because those areas have largedeposits of sand and sandstone that meet the recommendedspecifications. Frack sand miners in those areas ship their prod

uct to oilfields around the country, which can result in high shipping costs (often 50% or more of the total proppant cost) for oifield operators located long distances from the sources. A locasource of frack sand for western oil and gas fields would obviously reduce costs and be more efficient than shipping frack sandacross the country. For these reasons the Utah Geological Surve(UGS), with funding from the Utah School and Institutional TrusLands Administration, produced a preliminary study of potentiafrac sand sources in Utah. We took numerous samples from sandand sandstone deposits throughout the state to test their suitability. The primary characteristics we evaluated were puritygrain size distribution, and sphericity and roundness. To evaluatthe purity we ran semi-quantitative chemical analyses on eachsample using the UGSs x-ray fluorescence device. We sievedeach sample using sieve sizes that correspond to marketed frac

sand sizes, and sphericity and roundness were visually estimatedusing a Krumbein-Sloss chart. We also qualitatively took note o

An outcrop of Jurassic White Throne Member of the Temple CapFormation, a sandstone found in southwest Utah.

A potential source of frack sanddune sand in Kane C

6 SURVEY NOTES


9/16

friability of sandstone samplesa friable sandstone will easilycrumble, which is a good thing if you want to produce sand.

Overall, our results indicate some potential for frack sand depositsin Utah. A number of samples have high quartz content, but somewashing may be required to upgrade the sand to meet specifica-tions. All the samples met sphericity recommendations and manymet roundness recommendations. Sieve results indicated thatthe most widely utilized frack sand size distribution could not beproduced, but some of the other common, smaller sizes probablycould. Based on results from the tests, we assigned an overallsuitability ranking for each sample. These rankings suggest that

the three geologic units with the highest potential for frack sandare the Permian White Rim/Cedar Mesa Sandstones, JurassicWhite Throne Member of the Temple Cap Formation, and Qua-ternary eolian dune sands in southwest Utah. Although the WhiteRim/Cedar Mesa Sandstones of Emery County had the best sizecharacteristics, most of the samples had marginal roundness,and much of the unit is located in the San Rafael Swell, a popu-lar recreational area that could complicate permitting. Both theWhite Throne Member and eolian dune sands, which were sam-pled in Kane and Washington Counties, showed potentially suit-able size distributions, but the Quaternary dune sands may havethe highest potential because they are unconsolidated, whichwould require less processing.

Although our preliminary results suggest geologic units with

frack sand potential may be present, additional work is requiredto determine ultimate suitability of any of the deposits. Due to

cost constraints, our study did not include crush resistance test-inga key aspect of frack sand suitability. More detailed study ofsandstones with potential, the White Throne Member and WhiteRim/Cedar Mesa, would be necessary to determine if they aresufficiently friablefriability of fresh exposures may differ fromthe weathered exposures that we sampled. Also, for all potentiaunits, adequate mine sites with sufficient resources to maintainproduction would need to be delineated. As domestic frack sandproduction increases, a variety of possible environmental andhealth concerns have arisen in many communities near major

frack sand producing areas. Some of the concerns are not necessarily frack-sand specific, such as increased truck traffic due tomining, but others are, such as potential exposure to respirablecrystalline silica, which has an exposure level regulated by theU.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. While oper-ators have worked to mitigate these concerns, they have beenprominent in the Midwest.

If additional work shows that some of Utahs sand and sandstoneis acceptable for frack sand, and an appropriate site is locatedUtah could become one of the few frack sand producers in thewest. However, if the sand is unsuitable, Utah has another potential source for proppant: aluminum-rich mineral deposits that canbe used to produce high-quality synthetic proppant. Aluminum-

rich minerals such as kaolinite, alunite, and halloysite are foundin a number of areas, primarily in the western half of the state.

Magnified grains from dune sand in Kane County. The scale bar is in millimeters

Frack sand sample loca-tions. Red indicatessamples that are mostsuitable for frack sand,green indicates some suit-ability, and blue indicatesthe least suitability.

