Mineral Raw Materials G. W. JOSEPHSON U. S. BUREAU OF MINES, WASHINGTON 25, D. C.
F r o m Colonial times to the present, minerals have provided a firm foundation for the growth of the chemical industry i n t h e South Atlantic States. The mineral wealth of this area includes fuels, a variety of nonmetallic minerals, and a number of metallic ores. The coal, salt, phosphates, pyrites, limestone, and other minerals produced support major chemical manufacturing operations, and in some instances substantial tonnages are shipped out of the region. Large segments of the industrial complex in the northern part of this area are based on occurrences of fuels, limestone, and salt. A noteworthy example of t h e use of regional resources is the phosphate industry which consumes rock from the enormous deposits in Florida. Phosphate rock production has grown rapidly t o satisfy the fertilizer requirements of the United States. Recent mineral developments t h a t have a t tracted wide attention have been the recovery of uranium as a by-product of phosphate processing, the growth of titanium production, and t h e surge i n lithium mineral output and processing, based on the major lithium deposits in North Carolina. In addition t o minerals from regional deposits the chemical industry also draws major tonnages of raw materials such as petroleum, natural gas, and sulfur from other states or foreign countries. The chemical industry i n the South Atlantic States, therefore, has access t o essential mineral raw materials from both domestic and foreign sources.
HEIY browsing through the historical record of the South Atlantic States the reader is impressed by the great variety of solutions that have been found for mineral supply problems. These solutions in many instances have been strongly influenced by developments in the chemical industry. The chemical industry, v,-hich is engaged primarily in processing minerals and other raw materials, is a major consumer of these commodities, and tends to gravitate t o the areas in which adequate supplies of the required raw materials are available either l x a l l y or by economical transportation from the source. Although this area has many minerals in abundance there are some minerals t h a t are scarce. The obstacles encountered as a result of shortages have brought forth a variety of responses. Characteristically, an effort has been made first to satisfy needs from local sources. For example, it is reported t h a t when the Virginia colonists in 1613 found that salt imported from England i ~ a sextremely expensive, they began producing their own b y rvaporating sea water in shallow wooden vats. S o t long after, in 1619, the first iron furnace mas built. Small local mineral deposits often T V P ~ Psufficient to satisfy the n e d .
But as time vient on conditions changed. Changes in transportation facilities, qua1it.y requirements, technology, competition, or just groxi-th in population made many old deposits inadequate. Other sources n-ere sought, and soon a new supply pattern vias established. The processor or consumer who found a local supply available was fortunate; many did not and had to search farther afield. Sometimes, as with phosphate rock, t,he source was found in tho South Stlantic or adjoining states. Sometimes, as with asbcst,oe, gypsum, and petroleum, supplies had to be imported. The long seacoast with several good harbors and relat'ively cheap ocean t,ransportation is an important factor in the choice of supplier. One counterbalance to this has been the constant improvement in the internal transportation system. The At,lantic* region is also relatively free from shortages of timber, water, anti labor that hamper development of mineral deposits in many arid or remote areas. The South Atlantic States, therefore, have provided the chemical and other mineral consuming industries v-it'h many raw materials from their 0n-n deposits and easy access to the more distant and foreign resources. As a group these states have fuels and a variety of nonmetallic minerals b u t relat,ively small met,allic mineral output. I n 19.52 t,heir output of mineral produrts totaled about $1,200,000,000, almost 9yoof the national production (Table I). Individually the states vary n-idely in mineral Tvcalth; West Virginia contributed 69%, Virginia 14%, and t,hc other six sta,tes togcther liyo. T h e wide divergence is principally due t,o t,he concentration of coal product,ion in West Virginia and Virginia.
Table I. Value of Mineral Production in South Atlantic States, 1950 and 1952, by States in Thousands of Dollars 1962 State Delaware Florida Georgia ~~~
Rlaryland North Carolina South Carolina
Virginia West Virginia Total
U. 5. Total, ,522
67.717 44,357 22,725
137,800 829,624 1 , 140,283
Value 677 80,333 02,398 26,847
0.01 0.60 0.30
14,531 164,679 825.675 1,199,868
6.17 -~ 8.97
Statistics of total mineral output providc a suitable framework for a view of the mineral industry, but even more revealing is a ievien of individual commodity situations. For those who wish to obtain further details, Table I1 shows commodity statistics, the producing states, and literature references.
INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
Vol. 47, No. 3
Table 11. Productiona of Minerals in South Atlantic States in 1952 Commodity Abrasive materials Garnets, short tons Grinding pebbles, millstones, and tube-mill liners (natural). short tons Grindstones, short tons Quartz (crude. crushed. and ground). short tons Ground, sand and sandstone, short tons Aplite long tons Asbesios short tons Barite (:rude), short tons
Bauxite long tons dried equivalent Berylliim concentkate, short tons, gross wt. Bromine, 1000 Ib. Calcium-magnesium chloride, (Ca,hIg)Clz basis, short tons, 75% Cement, 376-1b. barrels
b 6 b
b b b
( I d , SD,24E,f J ,4J,6J)
North Carolina West Virginia
( 1C , 5C, QE,24E,iF.8 F , 6G,1J ,4J)
Maryland, North Carolina Georgia, Virginia, West Virginia Virgin,ia Georgia Georgia, South Carolina
(SD, IJ, 4J85J)
Georgia Georgia, West Virginia West Virginia
Florida,,Georgia. Maryland, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia Clays (except for cement) including fuller’s 7,052,458O 36,070,325c Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Maryearth, short tons land, North Carolina, South . Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia Coal, short tons 163,914,030 859,150,294 Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia b b Columbium-tantalum ore North Carolina Feldspar (crude), long tons 24p,364c 2,41$,031 Nort,h,Carolina, Virginia Gypsum (crude) short tons Vir gin Ia Iron ore (usable$, long tons, gross wt. 319,959 1,439,251 Georgia, Virginia Kyanite, short tons b b South Carolina, Virginia Lead (recoverable content of ores), short tons Lime (open market), short tons Lithium minerals, short tons Manganese ore (35% or more M n ) , short tons, gross wt. Marl, calcareous (except for cement), short tons Mica Scrap, short tons Sheet, Ib. Natural gas, 1000 CU. ft. Natural gas liquids Natural gasoline, 42-gal. barrela LP-gases, 42-gal. barrels Olivine, short tons Peat short tons Petrheum (crude), 42-gal. barrels
3,792 523,584 b
1,031,000 4 , 75b7,000
3,069,000 6 , Bb7,000
E , 782,125 392,519‘ 34,789,686
Talc, pyrophyllite, and ground soapstone, short tons Tin (content of ore and concentrate), long tons Titanium concentrate, short tons, gross art. Tungsten concentrate, short tons, 60% WOs basis Vermiculite, short tons Zinc (recoverable content of ores), short tons Zirconium concentrate, short tons Undistributed
(12B,4C,5C, f J ,43.6 J ) (lB,lPB, SC, 4C, 6 C , l P C , 16C, lac, 4 0 8D 8E 18E PlE Z4E 8F dOG-PPG, iH:6 H , 9 H , ibH,lj,4J: 6J)
(4C,6 C , 17C,5D,5H, 6H,8H-llH,1J, 4J,6J) (SC,8 C , 5E,P4E,16G.1J , 4J,6 J ) (4C kC’14b (i6G f J 4J 6J) IBE 1QE YG,f 5 G , 6 H , Q H , l b H , l i H . l j , 4J,’6J) (6C,1SC. l Q C , 11E, M E , Q F , 14G,I J , 4J 6J) Virginia (P4E:SG,f Z G , 16G,fJ,4J,5 J ) Florida, Georgia, Maryland, Vir- ( 1J,6J) ginia, West Virginia North ,Carolina Virginia Virginia, West Virginia
(7E i0E 4F 1J 4J 6J) (4C: 6C,’d4E, BkE,’BF, 8 F , 14G, 16G, 1YG 6H YH OH-lfH 1J 4 J 6J) ( Q B ,I h B , k C , kE,QG,iiG,6H,’lJ, 45,
Georgia, North Carolina
( 6 C , 6 C , 8C, lSC,9 D , l d E , 17E, 94E, M E . f6G,i J , S J ,6 J )
Georgia, North Carolina, Virginia Florida, Maryland, Virginia, WeRt Virginia
(4B, M B ,6C, 5G,BH,6 H , QH-IlH,43, 6J)
West Vjrgjnja West Virginia North Carolina Florida, Georgia 192 164 9,780:000d Florida, Virginia, West Virginia 51,542,799
Florida Marvland-vir-g$ia 1,438,490’ Virginia West Virginia 33,786,429 Delawa$e, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia b Georgia Maryland, Virginia 77,764,700 Delawaie, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia 2 , 4 2 4 , 6 6 2 c Georrria. Marvland. North Carolina, VirginCa 12,601 North Carolina Florida, North Carolina, Virginia
45,600,615 171,972 b
North Carolina North Carolina, South Carolina Virginia Florida
(4C,6C,5G, 16G,lJ,4J,5J,6J) (1J. 4J,6 J ) ( 1 J ,4Jt6 J )
Slate short tons Stond (except limestone for cement and lime), short tons
(6C 9C SD 84E 5G 1J 4J 5J) (4C:5C: Plb, 6E:B4E,6G,i4G,I J , 4 J ,
Phosphate rock, long tons Potassium salts, short tons K20 equiv. Pyrites, long tons Salt (common), short tons Sand and gravel, short tons
Producing States Florida
(4C,6C, 16C, 5G,l J , 4J.6 J ) (6B QB 1BB 4C 6C 11C POC BD SE l$E,k6E, BF,60, ?G,IjG,IhG,hbG: SH,~H,OH-llH,1J,2J,4J,5J) (6C, 7 C , 8C, 8ZE,PSE,5G, 1 J , 4J,6 J ) i84E 4F 16G 1J 4J 6J) (SB,iOBLlBB’, 6 D , S F , dG, 4G,6G,i 5 G , 89G 1J 45 6J) (14E,j4E:fG,lJ,4J,6J) (84E,SG, 6G,fZG, 16G,l J ,4J,6.1) (8B f8B f6G 1 J 4.1 5J) 5 F ’ 8F’ 8G: ( l1hE A ’ PhOE’S4E C ’ 4 Ci C bSF’ i d SD 1E 86G: E 4E llGLi4G,’l8G. iQG,’lJ, 23,6J)
Production as measured by mine shipments or mine sales (including consumption by producers); fuels are strirtly production Included with “Undistributed” to avoid disclosure of individual company operations. Incomplete, production of one or more of states is not included: value is combined with “Undistributed.” d Incomplete, value for one or more of states is combined with “Undistributed.”
