Intracratonic basins and ore deposits

CIM Bulletin, Vol. 72, No. 812, 1979
C.J. SULLIVAN, C. John Sullivan Limited, Toronto, Ontario
Abstract Is there a relationship among the Sudbury nickel ores, the Cobalt deposits, and the Huronian, Athabascan and North Australian uranium provinces?All are within intracratonic basins, with ore near basal unconformities. There are similarities in the geochemical "fingerprints" pointing to basic igneous rock affiliations. Some show a time relationship to basic igneous activity and to great rift systems. Many basic dykes show radioactivity at their edges. A spatial relationship between the uranium-cobalt-nickel ore at Midwest Lake, Athabasca, and basic igneous rock is reported.These remarks are not meant to imply, necessarily, a direct genetic connection between the basic dykes, etc., and the ore. In some cases, the relationship may be similar to that noted between basic and ultrabasic intrusives and volcanic massive sulphide ore deposits. Crustal thinning in these areas, associated with graben, appears to have favoured volcanic activity, as well as basic intrusives.Probably, the potential of the Huronian should be rethought. Athabascan-type ore may be present. New data on mineralization in Turner Township, Ontario, suggest this. The mineral possibilities of other basins should be reconsidered. It is to be remembered that the Athabascan and Kombolgie basins were neglected for many years.Intracratonic sedimentary-igneous basins contain many of the greatest mineral fields of the world.
Keywords: Geology, Mining history, Intracratonic basins, Ore deposits, Uranium deposits, Athabasca Basin, Alligator River deposits, Sudbury Basin, Cobalt, Blind River, Exploration, Kom-bolgie Basin, Huronian Basin, Aggressive deposit, Jabiluka deposit.
Full Access to Technical Paper
PDF version for $20.00
Other papers in CIM Bulletin, Vol. 72, No. 812, 1979