0 1 2mm

JANUARY 2014 7


10/16

Salt Lake City was the site for the 2013 convention of the RockyMountain Section of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists(RMS-AAPG), held September 2224. Hosted by the Utah GeologicalAssociation, the convention drew nearly 500 professional geologists,geophysicists, and engineers, mostly from the Intermountain West,but from as far away as Canada, Europe, and Asia. In addition, 117 uni-versity students participated in the event, signiicantly more than atprevious conventions, and many gave presentations on their graduateor undergraduate research. Several Utah Geological Survey (UGS) per-sonnel were active on the conventions organizing committee, includ-ing Craig Morgan as conference general chairman, Michael Vanden Bergas RMS-AAPG president, and the following chairs: Thomas Chidsey,technical program; Robert Ressetar, exhibits; Stephanie Carney, reg-

istration; Paul Inkenbrandt, social events; and Sandy Eldredge, teacheractivities (see related article in Teachers Corner, page 12 of thisissue of Survey Notes). Additional committee members included localuniversity faculty members, consulting geologists, and staff fromUtah oil companies.

The highlight of the convention was the extensive technical programparticipants presented nearly 130 talks and posters featuring thelatest in petroleum geology research, geothermal resources, andpolicy issues related to energy development in the Rocky Mountainregion. A common theme in the presentations was the profoundrecent changes in the petroleum industry, including innovative wellcompletion techniques that are moving historically unconventionalhydrocarbon resources into the realm of conventional. However, aspetroleum production expands in both new and established areas,peripheral concerns arise involving topics such as air quality, ground-water protection, wildlife conservation, and economic development.

These concerns were the subject of a half-day Energy Policy Forumthat focused on the potential impacts of expanding hydrocarbonproduction, particularly in the Uinta Basin of eastern Utah.

Unconventional energy sources were prominent in many of the geologi-cal presentations. For example, nine presentations, several from UGSgeologists, addressed geothermal resources in western st ates, includ-ing newly discovered geothermal potential in Ut ahs Black Rock Desert.Nationally, production of natural gas and oil from shale has broughtthe most signiicant changes to the energy industry in decades, andthis new hydrocarbon source was the topic of several sessions.Researchers from the University of Utah and the UGS gave seven pre-sentations on their joint assessment of the hydrocarbon potential ofthe Mancos Shale in the Uinta Basin. UGS geologists and their collabo-rators also described the hydrocarbon potential of Paleozoic shales inthe Paradox Basin, the northern San Rafael Swell, and the Basin andRange Province. A nother recent development in petroleum geology is

the recognition of the signiicance of microbial carbonate reservoirs.Utah is special in having both modern (in Great Salt Lake) and ancient(in the Uinta Basins Green River Formation) examples of this rock,which was the topic of seven presentations as well as a post-meetingcore workshop and ield trip (see related art icle on page 1 of this issueof Survey Notes).

The All-Convention Luncheon provided a step away from petroleumgeology as the featured speaker, Dr. Rebecca Williams of the PlanetaryScience Institute, presented the latest indings from the Mars roverCuriosity. Even this event maintained a local lavor as many Utahlandscapes have served as analogs to geologic features on MarsseeSurvey Notes, v. 40, no. 3, p. 14.

Overall, the conference was a resounding success. Attendees offeredmany compliments on the technical program, short courses, and ieldtrips, in addition to remarking on the beauty of Salt Lake City and Utah.

Top:Genevieve Atwood (of Earth Science Education and formerdirector of the UGS) points out features to geology students and young

professionals on a pre-convention ield trip to Antelope Island.Middle Left:Bob Bereskin (Bereskin and Associates) and Tom Chidsey(UGS) in front of their award-winning poster on the hydrocarbon

potential of the Chainman Shale of western Utah. Middle Right:Michael Vanden Berg, UGS geologist and RMS-AAPG President,

giving opening remarks at the conference. Bottom:Julie LeFever,North Dakota Geological Survey, showing meeting attendees core

from the Bakken Formation, the target of much drilling activity inNorth Dakota.