FUELS Both petroleum and coal are important factors in the fuel supply of the South Atlantic area. West Virginia was the second state in which oil was discovered and contributed about of the total national production toward the end of the last century. I n recent years it has contributed less than 1%. Since 1944 West Virginia’s production has approximated 3,000,000 barrels per year. Of the other states in the Southeastern area, Florida produced 537,000 barrels, and Virginia, 10,000 barrels of petroleum in 1953. West Virginia is moreover the principal producer of natural gas in the area, contributing 182,100,000,000 cubic feet or almost
2.5% of the national total in 1953; this equals about the consumption in the area. Maryland, Virginia, and Florida also produced small quantities. Natural gas is brought into the area by the Big Inch and other pipelines from gas fields in Tcxas and other states. West Virginia produces enough natural gas to support plants for extracting natural-gas liquids. I n 1953 the nine plants in the state extracted over 7,000,000 barrels of liquid products, mainly liquefied petroleum gases, from natural gas. This was almost 3% of the national total. Petroleum refining activity is more generally distributed through the area; Delaware, Georgia, and South Carolina have one refinery each devoted principally to making asphalt, and
INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
Maryland and West Virginia have three general product refineries each. The asphalt refineries operate almost entirely on heavy crude oil imported from Mexico or Venezuela. The West Virginia refineries process about 2/3 the oil produced in the state, and this supplies about ‘/z its refinery consumption; the balance is brought in, almost entirely by pipeline, from various other states-Illinois, Ohio, Kentucky, and Oklahoma. The Maryland refineries-all in Baltimore-import about 1/3 thcir crude oil supplies; the remaining 2/3 is shipped by tanker from Texas and Louisiana. The South Atlantic area is well represented in the rapidly growing petrochemical industry, with 10 plants manufacturing a wide variety of chemical products from natural gas and petroleum fractions. Seven are in West Virginia and one each in Maryland, Virginia, and South Carolina. The South Atlantic area is a very important factor in petroleum consumption, using about one hundred times as much oil as it produces and almost ten times as much as it refines. The quantities of the principal petroleum products consumed in the area during 1953 and the share of the national totals are
Gasoline Kerosine Distillate fuel oils Residual fuel oils Total I
Consumption, Thousands of Barrels
Percentage of C. S. Total
150,444 25,572 49,503 77,652 303,171
12.8 22.4 10.1 13.8
The South Atlantic States therefore produce both petroleum and natural gas and can draw on other domestic and foreign sources for the additional quantities required. A map of the coal fields of the United States shows that nature did not deposit coal lavishly in most South Atlantic States. The great Appalachian field stretches northeastward from Alabama, paralleling these states, and only small areas in Georgia, Korth Carolina, Virginia, and Maryland are coal-bearing. West Virginia, on the other hand, encloses a major segment of the Appalachian field; consequently, the region is an important factor in the coal industry. Reserves are very large; the present estimate of reserves for West Virginia alone exceeds 106 billion tons. Development of these coals dates from Colonial time. Today the bulk of the production comes from West Virginia; Virginia is second for this area, and smaller quantities are supplied by Maryland, North Carolina, and Georgia. Not only are the reserves large, but the quality is high. These coals provide coke for the steel industry and as a raw material and a source of heat and power have been major factors in the development of the chemical industry of the South Atlantic States. From their use and processing come a great variety of products, such as benzene, ammonia, toluene, and phenol, which end up in plastics, dyes, perfumes, medicines, detergents, fertilizers, explosives, and the many other items in the terminal branches of the coal tree. Substantial tonnages move to the industrial market of the Eastern seaboard. A recent development in West Virginia that attracted wide attention was the construction of a coal hydrogenation plant to yield chemicals as primary products. These coal chemicals traditionally have been recovered as by-products of coal processing. NONMETALLIC MINERALS The South Atlantic area has large reserves of a number of nonmetallic minerals on which are based chemical and allied operations, such as the production of alkalies and fertilizers. Salt and Salines. The inhabitants of the South Atlantic States have drawn on many sources for their supplies of salt, For long periods, the evaporation of sea water was practiced
extensively. But xyith improvement in transportation and the discovery of inland salt deposits sea-salt output declined. The development of deposits a t Saltville, T’a., and in the Kananha T‘alley of West Virginia not only provided salt for table use and meat curing in the early 18OO’s, it also laid the foundations for the large present day chemical operations in those areas. The salt deposits of this region are near fuel and limestone, a fortunate association of minerals that provides the principal raw materials for the manufacture of alkalies, chlorine, and related products. From these same brines come calcium chloride and bromine. From 1933 to 19413large quantities of bromine were produced from sea water a t Wilmington, N. C. Limestone and Dolomite. The limestones, dolomites, marbleb, and shell deposits are widely distributed in the South Atlantic States. These are used in making a variety of products, including lime, dead-burned dolomite, magnesia, soda ash, cement, and building stones. One precautionary note: Stone of the quality sought by a prospective consumer is not aln.ays easy to find, even in areas where calcareous stone may be abundant. The most important limestoncs of the Southeast form a belt extending from eastern Kest T-irginia down the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia through Tennessee to Georgia. Dolomite in the northern section of the belt is used for making dead-buined dolomite refractories for the steel industry and as a source of magnesia for refractories. About 3,000,000 tons of high calcium limestone quarried in West Virginia is used annually for furnace flus in the iron and steel industry. I t is also used for