Search Documents

Editor?s note: Each year, Mining Engineering features an industrial minerals review. Several people put in a fair amount of time in developing the material for this issue, all the while doing their own jobs. Thank you to the industrial minerals annual review editor, to the Industrial Minerals and Aggregates Division technical committee chair and vice-chairs, and to the authors of the individual commodity profiles. Jim Norman, member SME, of Tetra Tech, is the industrial minerals annual review editor. Rajesh Raitani, member SME, of Cytec Industries Inc., is chair of the Industrial Minerals and Aggregates Division?s Technical Committee. The technical Committee vice chairs include: ? Vishal Gupta, member SME, of FlSmidth, Agricultural Materials. ? Candace Trimble, member SME, of Oil- Dri Corporation of America, and Bradley Van Gosen, of the U.S. Geological Survey, ceramics and refractory materials. ? Stanley Krukowski, member SME, of the Oklahoma Geological Survey, chemical raw materials. ? Russell Winn, member SME, of R.E. James Gravel Co., chemical raw materials. ? Justin Zdunczyk, member SME, of Plum Creek, construction materials. ? Jerry Gauntt, member SME, of Golder Associates, fillers and pigments. ? Michael Cheshire, member SME, of Los Alamos National Laboratory, sorbents, filters and process aids. ? Rajesh Raitani, member SME, of Cytec, Industries Inc., specialty minerals. Their help makes possible this June industrial minerals issue. On behalf of ME readers, the editors thank them.

Jul 1, 2013

By R. L. Virta

Four companies ? H.C. Spinks Clay Co., Inc., Imerys, Old Hickory Clay Co., and Unimin Corp. ? mined ball clay in four states in 2013. On the basis of preliminary data, production was 1 Mt (1.1 million st) with an estimated value of $47 million. Production increased by 3 percent in tonnage from 973 kt (1.1 million st) with a value of $45.1 million in 2012. Tennessee was the leading producer accounting for 64 percent of domestic production, followed by Texas, Mississippi and Kentucky. About 67 percent of total ball clay production was airfloat, 22 percent was crude or shredded and 11 percent was water-slurried.

"Editor’s note: Each year, Mining Engineering features an industrial minerals review. Several people put in a fair amount of time in developing the material for this issue, all the while doing their own jobs. Thank you to the industrial minerals annual review editor, to the Industrial Minerals and Aggregates Division technical committee chair and vice chairs, and to the authors of the individual commodity profiles.Jim Norman, member SME, of Tetra Tech, is the industrial minerals annual review editor.Vishal Gupta, member SME, of EP Minerals LLC, is chair of the Industrial Minerals &Aggregates Division’s Technical Committee.The technical committee vice chairs include:• Vishal Gupta, member SME, of EP Minerals LLC, Agricultural Materials.• Joe Garska, member SME, of Imerys, ceramics and refractory materials.• Stanley Krukowski, member SME, of the Oklahoma Geological Survey, chemical raw materials.• Russell Winn, member SME, of R.E. Janes Gravel Co., chemical raw materials.• Justin Zdunczyk, member SME, of Pike Industries, construction aggregates.• Jerry Gauntt, member SME, of Golder Associates, fillers and pigments.• Ebrhaim K. Tarshizi, member SME, of the Michigan Tech, sorbents, filters and process aids.• Daniel T. Eyde, member SME, of St. Cloud Mining, specialty minerals.Their help makes possible this July industrial minerals issue. On behalf of ME readers, the editors thank them.Virta, R.L. U.S. Geological Survey, National Minerals Information CenterFour companies - H.C. Spinks Clay Co., Inc., Imerys, Old Hickory Clay Co., and Unimin Corp. - mined ball clay in four states in 2013. On the basis of preliminary data, production was 1 Mt (1.1 million st) with an estimated value of $47 million. Production increased by 3 percent in tonnage from 973 kt (1.1 million st) with a value of $45.1 million in 2012. Tennessee was the leading producer state accounting for 64 percent of domestic production, followed by Texas, Mississippi and Kentucky. About 67 percent of total ball clay production was airfloat, 22 percent was crude or shredded and 11 percent was water-slurried.ConsumptionIn 2013, domestic ball clay producers sold clays to the following markets: ceramic floor and wall tile (44 percent); exports (21 percent); sanitaryware (18 percent); miscellaneous ceramics (9 percent); fillers, extenders, and binders, and unspecified uses (4 percent each), based on 2012 end use patterns and current markets. Other markets accounted for less than 1 percent of the remaining ball clay sales or use. Sales reported for the manufacture of fiberglass or most filler, extender, and binder applications were likely to have been mainly kaolin mined or purchased by the ball clay producers.PricesThe average value of domestically produced ball clay was approximately $47/t ($43/st) in 2013 compared with $46/t ($42/st) in 2012, on the basis of a preliminary survey of domestic ball clay producers. The unit values of exported and imported ball clay were $126/t ($114/ st) and $373/t ($338/st), respectively, in 2013, compared with $62/t ($56/st) and $314/t ($285/st), respectively, in 2012. Unit values for most large export shipments increased in 2013, and a larger number of low-tonnage, high-value export shipments were shipped in 2013 than in 2012, resulting in a doubling of the average export value. Two low-tonnage, high-value shipments in 2013 accounted for the increased value of imports."