Utah Hosts Petroleum Geology Convention

ENERGYNEWS

by Robert Ressetar & Michael Vanden Berg

8 SURVEY NOTES


11/16

tracks made by a number of dierent trackmakers were idened.

To preserve these world-class dinosaur track-ways for scienc and educaonal purposes,Dr. Johnson and his wife, LaVerna, donated thetracksite to St. George and worked with thecity, local businesses, federal and state govern-ments, and paleontologists to create the on-sitemuseum. Hundreds of thousands of visitors andpaleontologists from all over the world havevisited this remarkable site to learn how dino-saurs walked and behaved.

Geologic History and Informaon:Nearly200 million years ago (Early Jurassic me),Lake Dixie was a large,freshwater oasis aract-ing dinosaurs to its watersedge with its abundanceof large sh and shores ofedible plants.

Ripple marks and mudcracks found in the sand-stones and mudstones ofthe Moenave Formaonindicate that the beachesand mudats along theshoreline of Lake Dixie

were periodically sub-merged. As dinosaurs andother creatures walkedin the mud, they leftfootprints, which werethen quickly lled in withsilt and sand, preservingthe ne details of the impressions. These laterhardened into stone and became track casts.

Just oshore, dinosaurs swam and shed. Thedinosaur swim tracks at this site are currentlythe worlds largest and best-preserved assem-blage, and helped end the controversy amongpaleontologists over what these kinds of marksrepresent. Large serrated dinosaur teeth havebeen found at the site with a disnct wear

paern, indicang dinosaurs may have eatenlarge sh covered in heavy, enamel-coveredscales.

Trackways, footprints, tail drags, and burrowsare all examples of trace fossils or ichnofossils(fossils without any physical body parts) thatprovide evidence of an animals acons andbehaviors. The majority of dinosaur tracks fromthe 25 track-bearing layers within the MoenaveFormaon are from two types of tracks,Grallatorand Eubrontes.

The more common track, Grallator, is a 4- to8-inch-long, three-toed print, probably belong-ing to a slender, meat-eang dinosaur such asthe 10-foot-long Megapnosaurus. Eubrontes,

a larger 13- to 18-inch-long, three-toed print,is thought to be made by a large meat-eang

by Christine Wilkerson

St. George DinosaurDiscovery Site at

Johnsons Farm,Washington County

GeoSights

Two hundred million years before humansocked to southwestern Utah, dinosaurs werehanging out and enjoying this area. Thousandsof dinosaur tracks and other fossils found heretell the story of dinosaurs walking, running,crouching, swimming, wading, and shing whileliving near the shores of a large ancient lake,named Lake Dixie.

Discovery and Preservaon:While leveling

land on his property in February 2000, Dr.Sheldon Johnson discovered bumps on theunderside of a large block of sandstone he wasmoving. Instead of the usual indented dinosaurtracks (impressions), these looked like the actualdinosaur feet, and were in fact, well-preserved3-D casts of dinosaur footprints. Many of thecasts at the site show detailed skin impressions,foot pads, claw marks, and dew claws.

Aer this inial discovery, abundant sh, plant,trace, and invertebrate fossils, rare dinosaurteeth and bones, and thousands of addional

How to get there: If traveling onI-15 from the north, take exit 10 (GreenSprings Drive) toward Washington Cityand connue south (le) onto GreenSprings Drive. Soon Green Springs Drivebecomes 3050 East and about one milelater the road curves to the southwestand becomes Riverside Drive. Connueaer the curve for about one mile; the

museum is located on the south (le)side of the road at 2180 East RiversideDrive.

If traveling on I-15 from the south, takeexit 6 (Blu Street) in St. George, thenturn east (right) onto Riverside Drive.Connue on Riverside Drive for about3.5 miles unl you reach the museumlocated on the south (right) side of theroad at 2180 East Riverside Drive.

For current exhibit and other infor-maon, visit the St. George DinosaurDiscovery Site at Johnsons Farmwebsite at www.dinosite.org.

dinosaur such as the crested Dilophosauruswhich grew up to 6 feet tall and 19 feet longand weighed 900 pounds. Many, small nondinosaur tracks have also been found, includingthose of ancient crocodilians and horseshoecrabs.