making cement and lime. I n Virginia the limestones are used widely for making lime. These two states supply over 1,000,000 tons of limestone annually for chemical and industrial uses. I n the Carolinas, high grade limestones are relatively scarce, but the extension of the limestone belt to Georgia provides that state Tvith important deposits. Georgia marble of high purity is used in pulverized form as maible flour for paint filler, putty manufacture, and many other industrial uses. I n Florida limestones are abundant, but many lack the physical and chemical properties that fit them for chemical use. Shell marls occur along the coastal plain. They are used for soil amendment and as a raw material for cement manufacture. Phosphate Rock. The first phosphate deposits discovered and mined in this country \yere those in South Carolina. From 1867 to 1921 this state produced substantial tonnages. I n 1888 extensive deposits of higher grade and more cheaply minable phosphate rock were discovered in Florida, and as these mere dcveloped production in South Carolina declined and finally ceased. The production of phosphate rock in Florida has grown to such proportions that this state now is the world’s outstanding source of this important mineral. The operations are highly mcrhanized; gigantic mining equipment is employed. The introduction of flotation methods for recovering the finer sizes of phosphate has greatly increased the reserves of the Florida fields. The inferred reserves minable under present conditions are now estimated a t over 2 billion tons. Florida is well situated for supplying phosphate rock to both the foreign and domestic markets. Excellent transportation facilities are available for shipping the rock both by rail and water. The bulk of the Florida phosphate marketed in this country is ground finely, treated with sulfuric acid, and converted to superphosphate for fertilizer use. The development of the electric furnace process for manufacturing elemental phosphorus and phosphoric acid has provided new outlets for this mineral. rln obvioudy important phase of phosphate-rock processing that has recently been developed to the commercial stage is recovery of uranium as a by-product. Bnother by-product phase of the phosphate industry that merits attention is recovery of fluorine. The fluorine requirements of the United States for both metallurgical and acid uses are grox-ing steadily. T o serve this demand, the fluorine evolved
INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
Vol. 47, NO, 3.
-Resources in phosphate-rock processing is a promising source both from the viewpoint of conservationists and of those primarily interested in maintaining an adequate supply. The considerable progress that already has been made in process development and actual recovery of fluorine compounds indicates that phosphate rock is likely to make substantial contributions to fluorine supply in the future. Sulfur. T o make all the superphosphate and the many other industrial products manufactured in the area requires a great deal of sulfur. A fraction of the sulfur needed for this purpose is obtained from local pyrites in Virginia, but the bulk of the sulfur raw materials originates outside these states. Texas and Louisiana, which have deposits that can be mined by the Frasch process, are the principal sources of elemental sulfur. At present, additional Frasch-type mines are being developed in Mexico and are receiving wide attention, because they promise to increase substantially the quantity of this preferred form of sulfur on the market. Pyrites are available in adjoining states and in Canada and Spain. Deposits of pyrites, particularly those in Virginia, are available for future development when the competitive situation becomes more favorable. The flurry of concern over sulfur supplies that gripped the chemical industry during the shortage a few years ago has subsided since sulfur has become readily available again. Many projects for augmenting supply with non-Frasch sulfur received serious consideration during the shortage, and quite a few were put in operation. These and the new Frasch mines developed in the United States have bolstered sulfur production capacity for the present. The future, of course, holds its own secrets, but sulfur is a constituent of so many minerals and a potential by-product of so many processes that resources now submarginal must be considered as ample on the assumption that technical developments and economic adjustments P\ ill rome when needed. Lithium. One of the fastest growing branches of the mineral industry is lithium production. Lithium minerals, lithium compounds, or the metal and its alloys are used in ceramics, greases, pharmaceuticals, storage batteries, metallurgy, and in many other ways. For a few years lithium has been in short supply, but several new developments, principally in the South Altantic States, are expected to improvcx this situation. During World War I1 spodumene production was begun near Kings Mountain, N. C., largely to supply military needs for lithium compounds. When Government contracts vere canceled a t the end of the war, this facility was shut down. During the next few years research and market development programs on lithium were intensified. As a result, important new applications were found. A short supply situation soon developed, and producers began to expand their capacities. The facilities a t Kings Mountain were rehabilitated and expanded. A new plant was built a t Sunbright in western Virginia to make lithium chemicals from the spodumene concentrates produced a t Kings Mountain. Another firm recently began construction of a lithium plant near Bessemer City, N. C. The largest known reserves in the United States of the lithium mineral, spodumene, occur in an area extending from a point near Lincolnton, N. C., to Grover on the state line between hTorth and South Carolina. The spodumene occurs in numerous elongate bodies of pegmatite in this area. Beryl associated with the spodumene in the Kings Mountain district of North Carolina constitutes the largest known potential reserve of beryllium in the United States. Beryl is not yet being produced from these deposits on a commercial scale, but it is anticipated that a satisfactory recovery process eventually will be developed. Small quantities have been produced a t other spots in these states. Beryllium is a hardening additive in alloys, principally beryllium-copper alloys. Other Nonmetallics. The region produces and consumes quite a number of additional nonmetallic minerals of varying interest to the chemical industry.