Jan 1, 2014

By Daniel M. Flanagan

"Editor’s note: Each year, Mining Engineering features an industrial minerals review. Several people put in a fair amount of time in developing the material for this issue, all the while doing their own jobs. Thank you to the industrial minerals annual review editor, to the Industrial Minerals & Aggregates Division technical committee chair and vice chairs, and to the authors of the individual commodity profiles. Jim Norman, member SME, of Tetra Tech, is the industrial minerals annual review editor.Joe Garska, member SME, of Imerys, is chair of the Industrial Minerals &Aggregates Division’s Technical Committee.The technical committee vice chairs include:• Hyunjung Kim, member SME, of Chonbuk National University, agricultural materials.• Xihui Lin, member SME, of Kemira, ceramics and refractory materials.• Nikhil Gupta, member SME, of Virginia Tech, chemical raw materials.• Adam Rodriquez, member SME, of Penn State, construction aggregates.• LeDeana Roberts, member SME, of Imerys, fillers and pigments.• Harsha Kolla, member SME, of ChemEOR, sorbents, filters and process aids.• Edgar Blanco, member SME, of FLSmidth, specialty minerals.Their help makes possible this July industrial minerals issue. On behalf of ME readers, the editors thank them.During the past 25 years, U.S. ball clay production (the quantity sold or used by domestic producers) increased from 788 kt (869,000 st) in 1990 to an alltime high of 1.31 Mt (1.44 million st) in 2003 (Fig. 1). Housing construction within the United States, a leading market for ball clay-based ceramics and sanitaryware, began to decline in 2005, which resulted in a considerable decrease in sales of ball clay that continued through the 2008-2009 economic recession. After bottoming out at 831 kt (916,000 st) in 2009, ball clay production steadily increased through 2015 (Fig. 1). Estimated sales in 2015 were 36 percent higher than those in 1990 and 18 percent lower than those in 2003.Four companies (H.C. Spinks Clay Co., Imerys S.A., Old Hickory Clay Co., and Unimin Corp.), mined ball clay in five states during 2015. An estimated 1.7 Mt (1.18 million st) of ball clay valued at an estimated $47.5 million was sold or used by U.S. producers, a 4-percent increase from 1.03 Mt (1.14 million st) valued at $45.2 million in 2014. Approximately 65 percent of total ball clay production was air-float, 25 percent was crude or shredded and 10 percent was water-slurried"