One important discovery is a Eubrontestrackway displaying extremely rare crouchingand tail drag traces. It shows the dinosaur rssing on the ground, then lumbering forwardand sing down again. Later as the dinosauconnued on its way, climbing up a sand bar, it

tail scraped the ground as it walked leaving dragmarks along the trackway.

Reconstrucon of Dilophosauruswith the Grallatorand Eubrontestrack types. Illustraon by Brad Wolverton

This natural cast of a Eubrontesdinosaur track wasdiscovered at the St. George Dinosaur Discovery Site.

These Grallator-type swim tracks display threeparallel scrape marks with the longer middle toeleaving a longer and deeper scape mark comparedto the shorter outer toes.

JANUARY 2014 9


12/16

How can sedimentary rocks

tell you about Utahs history?Every rock has a unique story to tell. Just as a detective piecestogether clues from a crime scene to determine what may havehappened, a geologist uses clues within sedimentary rocksto determine what type of environment the rock formed in.Sedimentary rocks form through the deposition and cementationof material (sediments). The original sediment can be composedof various substances:

1. Fragments of other rocks that are transported by water(streams, ocean currents, etc.), wind, or glaciers, and

deposited in another environment, such as sand on a beachthat solidiied into sandstone or mud on the ocean loorthat formed shale.

2. Organic materials, such as plants in a swamp, which canform coal.

3. Minerals that precipitate out of water, such as salt from sal-ine lakes like Great Salt Lake, forming rock salt, or calciumcarbonate from marine animal shells, forming limestone.

Sedimentary rocks have many characteristics that provideimportant information about past climates, past life forms, andthe ancient geography.

The grain size, shape, and sorting within the rocks that

are composed of rock fragments indicate the energy ofthe water, wind, or glaciers transporting the sediments,as well as the length of time or distance the sediment wascarried. High-energy environments such as (a) large, fastrivers or (b) steep mountain streams form rocks with thelargest grain sizes (sometimes as large as boulders) thatare also mixed in with varied smaller sizes. When thesemixtures are deposited and cemented after relatively shorttransport, the grains retain angular shapes and are calledbreccia. Longer transport across greater distances allowsabrasion to smooth the grains into rounder shapes, and theresultant rock is called conglomerate. As the energy withinthe system decreases, the grain sizes being transported

GladYou Asked

by Robyn Keeling

DepositionalEnvironment

SedimentSedimentary

StructuresSedimentary

Rocks

river channel

boulders, sand,mud; variable

sorting androunding

cross-bedding,ripple marks,

mudcracks

conglomerate,sandstone,

shale

lake mud, sand mudcracks,

ripple marks,bedding, fossils

shale,sandstone, salt(saline lakes)

beach

boulders, sand,mud; well-sorted and

well-rounded

cross-bedding,ripple marks

conglomerate,

sandstone,shale

tidal lats sand, mudripple marks,

mudcrackssandstone,

shale

shallowmarine

sand, mud,carbonatesediment,

well-sorted andwell-rounded

bedding, cross-bedding, ripplemarks, marine

fossils

sandstone,shale, limestone

deep marinemud, carbonate

sedimentmarine fossils shale, limestone

10 SURVEY NOTES


13/16

Ripple marks preserved in the quartzite about 1 miles up BigCottonwood Canyon.

Little Sahara sand dunes in western Utah.

Mudcracks five to seven inches in diameter in the shale about 6 milesup Big Cottonwood Canyon.

ErosionalSur f a ce

Ti l tedBedding

T i ltedBedding

Ancient sand dune deposi t, now cross-bedded Navajo Sand stone in southern Utah.

Ripple marks and mudcracks inBig Cottonwood Canyon, Salt Lake CityThe canyon walls along the irst six miles up the road from themouth of Big Cottonwood Canyon are composed of tilted layersof reddish-brown quartzite and black to purple to green shaleThese rocks are remnants of a tidal-lat environment and formedfrom deposition of alternating layers of sand (now quartzite) andclay (now shale).