The production of mixed fertilizer in the Southeast consumes large quantities of potash, which are shipped in from distant sources. Ample supplies are obtained from the great potash mines in Carlsbad, N. M., and from European sources. The only local production of potash, at a cement plant in Maryland, may be small but is unique. This plant recovers potash as a by-product from cement-kiln flue dust. The first reported production of barite in the United States was in Virginia. It is not now produced in that state but has been mined for many years in Georgia and South Carolina. Some is crushed and ground for use in oil-well drilling and as heavy aggregate in concrete coating for pipelines; some is used in rubber, glass, and linoleum. hiluch of it goes to chemical plants in Georgia and West Virginia. Barite is also available from states outside this area and from Nova Scotia and overseas sources. Large reserves of mica lie in an area extending from Virginia south through the Carolinas to Georgia. Output in the Southeastern states, the largest mica-producing area in the United States, has been stimulaed in recent years by the Government’s strategic mica purchasing program. Hundreds of individuals or small groups are now producing mica in the area. The output of scrap mica from tho sheet mica operations and scrap mica mined as the primary product has reached substantial proportions in these states. This scrap is ground and used in roofing, plastics, paint, and wallpaper. The region has substantial requirements for gypsum to be used in soil treatment, gypsum construction materials, and portland cement manufacture. Only a small part of these requirements are supplied from the single gypsum mining area in Virginia. Fortunately, enormous deposits in Nova Scotia are close to the harbor. These are mined and transported cheaply to the several gypsum processing plants that have been built along the South Atlantic Coast. Asbestos has long been a product of several of these states; but mining has never reached large proportions, primarily because no large deposits of chrysotile, the principal commercial variety, have been found. Amphibole asbestos is produced and processed in the region, but chrysotile supplies are imported from Canada or overseas. For many years the United States depended on foreign sources for its supplies of high grade kaolins for the ceramic, paper, and rubber trades. That is no longer the case because such advances have been made in beneficiating the kaolins of Georgia and North and South Carolina that they now supply the bulk of domestic requirements. Georgia and Florida produce over 60% of the fuller’s earth consumed in the United States. Similarly, major quantities of feldspar are produced in the North Carolina-Virginia area for the ceramic trade. A large tonnage is recovered by flotation treatment of material obtained from intrusive masses of relatively fine-grained pegmatitic rock. Kyanite for refractory and ceramic purposes is produced in South Carolina and Virginia. Potentially useful deposits of sillimanite also occur in the Carolinas and Georgia. The reserve situation of the strategic grades of kyanite has been relieved recently by the development of commercially successful synthetic mullite for refractory use. North Carolina, Georgia, Maryland, and Virginia together contribute a substantial tonnage of talc and pyrophyllite to the national supply. North Carolina has olivine, which is used for refractory applications.
METALS Although the South Atlantic States are not major suppliers of the metallic minerals, they do make some notable contributions.
INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
The S3uth Atlantic region has contributed substantially in recent years to t h e growth of titanium production. Requirements for titanium minerals have increased greatly for use in such well-established markets as pigments and welding rod coatings, and now demand for the metal is increasing. I t s combination of light weight and strength is advantageous in modern aircraft. Ilmenit,e and rutile deposits that have been developed in Florida, Korth Carolina, and Virginia contribute large tonnages, and more developments are in progress. These states now supply over the total United States output. Much of the tonnage is shipped from the mines in Florida to plants in Delaware and Maryland for processing into pigment and metal. Additional tonnages of titanium minerals are imported into the regian from abroad. Extensive titaniferous deposits occur in Virginia, Xorth Carolina, South Carolina, and Florida. These vary great,ly in economic promise but merit investigation as possible future sources. For a number of years thc Carolinas were sources of monazite, the principal rare earth mineral, but this out,put ceased owing to competition of Indian and Brazilian material. I n recent years, however, the exportation of monazite from India and Brazil has been restricted, and recovery from deposits in the United States has been revived. Monazit'e is now being produced as a byproduct of titanium sand processing in Florida. Additional potential exists in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. Another by-product of titanium mineral mining in Florida is zircon. This material has been used principally in refractory and ceramic applications and now is expanding to the metal field. Ductile zirconium metal has corrosion resistance and other properties t h a t make its future promising in metal applications. Its most important current use is in the construction of nuclear