Jul 1, 2016

By Jack Bedder

"Editor’s note: We would like to thank those who make this annual issue possible. A special thank you goes out to the industrial minerals annual review editor, to the Industrial Minerals & Aggregates Division Technical Committee chair and vice chairs, and to the authors of the individual commodity profiles.Jim Norman, member SME, of Tetra Tech, is the industrial minerals annual review editor.Ebrahim K. Tarshizi, member SME, of Michigan Tech, is chair of the Industrial Minerals &Aggregates Division’s Technical Committee.The technical committee vice chairs include: • Hyunjung Kim, member SME, of Chonbuk National University, agricultural materials.• Xihui Yin, member SME, of Kemira, ceramics and refractory materials.• Nikhil Gupta, member SME, of Virginia Tech, chemical raw materials.• Jasson Giddens and Swadhin Saurabh, members SME, of Oil Dri Corp of America and Mill Creek Engineering, respectively, chemical raw materials.• Snehamoy Chatterjee, member SME, of the Michigan Tech.• LeDeana Roberts and Shubham Verma, members SME, of Imerys and U.S. Oil Sands, respectively, fillers and pigments.• Thomas Hilderbrand and Kaiwu Huang, members SME, of Thiele Kaolin Co. and Virginia Tech, respectively, sorbents, filters and process aids.• Rhaghav Dubey and Edgar Blanco, members SME, of Outotec and FL Smidth, respectively, specialty mineralsAntimony generally occurs along with gold, lead, copper and silver. There are more than 100 antimony minerals, although the sulfide mineral stibnite is the main one.Antimony enters the supply chain either as a result of mining (primary production) or recycling (secondary production). China has by far the largest antimony resources and is, as a result, the world’s center for antimony mine production. In 2016, it accounted for more than three quarters of the global mine supply out of a world production figure of 130 kt (143,000 st), according to the U.S. Geological Survey. The biggest, and most high-grade deposits are found in southern China, with the largest mines located in Hunan, Guangxi and Yunnan provinces. Tajikistan, Russia, Australia and Bolivia are the largest mine producers outside China. A new antimony project in Oman made progress in 2016, producing first metal in April 2016 in test facilities, and then ordered three furnaces for a 26 kt/a (28,600 stpy) antimony metal and oxide smelter that is due on stream in late 2017.Antimony ingot production is not as widespread as is antimony mine production, owing to the high levels of pollution that are associated with antimony smelting. It is for this reason that smelting has been largely confined to China and other Asian countries, where environmental legislation is less stringent.Antimony oxide production is undertaken on four continents with China being the biggest producer. There is also a considerable amount of oxide production in Europe — which relies on imported feedstock, mostly from China. Antimony also enters the supply chain through recycling. Lead containing antimony is produced in a number of countries, mainly in secondary lead smelters. Typically, a blast furnace charge containing used or discarded battery plates, type metal or bearing metal is reduced to lead bullion, which is refined in reverberatory furnaces and melting pots. In the main, the antimony recovered is consumed in metallurgical applications. China was the biggest secondary antimony producer in 2016, and accounted for 25 retardants and lead-acid batteries. Flame retardants accounted for roughly 50 percent of consumption in 2016 with batteries representing about 25 percent. Other end uses include plastics and heat stabilizers, ceramics and glass and a variety of metallurgical applications. Demand has been sluggish since the global financial crisis, mostly because key markets failed to recover strongly from the downturn, particularly in Europe."

Jan 7, 2017

By Jack Bedder, Nils Backeberg

"Native antimony metal is rare and antimony generally occurs together with gold, lead, copper and silver. There are more than 100 antimony minerals, although the sulfide mineral stibnite is the main economic mineral.Antimony enters the supply chain either as a result of mining (primary production) or recycling (secondary production). China has by far the largest antimony resources and is, as a result, the world’s center for antimony mine production. While China remains the leading primary producer, accounting for 69 percent (80.5 kt or 88,700 st) of the global 117.5 kt (129,000 st) in 2017, market consolidation and regulatory inspections across China leading to closures of facilities have caused a significant decrease in Chinese output from 115.8 kt (127,600 st) in 2015 (81 percent of global production).Tajikistan and Russia are the next largest producers of antimony after China, both ramping up production in recent years. Russia could significantly increase its supply of antimony if Polyus moves ahead with supplying 10-12 kt/a (11,000–13,200 stpy) of contained antimony from gold tailings. Australia and Bolivia are also significant mine producers outside China. The value of the different ores varies based on the metal content of the concentrates, with the most valuable gold-bearing ores sourced from Australia’s Costerfield Mine and the least valuable mercury-bearing ores sourced from the Anzob Mine in Tajikistan. On average, Bolivian and Russian ores trade at an intermediate value between those from Costerfield and Anzob. Nearly all of the rest-of-world production is exported to China, where the ores and concentrates are processed into antimony ingots and oxides.Antimony ingot production is not as widespread as is the case with antimony mine production, owing to the high levels of pollution that are associated with antimony smelting. It is for this reason that smelting has been largely confined to China and other Asian countries ,such as Vietnam and Myanmar, where environmental legislation has historically been less stringent. Tajikistan has become a growing producer of antimony ingot since 2014, coming from the commissioned metallurgical plant at the Anzob Mine.Antimony oxide production is undertaken on four continents with China being the biggest producer. There is also a considerable amount of oxide production in Europe (mainly Belgium and France), which relies on imported antimony metal feedstock, mostly from China.A new antimony project under construction by Strategic and Precious Metals Processing (SPMP) in Oman made progress in 2016 and 2017, and after producing first metal in April 2016 in test facilities, was set to be commissioned in the first quarter of 2018. Commissioning had been moved back to June 2018, with a potential ramp-up to 2-3 kt/a (2,200 to 3,300 stpy) of antimony metal by the end of 2018. SPMP is also reviewing producing antimony oxide as part of its flow sheet."

