Seismic imaging of massive sulfide deposits; Part II, Reflection seismic profiling

Seismic methods in mineral exploration and mine planning: A general overview of past and present case histories and a look into the future

“…However, the only surface method that can provide high-definition images of the underground and has the required depth of penetration is the seismic reflection method. The potential of the method for mine planning and exploration has been long known (e.g., Schmidt, 1959;Oblogina et al, 1962;Elliot, 1967;Gupta, 1971;Reid et al, 1979;Hawkins and Whiteley, 1980;Kehrman, 1980;Ruskey, 1981;Wright, 1981;Gladwin, 1982;Nelson, 1980Nelson, , 1984Cosma, 1983;Wong et al, 1983;Campbell and Peace, 1984;Gustavsson et al, 1984;Dahle et al, 1985;Galperin, 1985;Fatti, 1987;Mutyorata, 1987;Campbell and Crotty, 1988;Duncan, 1989;Pretorius et al, 1989;Read, 1989;Young et al, 1989;Gendzwill, 1990;Juhlin et al, 1991;Maxwell and Young, 1992;Milkereit et al, 1992c;Spencer et al, 1993;Cao and Greenhalgh, 1995;Frappa and Moinier, 1993;Friedel et al, 1995Friedel et al, , 1996Milkereit et al, 1996;Salisbury et al, 1996;Greenhalgh and Mason, 1997;Hajnal et al, 1997;…”

“…The anomalous petrophysical properties (often density, and sometimes velocity) of massive sulfide deposits and the application of seismic methods to explore for them were presented by Milkereit et al (1996). Subsequently, several papers were published presenting the successful application of seismic methods for hard-rock exploration (e.g., Eaton et al, 2003).…”

“…However, an important catalyst for the application of seismic methods for mineral exploration was the successful imaging of fault and fracture zones in the hard-rock environment for the characterization of nuclear-waste repository sites (Noponen et al, 1979;Mair and Green, 1981;Green and Mair, 1983;Juhlin et al, 1991;Juhlin, 1995;Cosma et al, 2001;Juhlin and Stephens, 2006). Large-scale seismic investigations in Canada (e.g., Lithoprobe), the USA (e.g., COCORP), Australia (AGSO), Europe (Europrobe), and South Africa (National Geophysics Programme) also were very important in developing the necessary techniques for imaging challenging and complex geologic structures in the crystalline environment (e.g., Ruskey, 1981;Clowes et al, 1984;Milkereit et al, 1992c;Juhlin et al, 1995;Milkereit et al, 1996;Milkereit and Eaton, 1998;Ayarza et al, 2000;, Odgers et al, 1993Calvert et al, 2003;Eaton et al, 2010). Extensive 2D seismic surveys to map the structure and explore for extensions of the gold-bearing Witwatersrand Basin of South Africa commenced in the early 1980s (Campbell and Peace, 1984;Durrheim, 1986;Pretorius et al, 1989;Chambovet et al, 2006).…”

Seismic volumetric interpretation of a disseminated copper system in Kevitsa, northern Finland

“…In some cases, seismic reflection has been able to directly target the ore-body (Milkereit et al, 1996, Salisbury et al, 2003, Malehmir and Bellefleur, 2009). …”

3D reflection seismic imaging for open-pit mine planning and deep exploration in the Kevitsa Ni-Cu-PGE deposit, northern Finland

“…To our knowledge, there is no 3D reflection seismic survey conducted for deep open-pit mine planning. Three-and twodimensional reflection seismic surveys have, however, been used for the exploration of deep-seated mineral deposits with several examples from Canada, South Africa, Europe, and Australia (e.g., Milkereit et al, 1996Milkereit et al, , 2000Salisbury et al, 2000;Adam et al, 2003;Pretorius et al, 2003;Malehmir et al, 2007Malehmir et al, , 2009aMalehmir et al, , 2009bMalehmir et al, , 2011Harrison and Urosevic, 2009;Bellefleur, 2009, 2010;Dehghannejad et al, 2010Dehghannejad et al, , 2012Cheraghi et al, 2011;Juhojuntti et al, 2012). Kevitsa, our study area, is a large nickel/copper deposit hosted by a massive ultramafic intrusion in northern Finland (Figure 1) with measured and indicated resources of 240 million tons (using a nickel cutoff grade of 0.1%) grading 0.30% nickel and 0.41% copper.…”