reactors wherein advantage is taken of its low rate of neutron absorption. Zircon reserves in Florida are considered t o be large compared with United States requirements. The South Atlantic States nom- produce comparatively little iron ore b u t consume large tonnages, imported primarily from Chile and Venezuela. Output for the metal trade is active only in Georgia, where 200,000 to 300,000 t,ons is produced annually for consumption by furnaces in Alabama and occasionally Tennessee. Iron oxide is also being mined in southwestern Virginia and Georgia for use other t,han as iron ore. It is processed and sold for use as a mineral pigment,. Iron ore deposits of significant proportions but uneconomic at. present exist in Virginia and North Carolina. Georgia has produced iron ore almost continuously since Colonial times. Sinall deposits are widely scattered in all these states, and all have produced some iron ore in t'he past. The iron oxide cinder that is left behind when pyrites are burned for sulfuric acid manufacture supplements the supply of iron ore in this region. Pyrite cinder is processed in Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia for use in steelmaking. Part is consumed in Maryland and part shipped to Alabama. Lead and zinc are ,produced in Virginia and tungsten in S o r t h Carolina. Metal sulfide occurrences have been reported in the \vestern parts of Gcorgia, North Carolina, Virginia, and Maryland, and elsewhere. Active exploration of lead and zinc prospects is reported in the Shenandoah Valley and in Maryland. The Hamme mine in North Carolina was the leading producer of tungsten concentrates in 1953. Manganese has been produced intermittently for many years in Virginia, West Virginia, Georgia, and t h e Carolinas. Currently a number of producers are active in Virginia under the domestic manganese purchase program of the General Services Administration. A modest tonnage of bauxite is produced in Georgia and shipped for use in t h e chemical industry. Although the early explorers were somewhat disappointed in the South Atlantic area as a source of gold, it has produced almost 500,000 ounces of t h a t metal. Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia have all contributed.
Numerous examples have been cited of chemical and other industries that import minerals from abroad to sustain operations in this region. T o them can be added the ferrosilicon and ferrochromium production plant a t Charleston, S. C., and a blast, furnace a t Lynchburg, Va., n hich manufactures ferromanganeee. From the foregoing, it is apparent that industry has talien advantage of many opportunities to develop and use the mineral resources of the South Atlantic States. S a t u r e often docs not lay domn the resource in the most desirable location, quantity, or form, but with the ingenuity and persistence for which it is noted, the chemical industry should find ample opportunit? for further gro\\ t h based on domestic and foreign ram materials avnilable to the South Atlantic States. ACKNOWLEDGMENT I n preparing this paper the author received a great deal of illformation and assistance from the specialists in the Bureaii of Mines who are responsible for the commodities discussed. Sly indebtedness to them and to S a n Jensen and Lee Hunt, u ho prcpared the tables and bibliography, is gratefully aclinomledged. LITERATURE CITED DELAWARE
(1.1)Hawkins, Alfred, C., RocLs and Minerals, 11, No. 10, 21(&17
(1B) Calver, James R.. Florida Geol. Survey, Inform Circ. 2 (1949). (2B) Davis, John H., Jr., I b i d . , Bull. 30 (1946).
(3B) Florida Geol. Survey, 19th i\nn. Rept., 33-123 (192s).
(4B) Gunter, Herman, Florida Geol. Sur\-ey, (Suppl.) Inform (:ire. 1 ~10,;m. (5B) H&k&-R. TI., R i d . , Rept. Invest. 3, 105 (1942). (6B) Hudson, W. C . , U . S. Bur. Mines, liept. Invest. 3865 (1946). (7B) Mansfield, G. R., U. S.Geol. Survey, Bull. 934 (1943). (8R) Alartens, J. 13. C., Florida Geol. SurveL-, 19th A n n . Itept.,
124-54 (1928). (9B) Mossom, Stuart, I b i d , 16th Ann. Rept., 27-195 (1925). (10B) Spencei, R. V., U. 9. Bur. hlines, Rept. Invest. 4208, 1-21
(I1B) Thoenen, J. R., and Warne, J. D., Ibid., 4515, 1-62 (1949). (12B) Vernon, Robert O., Florida Geol. Survey, Bull. 24, 207 (1943). GEORGIA
S. Bur. ; \ h e 5 , Ilept. Invest. 4309, 1-5 (1948). ( 2 C ) I b i d . . 4311. 1-24. Bay,'R. X:, and nluiiyan. -1.C., Georgia Geol. Dept. of Information, Circ. 6 (1935). Butts, Charles, and Gildersleeve, Benjamin, Georgia Geol. Survey, Bull. 54 (1943). Furcron, A4.S., Munyan, A. C., Peyton, Garland, and Smith, Richard W., "5Iineral Re5ources of Georgia," Georgia Geol. Survey, 1-185 (1938). Furcron, A. S., and Teague, Kefton If.,Georgia Geol. Survey, Bull. 48, 1-192 (1943). (7'2) Ihid., 53, 1-75 (1947). (8C) Galpin, S. L., Ibid., 30 (1915). (9C) Hopkins, Oliver B., I b i d . , 29 (1914). (1OC) Hunter, Charles E., Ihid., 47, 1-117 (1941). (11C) McCallie, 9. W., I b i d . , 1, 2nd ed. (1907). (12C) Munyan, Arthur C., Ibid.,44-A (1938). (13C) Prindle, Louis R f . , Ibid., 46, 1-50 (1935). (14C) Robertson, A. F., U. S. Bur. AIines, Rept. Invest. 4179 (1948). (15C) Shearer, H. K., Georgia Geol. Survey, Bull. 34 (1918). (l6C) Smith, R. W., Ibid., 45 (1930). (17C) Troxell, John R., U. S. Bur. Mines, Rept. Invest. 3960 (1946). (18C) Vaughan, T. W., U. S.Geol. Survey, Bull. 213, 392-9 (1903). (19C) \Vatkine, J. H., Am. Ceram. SUC.Bull., 21, 141-2 (1942). (20C) Watson, T . L., Georgia Geol. Survey, Bull. 9-A (1902). (21C) l17eigel,W.M.,U. S . Bur. Mines, Rept. Invest,. 2477 (1923). (1C) Ballard, T. J., U.
