The Potential Impacts of Gold Mining in Virginia (2023) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Appendix E: Comparison to Other Deposits
Appendix E: Comparison to Other Deposits
Pages 205-208
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 205... ...
Deposits in the gold-pyrite belt and the Virgilina district are associated with greenschist grade metamorphic rocks, although some approach amphibolite grade and some in the Virgilina district are lower greenschist grade. The tectonic, structural, and alteration characteristics of goldpyrite belt deposits match the greenschist class of orogenic deposits well, but differ from many greenschist-hosted orogenic deposits in that a larger proportion of gold in this class occurs as "free" gold, whereas most gold in the gold-pyrite belt is encapsulated in pyrite.
|
From page 206... ...
In the other ore bodies, mineralization occurs primarily as disseminated pyrite or auriferous pyrite seams and blebs. The Kensington deposits are comparable to deposits in Virginia in terms of genetic classification as orogenic deposits -- both are associated with shearing, have steeply dipping veins, show similar alteration assemblages, are low in arsenic, and have similar gold grades.
|
From page 207... ...
For example, the Eagle Shawmut deposit is of a similar size and is associated with steeply dipping veins in greenschist-hosted shear zones. However, the deposit differs from Virginia in that it has higher arsenic and contains more free gold (Knopf, 1929)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.