Jan 7, 2018

By E. Lee Bray

"Editor’s note: The editors thank those who make this annual issue possible. A special thank you goes out to the Industrial Minerals Annual Review editor, to the Industrial Minerals & Aggregates Division Technical Committee chair and vice chairs, and to the authors of the individual commodity profiles.Jim Norman, member SME, of Tetra Tech Geo, is the industrial minerals annual review editor. Edgar Blanco, member SME, of Freeport- McMoRan, is chair of the Industrial Minerals &Aggregates Division’s Technical Committee.The technical committee vice chairs include:• NickTushar Gupta and Sallie Gaillard, of the USGS, members SME, agricultural materials.• Abhishek Choudhuryand Xihui Yin, members SME, of Montana Tech and Kemira, repectively, ceramic and refractory materials.• Bobbi Strange and Riddhika Jain, members SME, of Outotec, Martin Marietta and Outotec, respectively, chemical raw materials.• Snehamoy Chatterjee, Alyssa Kendir and Alind Chandra, members SME, of BMT, Universityof Kentucky and Michigan Tech, respectively,construction aggregates.• Subham Verma, Gauran Soni and Freddy Sime, members SME, fillers and pigments.• Kaiwu Huang, Thomas Hilderbrand and Ricardo Santander members SME, of Virginia Tech, Thiele Kaolin and Carbo Ceramics, respectively, sorbents, filters and process aids.• Rhaghay Dubey and William Rapier, members SME, of Outotec and a consultant, respectively, specialty minerals.On behalf of ME readers, the editors thankTwo U.S. alumina refineries produced an estimated 1.5 Mt (1.65 million st) of alumina from imported bauxite in the United States in 2018. The 500-kt/a (550,000-stpy) refinery in Burnside, LA, owned by Almatis Inc. produced specialty alumina used in the abrasives, ceramics, chemical and refractory industries. The 1.2-Mt/a (1.32 million-stpy) refinery in Gramercy, LA, owned by Noranda Alumina LLC produced alumina mostly for use in aluminum smelters but also produced specialty alumina. An upgrade project at the Gramercy refinery to convert 200 kt/a (220,000 stpy) of capacity to produce more profitable specialty alumina was completed in the first half of 2018, and another project to increase capacity was started but a completion schedule was not available. The amount of new capacity was not disclosed, but it would be used to produce nonmetallurgical grade alumina. The 2.3-Mt/a (2.5 million-stpy) refinery in Point Comfort, TX, which was temporarily shut down in March 2016, remained closed throughout the year."

Jul 1, 2019

By Mike O'Drisooll

There is no doubt, if any existed, that the commercial minerals world has now moved into a new era of unprecedented challenges in the sourcing, mining, processing, trade and use of industrial minerals. Industrial (nonmetallic) minerals remain the often unsung workhorse of mineral commodities and specialist raw materials that frankly keep the world’s manufacturing industries ticking over, and everyday products we use in sound availability. They are also very much present among the so-called “critical minerals” necessary to advance cutting-edge developments in growing high-tech markets such as in energy transition: for example, lithium, rare earths, graphite and fluorspar. Indeed, in the United States during 2024, industrial minerals again accounted for the majority share of total sourcing, and, yes, geopolitics. The last few years have witnessed a series of geopolitical issues that have impacted and continue to impact international trade in industrial minerals. Above all, it has been the threat and implementation of recent trade tariffs between countries that have been most damaging in creating a potential trade war. mine production by value at $72.1 billion, or 54 percent, followed by metals, 25 percent, and coal, 21 percent, according to the latest data from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). But right now, “industry resilience” seems to be the rallying call, with industrial mineral producers and traders facing straitened times from market slowdowns; environmental regulations; decarbonization and other sustainability issues; pressure to diversify; and near-shore mineral sourcing, and, yes, geopolitics. The last few years have witnessed a series of geopolitical issues that have impacted and continue to impact international trade in industrial minerals. Above all, it has been the threat and implementation of recent trade tariffs between countries that have been most damaging in creating a potential trade war.