(1D) Darton, K. H., U. S. Geol. Survey, Bull. 906-A, 1-42 (1939). (2D) Mathem, E. B., and Grasty, J. S.,Maryland Geol. Survey, Special Pub., Vol. 8, pt. 3 (March 1910).
INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
Vol. 47, No. 3
-Resources (3D) Ostrander, C. W., and Price, W. E., Jr., “Minerals of Maryland,” Natural History Society of Maryland (1940). (4D) Ries, H., Maryland Geol. Survey, 4 , pt. 3 (1902). (5D) Swartz, C. K., and Baker, W. A,, Jr., Ibid., 11, pt. 1, 1-261 (1922). (6D) Tomlinson, W. H., Am. Mineralogist, 31, 322-5 (1946). (7D) Trainer, D. W., Jr., Maryland Geol. Survey, 12, pt. 1 (1928). (8D) Watts, A. S.,Schurecht, H. G., Swartr, C. K., and Hall, G. M., Ibid., 11, pt. 2, 1-248 (1922).
(1G) (2G) (3G) (4G) (5G) (6G)
(IE) Ballard, T. J., and Clayton, Austin B., U. S. Bur. Mines. Rept. Invest. 4290 (1948). (2E) Ibid., 4341 (1948). (3E) Berry, E. W., North Carolina Dept. Conservation and Develop., Bull. 54, 1-17 (1947). (4E) Bryson, H. G., Ibid., 38 (1936). (5E) Cameron, Eugene N., Ibid., 62, 1-100 (1951). (6E) Dahners, L. A , , U. S. Bur. Mines, Rept. Invest. 4571, 1-26 (1949). (7E) Goter, E. R., and coworkers, M i n i n g Eng., 5, Trans, 890-3 (September 1953). (8E) Greaves-Walker, A. F., North Carolina Eng. Expt. Sta., Bull. 6 (1933). (9E) Hadley, J. B., U. S. Geol. Survey, Bull. 849-E, 103-28 (1949). (10E) Hess, F. L., Eng. Min. J . , 137, 339-42 (1946). (11E) Hunter, C. E., and White, W. A., North Carolina Dept. Conservation and Develop., Inform. Circ. 4 (1946). (12E) Kline, >I. H., and Ballard, T. J., U. S. Bur. Mines, Rept. Invest. 4274 (1948). (13E) Loughlin, G. F., Berry, G. W., and Creshman, J. H., North Carolina Geol. and Econ. Survey, Bull. 28 (1921). (14E) lIcIntosh, Frank K., U. S. Bur. Mines, Rept. Invest. 4380 (1948). (15E) hlurdock, T. G., and Hunter, C. E., North Carolina Dept. Conservation and Develop., Bull. 50, 1-44 (1946). (16E) blurdock, T. G., and MacCarty, G. R., Ibid., 42, 1-39 (1942). (17E) Olson, J. C., and coworkers, Ibid., 49, 1-58 (1946). (HE)Ries, H., North Carolina Geol. Survey, Bull. 13 (1897). (19E) Robertson, Almon F., U. S. Bur. Mines, Rept. Invest. 3974 (1946). (20E) Robertson, A. F., and coworkers, Ibid., 4156, 1-9 (1947). (21E) Stuckey, J. L., Am. Inst. Mining Met. Engrs., Tech. Pub. 2219 (1947). (22E) Stuckey, J. L., Econ. GeoZ., 32, 1009-18 (December 1937). (23E) Stuckey, J. L., North Carolina Dept. Conservation and Develoa.. Bull. 37 (1928). (24E) Stuck&,’ J. L., and Steel, Warren G., I b i d . , Educ. Series, 3, 1-35 11963). (25E) Watson,‘T. L:, and Laney, I?. B., North Carolina Geol. Survey, Bull. 2 (1906). (26E) White, E. D., E n g . Min,. J., 154, 94-6 (March 1953). (27E) White, W. A., North Carolina Dept. Conservation and Develop., Mineral Investigation, 2, 1-14 (1944). SOUTH CAROLINA
(7G) (SG) (9G) (10G) (11G) (12G) (13G) (14G) (15G) (l6G) (17G) (18G) (19G) (20G) (21G) (22G) (23G) (24G) (25G)