The same depositional environments that existed in ancienttimes also exist today (just in different places). By using thegeologists motto, the present is the key to the past, geologistscan determine what the area might have looked like at varioustimes in the past.

also decrease, as is the case with some rivers or deltascarrying coarse to ine grains of sand, which are cementedtogether to become sandstone. The very lowest energyenvironments, such as lagoons and deep, standing waterbodies, can only carry the smallest particles such as mudand clay, which can become mudstone and/or shale.

Mudcracks form when wet clay is temporarily exposed tothe air and dries.

Ripple marks indicate which direction the water currentswere moving and are typical of rivers, beach deposits, and

tidal action.

Fossils, tracks, and burrow marks indicate speciic lifeforms and climate conditions, as well as pinpoint the age ofthe rock.

Sediment is often deposited in layers, and each layer (bed)can reveal details such as slight changes in water conditionsor even seasonal changes. One variation, cross-bedding,contains multiple sets of layers with different orientations;like ripple marks, these indicate current directions.

JANUARY 2014 11


14/16

Earth Science WeekAnother successful Earth Science Week (ESW) washeld at the UGSs Utah Core Research Center with over860 students attending, along with about 60 parentsand 35 teachers. This year was a smashing successwith the help of numerous volunteersin additionto UGS stafffrom other Department of Natura

Resources divisions, and various organizationsWe also extend our appreciation to Utah KennecottCopper, CML Metals Corporation, and U.S. Magnesiumfor donations of several minerals.

More! Rocks in Your HeadThirty Utah teachers attended this nationallyacclaimed teacher workshop, which was heldSeptember 21, 2013 in conjunction with the RockyMountain Section (RMS) of the American Associationof Petroleum Geologists (AAPG) annual meeting.

The workshop was attended mostly by 4th-grade teachers (who teach their students about rocks and minerals, per the Utahscience curriculum mandate), who walked away with a better understanding of the subject matter as well as with much

appreciated numerous and valuable resources. The workshop was paid for by the RMS-AAPG and National AAPG foundations.

Kathi Galushawas Financial Manager for the UGS and had worked here for eight years. Sadly, Kathi passed away in AugustEveryone at the UGS will miss her keen inancial advice and admirable work ethic.

Jodi Pattersonjoined the UGS as the new Financial Manager. Jodi has an MBA from Weber State University and has workedfor the state for 20 years. Welcome to the UGS!

The Groundwater and Paleontology Program welcomes Galvan Haun as the new secretary. He comes to us from Atlanta

Georgia, where he worked in state and federal government positions. Galvan replaces Rebecca Medinawho resigned aftenine years of service.

The Editorial Section bids farewell to Stevie Emersonwho accepted a position at Weber State University. Thanks, Stevie, fodoing great work for the UGS for the past six years. Elizabeth Firmageis our new graphic designer. She has a Bachelor of FineArts in Graphic Design from the University of Utah. Welcome to Elizabeth, and best of luck to Stevie.

2013 Lehi Hintze AwardThe Utah Geological Association and the Utah Geological Survey (UGS) presentedthe 2013 Lehi Hintze Award to Robert Q. Bob Oaks, professor emeritus at UtahState University Geology Department, for a lifetime devoted to serving studentsresearching the geology of northern Utah and southern Idaho, and using hisseemingly endless wealth of knowledge to beneit communities in those areas. AsSusanne Janecke, geology professor at USU noted in her nomination letter, Bob hacontributed through his research in and near the state, his long career as a caringand conscientious mentor and educator of geology students, and his tireless workfor local communities, community groups, and service work. Bob is like a top-notchlibrary of knowledge and has been a wonderful source of information for many ous working in the northern Utah region. Since retiring from teaching, Bob becamthe valleys favorite consulting groundwater geologist and he has invested a hugeamount of time and effort helping Cache Valley communities ind water. Bob is awell-deserving winner of the Lehi Hintze Award.

Named for the irst recipient, Dr. Lehi F. Hintze of Brigham Young University, theLehi Hintze Award was established in 2003 by the Utah Geological Associationand the UGS to recognize outstanding contributions to the understanding oUtah geology.

Teacher's Corner

Survey News

12 SURVEY NOTES


15/16

UGS PublishesResource Industry Report

The annual report on the value of Utahs extrac-tive resource industries shows that the grossvalue of all energy and mineral commoditiesproduced in Utah during 2012 was $8 billion.

This represents a 15% decrease from the 2011inlation-adjusted value of $9.4 billion (seegraph), which is attributable to low prices forcopper, molybdenum, precious metals, coal,and natural gas. The report, UGS Circular 116,Utahs Extractive Resource Industries 2012,is available at the Department of NaturalResources Bookstore and on the UGS websiteat http://geology.utah.gov/utahgeo/rockmin-eral/index.htm#minactivity.

Total annual value of Utahs energy and mineral productioninf lation adjusted to 2012 dollars, 19602012

Interim geologic map of theeasternmost part of the Duchesne30' x 60' quadrangle, Duchesne andWasatch Counties, UtahYear 1 of 6,by Douglas A. Sprinkel, CD (19 p., 1 pl.),scale 1:24,000, OFR-625....$14.95

New PublicationsInterim geologic map of the BaileysLake quadrangle, Salt Lake and DavisCounties, Utah, by Adam P. McKeanand Michael D. Hylland, CD (18 p., 1 pl.),scale 1:24,000, OFR-624............$14.95

Geologic map of the Johnson Lakesquadrangle, Kane County, Utah,and Coconino County, Arizona, byJanice M. Hayden, CD (2 pl. [containsGIS data]), scale 1:24,000, ISBN 978-1-55791-873-4, M-261DM...........$24.95

Hydrogeochemistry, geothermometry,and structural setting of thermalsprings in northern Utah and south-eastern Idaho, by Brennan Young,Katherine Shervais, Moises Ponce-Zepeda, Sari Rosove, and James Evans,CD (9 p. + 20 p. appendices [contains GISdata]), OFR-605......................$14.95

Interim geologic map of theKanarraville quadrangle, IronCounty, Utah, by Robert F. Biekand Janice M. Hayden, CD (31 p.,1 pl.), OFR-618......$14.95

Geologic map of the YellowjacketCanyon quadrangle, Kane County,Utah, and Mohave County, Arizona,by Janice M. Hayden, CD (2 pl. [containsGIS data]), scale 1:24,000, ISBN 978-1-55791-865-9, M-256DM...........$24.95

Utah oil and gasa richhistory, a powerful future,

24 p., ISBN 1-55791-655-1,PI-71updated 2013.....$1.50

InSAR analysis of ground surfacedeformation in Cedar Valley, IronCounty, Utah, by Kurt Katzenstein,CD (43 p.), ISBN 978-1-55791-882-6,MP-13-5..................................$14.95

Cache Valley aquifer storage andrecoveryPhase II, by Paul Inkenbrandt,

Kevin Thomas, and Christian Hardwick,CD (33 p., 1 pl.), OFR-615...............$14.95

JANUARY 2014 13


16/16

Follow Us!

UGS TwitterUGS Blogl h /bl

UGS Facebook

We carry a wide variety of books and maps for all Utah outdoor enthusiasts as well as printedtopographic maps for the entire United States. You can also find us online at mapstore.utah.go

PRSRT STD

U.S. Postage

PAID

Salt Lake City, UT

Permit No. 4728

UTAH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

1594 W Nor th Temple, Sui te 3110

Box 146100

Salt Lake City, UT 84114-6100

Address service requestedSurvey Notes

Did you know that the Utah Geological Survey has a

physical store locationwhere you can browse and purchase items pertainingto all aspects of Utah geology and mapping?

MonFri 8:00 a.m.5:00 p.m. | 801-537-3320 or 1-888-UTAHMAP | [email protected]

Natural ResourcesMap & Bookstore

1594 W North TempleSalt Lake City, UT 84116

|

survey notes, january 2014

Documents