Jul 1, 2025

By J. F. Havard

The enterprises based upon the industrial minerals are diversified in geologic habit, mining systems, processing techniques and marketing methods. Nevertheless, in 1972 these enterprises faced many of the same frustrations and hopes and knotty problems and crucial decisions. Volume and profits were generally improved but were uneven in extent and effect. The U.S. cement industry, for example, was unable to meet demand in major markets. It was constricted by a frozen low-level price structure, faced expensive pollution control measures and watched heavy imports penetrating its markets from several European nations, Mexico and Canada.

Jan 1, 1973

By T. H. Eyde

Worldwide production of natural zeolites during 2001 was estimated to be about 3.5 Mt (3.85million st). Construction and agriculture continued to be the major consumers. Estimated production in North America during 2001, including the United States, Canada and Mexico, was about 40 kt (44,000 st). In the United States and Canada, the zeolitic tuffs are ground, extruded or modified for use as adsorbents, desiccants, ion-exchange media and carriers. In Mexico and the rest of the world, the zeolitic tuffs are cut into dimension stone that is used in construction. Zeolitic tuffs are usually composed of the minerals clinoptilolite, mordenite or both. They occur in a variety of colors and are easy to cut and shape. And they have low thermal conductivity. This construction application is classified with dimension stone rather than with chemical and agricultural uses.

Jan 1, 2002

Industrial minerals by definition are minerals used as part of an industrial process and usually are one of a number of components, eg finely ground Limestone is an extender in the manufacture of paint. They are normally non-metallic and non-fuel, but like all generalisations there are a number of exceptions. Take rutile û a source of titanium, a metal and also the raw material in the manufacture of titanium dioxide pigment. Industrial minerals under this general definition include construction and agricultural minerals. They are included in the same grouping, principally because their sources are similar and in many cases the raw material, example limestone, can be multi-functional. Calcium carbonate raw materials such as limestone, are used in a wide range of applications from industry as an inert filler, to agriculture as a 'lime' source and to construction and as an important component in the manufacture of cement. As far as this paper is concerned I will avoid discussing the agricultural or construction applications, including burnt lime production.

Jan 1, 1985

By Raymond Wilson

Grinding costs are an important item in cement manufacture, and the cost of power is one of the large items in grinding costs. Even where power is of secondary importance, cost items dependent on mill capacity are influenced by the efficiency with which the mill uses power. Tube mills typify the grinding mills most generally used in cement plants, though other types are in use. Tube mills have been widely criticized as being extremely inefficient, and this feeling regarding them has led to many attempts to design more efficient grinding equipment. Other types may be an improvement over tube mills, but the improvement has certainly not been revolutionatry, at least as applied to clinker grinding. The very fact that there is doubt regarding the relative efficacy of various types of mills is an indication that an adequate basis for an analysis of performance is lacking. The development of methods of analyzing mill performance has been hampered by the lack of a suitable method for measuring the work actually done in pulverizing. There has been no acceptable standard to which mill performance might be compared. As a consequence, it was not known whether the margin of possible improvement in pulverizing operations was large or small. Even direct comparison of different types of mills was seldom possible because most plants had only one type of mill for each type of service. Comparisons between plants were difficult because of differences in the grinding characteristics of various clinkers. Some recent developments complete a chain of circumstances that place the cement industry in a particularly fortunate position for the study of its clinker-pulverizing operations. Modern investigators of grinding phenomena have generally agreed that the best measure of mill performance is the production of new surface. For most materials this measure of performance is largely theoretical and has a rather remote connection with the practical aims of the grinding operation. In clinker grinding, on the other hand, surface area is intimately connected with the properties conferred on the cement by grinding. Morcover, the determination of surface area is rapidly coming into routine use as a tost

Jan 1, 1938

By Raymond Wilson

Grinding costs are an important item in cement manufacture, and the cost of power is one of the large items in grinding costs. Even where power is of secondary importance, cost items dependent on mill capacity are influenced by the efficiency with which the mill uses power. Tube mills typify the grinding mills most generally used in cement plants, though other types are in use. Tube mills have been widely criticized as being extremely inefficient, and this feeling regarding them has led to many attempts to design more efficient grinding equipment. Other types may be an improvement over tube mills, but the improvement has certainly not been revolutionatry, at least as applied to clinker grinding. The very fact that there is doubt regarding the relative efficacy of various types of mills is an indication that an adequate basis for an analysis of performance is lacking. The development of methods of analyzing mill performance has been hampered by the lack of a suitable method for measuring the work actually done in pulverizing. There has been no acceptable standard to which mill performance might be compared. As a consequence, it was not known whether the margin of possible improvement in pulverizing operations was large or small. Even direct comparison of different types of mills was seldom possible because most plants had only one type of mill for each type of service. Comparisons between plants were difficult because of differences in the grinding characteristics of various clinkers. Some recent developments complete a chain of circumstances that place the cement industry in a particularly fortunate position for the study of its clinker-pulverizing operations. Modern investigators of grinding phenomena have generally agreed that the best measure of mill performance is the production of new surface. For most materials this measure of performance is largely theoretical and has a rather remote connection with the practical aims of the grinding operation. In clinker grinding, on the other hand, surface area is intimately connected with the properties conferred on the cement by grinding. Morcover, the determination of surface area is rapidly coming into routine use as a tost

Jan 1, 1938

By Benjamin L. Miller, Charles H. Breerwood

From earliest recorded times, limestone has been employed in the industrial life of peoples of all sections of the world where it exists. It is widely distributed and therefore has been available in almost every country and has been employed for a variety of purposes. Its earliest use was for buildings, since it is more easily quarried and dressed than most other kinds of rocks and so could be utilized by early inhabitants, poorly equipped with tools. The next use was in the manufacture of lime, which was employed by the ancients in mortar. These two uses of limestone are still all important, but they have been overshadowed in scores of regions by literally hundreds of new applications for raw limestone or products made from it. Anyone familiar with modern manufacturing processes can quickly call to mind many industries in which limestones are essential, and new uses are continually coming to notice. Any enumeration would probably be incomplete and soon out of date. Origin of Limestone Disregarding details and unusual types concerning which often there is insufficient evidence and considerable difference of opinion, limestones have been formed by the precipitation of calcium carbonate from solution through the action of organisms, both plants and animals, or in a limited number of instances by chemical reactions without the intervention of living forms. Some of the organisms extracted the calcareous material in order to build up hard structures, either as bony skeletons or as coverings (clams, snails, etc.), whereas others in their life functions emitted substances that resulted in the precipitation of the soluble constituents outside the organisms themselves. In some instances the organisms utilized only calcium carbonate but in some cases other compounds as well were precipitated. Various materials have been found in the hard parts of animals, and for that reason it is almost impossible to find a pure natural limestone; that is, one composed entirely of CaCO3.

Jan 1, 1938

By Charles H. Breerwood, Benjamin L. Miller

From earliest recorded times, limestone has been employed in the industrial life of peoples of all sections of the world where it exists. It is widely distributed and therefore has been available in almost every country and has been employed for a variety of purposes. Its earliest use was for buildings, since it is more easily quarried and dressed than most other kinds of rocks and so could be utilized by early inhabitants, poorly equipped with tools. The next use was in the manufacture of lime, which was employed by the ancients in mortar. These two uses of limestone are still all important, but they have been overshadowed in scores of regions by literally hundreds of new applications for raw limestone or products made from it. Anyone familiar with modern manufacturing processes can quickly call to mind many industries in which limestones are essential, and new uses are continually coming to notice. Any enumeration would probably be incomplete and soon out of date. Origin of Limestone Disregarding details and unusual types concerning which often there is insufficient evidence and considerable difference of opinion, limestones have been formed by the precipitation of calcium carbonate from solution through the action of organisms, both plants and animals, or in a limited number of instances by chemical reactions without the intervention of living forms. Some of the organisms extracted the calcareous material in order to build up hard structures, either as bony skeletons or as coverings (clams, snails, etc.), whereas others in their life functions emitted substances that resulted in the precipitation of the soluble constituents outside the organisms themselves. In some instances the organisms utilized only calcium carbonate but in some cases other compounds as well were precipitated. Various materials have been found in the hard parts of animals, and for that reason it is almost impossible to find a pure natural limestone; that is, one composed entirely of CaCO3.

Jan 1, 1938

By Karl W. Mote

CALIFORNIA'S iron and steel industry had its beginning in San Francisco in 1849 when the first iron casting was poured at the old Union Iron Works. Soon after, in 1856 at Grass Valley, enough iron ore was smelted to supply pig iron for the castings of a quartz mill there. From 1880 to 1886, iron ore was produced from the Hotaling mine in Placer County and converted to pig iron in a local blast furnace using charcoal. From 1907 to 1914, the Noble Electric Steel Co. produced pig iron from iron ore mined at the Shasta Iron Co. mine, and followed this for three years in the production of ferro-alloys. Between 1917 and 1941, the State's industry in- creased its capacity for open hearth and electric furnace scrap treatment, but the real impetus was supplied by the need for more steel at the beginning of World War II. The result was the State's first integrated steel plant-the Kaiser Steel Corp. facilities at Fontana.

Jan 7, 1958

By W. J. Miles

Oil based drilling fluids utilize a number of industrial mineral products to accomplish oil and gas drilling in several environments where water based drilling fluids are less effective or inappropriate. These industrial minerals include: organically modified bentonite, organically modified lignite, barite, hematite, mica, calcium chloride and other salts. A variety of organic products are also utilized in oil based drilling fluid formulations. Oil based drilling fluids are preferred in several drilling situations because: they can be used to drill through water sensitive formations; they produce holes that are very close to the drill bit gauge; they exhibit high temperature stability; they are more environmentally acceptable; they minimize producing formation damage; they provide faster drilling rates when used with new polycrystalline diamond drill bits; they minimize pipe sticking and lost rig time.

Jan 1, 1986

By J. C. Bradbury

The year of the Centennial is upon us. Not only is AIME marking its 100th birthday, but the cement industry is also celebrating 100 years of activity (see article by Roy Grancher, page 48). Fort Dodge, Iowa, and gypsum also tried to get into the act but missed by one year. Frank Apple-yard's gypsum article (page 53) informs us that the Fort Dodge area has been producing gypsum continuously for 99 years. That would seem to make AIME and the industrial minerals doddering oldsters. Not so-our Institute shows more energy than ever, and the word for industrial minerals is growth. These are the mineral resources of the future, the raw materials for the abundant life to come

Jan 1, 1971

By James J. Fallon

The industrial minerals industry is defined loosely and a specific list is presented. Criteria by which to judge prospects and examples are provided. General trends of the industry are observed.

Jan 1, 1984

By Daniel Bloomfield

ONE of the major problems of management is how to restore in some measure the personal relation-ship between employer and employed which, in the days of small concerns, meant better morale among employees. The complexity of industry today, the heterogeneous mass. of workers employed, many .of them new to this country and to its institutions, the inability of those whose task it is to get out production to spend much time on the problems of labor-all these and many other factors serve to make of great impor-tance the question of how to establish more satisfactory mutual good will. While there is no such thing as a sure cure for labor troubles, in spite of the fact that charlatans have been selling alleged cures to guileless employers, study and experience have brought to light methods of approach to the problems confronting management in its relation to labor that are well worth consideration. Labor problems must be approached with common sense and an open mind. Facts must be the basis of action. So it is with the question of morale in industry. What makes or breaks morale? What are the forces behind the actions of men? What is there in one man that makes him act differently from another man under similar circumstances? How are men affected by the actions of others in their own group or by the actions of those under whose supervision they work? These are questions that must be carefully studied if we are, to get at the bottom of industrial unrest. It is an easy thing to say that good will can be created by "treating men right." That involves so many things and points of view that it will hardly serve as a full answer to our problem; but it is a good starting point if we mean by right treatment the payment of wages consistent with the well being of the worker and his family as members of the community, and if we also mean the provision of sanitary, wholesome working conditions and a working schedule that does not overtax the worker physically, and mutuality-a give and take relationship. With this as a basis we can go a step farther and see what else can be done to promote better relations between management and the workers.

Jan 9, 1922