Argyle, Ben E., U. S. Bur. Mines, Rept. Invest. 3857 (1946). Bevan, A., Eng. Min. J.,143, 52 (1942). Currier, L. W., Virginia Geol. Survey, Bull. 43, 1-122 (1935). Davidson, D. M., and coworkers, E c o n . Geol., 41, 738-48 (November 1946); Discussion, Ross, C. S.,42, 194-8 (March 1947). Dietrich, R. V., “Virginia Mineral Localities.” Virginia Eng. Expt. Station, Blacksburg (1953). Edmundson, R. S.,Virginia Geol. Survey, Bull. 53, 1-85 (1938). Furcron, A. S.,Ibid., 39, 1-124 (1935). Grosh, Wesley A., U. S. Bur. Mines, Rept. Invest. 4357 (1943). Hickman, R. C., Ibid., 4114, 1 4 (1947). Hickman, R. C., I b i d . , 4116, 1-3 (1947). Hickman, R. C., Ibid., 4641, 1-6 (1950). Kline, M. H., and Ballard, T. J., Ibid., 4532, 1-39 (1949). Lonsdale, John T., Virginia Geol. Survey, Bull. 30, 1-110 (1927). McGill, William M., Ibid., 47, 1-81 (1936). Mathews, A. A. L., Ibid., 40, 52 (1934). Miller, R. L., Ibid., 61, 1-150 (1945). Monroe, W. H., U. 8.Geol. Survey, Bull. 936, 111-41 (1942). Newberry, A. W., Roos, Alford, Robertson, Almon F., Dahners, L. A,, and Cohen, C. J., U. S.Bur. Mines, Rept. Invest. 4384 (1948). Pegau, -4.A., Virginia Geol. Survey, Bull. 33, 1--123 (1932). Ries, H., Ibid., 2 (1906). Ibid., 13 (1917). Ries, H., and Somers, R. E., I b i d . , 20 (1920). Ross, C. S., U. S. Geol. Survey, Profess. Paper 198 (1941). Watson, T. L., J . Am. Chem,.Soc., 2 , 794 (1919). Wentworth, C. K., Virginia Geol. Survey, Bull. 32 (1930).
(1H) Grimsley, G. P., West Virginia Geol. Survey, 3 (1906). (2H) Heck, E. T., and Hare, C. E., Ibid., Map (194:; (3H) McCure, J. B., and Woodward, H. P., Ibid., V L ~ .12, 1-560 (1939). (4H) Martens, James, H. C., I b i d . , Bull. 7, 1.-67 (19K). (5H) Price, Paul H., and coworkers, U. S. Bur. Nines, Tech. Paper 626 (1942). (6H) Price, Paul H., Tucker, R. C., and Haught, 0. L., West Virginia Geol. Survey, Vol. 10, 1-462 (1938). (7H) Reeves, Frank, I b i d . , Mimeograph series, Bull. 6, 1-22 (1935). (8H) Reger, David B., Ibid., 3, 1-34 (1928). (9H) Reger, David B., Ibid., County Report of Randolph County, 397-810 (1931). (10H) Reger, David B., Ibid., County Reports o f Mercer, Monroe, and Summers Counties, 645-798 (1926). (11H) Sisler, J. D., Ibid., Mimeograph Series, Bull. 5 , (August I , 1931). GENERAL
(1J) “Industrial Minerals and Rocks,” (S.11’. Mudd Series), 2nd ed., Am. Institute Mining Met. Engrs., New York, 1-1156,
1949 (25) Bowles, Oliver, “Stone Indufitries,” 2nd ed., 1--519,McGrawHill Book Co., Inc., New York, 1939. (35) Jahns, R. H., and coworkers, U. S. Geol. Survey, Profess. Papers, 2 4 8 4 , B, C, D , E, F, G, (pnb. separately) 1953. (4J) “Minerals Yearbook,” U. S. Bur. Mines, Washington 25, D. C., 1950. (5J) Parker, J. &I., 111, and coworkers, Symposium o n Mineral Resources of Southeastern United States, 1949 Proceedings, Dept. of Geol. and Geog., Univ. Tenn., 1950. (6,J) Thoenen, J. R., and Burchard, Ernest F., U. S. Bur. Mines, Rept. Invest. 3598 (1941). RECEIVED for review September 20, 1964. ACCEPTEDJanuary 11 1956. I
(1F) Ballard, T. J., U. S. Bur. Mines, Rept. Invest. 4310, 1-6 (1948). (2F) Beck, William A . , Ibid., 3858 (1946). (3F) Fries, C., Jr., U. S. Geol. Survey, Bull. 936-C, 59-78 (1942). (4F) Resler, Thomas L., I b i d . , 936-J, 245-269 (1942). (5F) Lefforge, J. W., and Haseman, J. F., Tenn. Valley Authority, Rept. 496 (1943). (6F) Martens, J. H. C.. Geol. SOC.Amer., Bull. 46, 1563-96 (1935). (7F) Rogers, G. A , , U. S.Geol. Survey, Bull. 580-J, 183-220 (1915). (8F) Sloan, Earl, South Carolina Geol. Survey, Bull. 2, 129-42 (1908). (9F) Smith, L. L., Econ. Geol., 40, 298-304 (1940).
INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY