The Hydrothermal Environment: L. Huston
The Hydrothermal Environment: L. Huston
The Hydrothermal Environment: L. Huston
IS -3~
Introduction
Until thirty years ago, economic geology was essentially an
empirical science. Models of hydrothermal ore deposits, which
centred largely on empirical associations between ore deposits
and intrusions, were based on the idea that temperature increases
with pressure in the crust. Hence, ore deposits were classified
into groups directly related to the crustal level of ore deposition.
Many terms from this classification, such as 'epithermal ' ,
'mesothermal' and 'hypothermal', persist to this day.
Three decades ago, economic geology became a more genetic
and predictive science. The shift in emphasis came about for
several reasons, the most important of which was the accumu
lation of a sufficiently large descriptive database to allow the
development of ' genetic models'. The development ofanalytical
techniques (e.g. fluid inclusion and stable isotope analysis)
allowed, for the first time, insight into the conditions of metal
transport and ore deposition. The acquisition of high quality
thermodynamic data at hydrothermal temperatures allowed
quantitative modelling of depositional processes (e.g. Reed 1982).
These three factors and the study of active hydrothermal systems
resulted in great advances in understanding the many processes
involved in ore genesis.
Hydrothermal mineral deposits are ultimately the result of
chemical reactions, even though they are localised by zones of
higher penneability such as faults and aquifers. The purpose of
this paper is to present and discuss chemical processes required
for the formation of hydrothermal mineral deposits, both in the
source regime and at the depositional site.
16
D.L. HUSTON
Sources(s) of
fluid, chloride,
sulphur and
metals
~
Magmati~ fluid ev~ution
Energy
source
Migration
pathway
Trap
5-500 km
i
Outflow
zone
<2 km
-I
Fhlirt mixinn
Burial,
regional
1
metamorphism
joints
and
and
magmatic
aquifers
..
Phase separation
.-
intrusion
1W-!:1
- -- -
_Ieachina
- -
"
"I
I
NO
deposition
Figure 1. The components of a mineral system (modified from Knox-Robinson & Wyborn 1997).
17
ex:>
Temperature (OC)
100
20
150
200
250
300
350
Temperature (OC)
100
20
150
200
250
300
350
Temperature (0C)
150
00
200
250
CI
300
350
a
en
10
10
-i
~
o.
\\
.;
()
as
Z1
-i
~
o.
-i
~
o.
()
()
as
as
Z1
0.5
;...
o~
0.2
Zn (ppm)
pH 3.5
log I.S = -2.5
log (I.SO,vI.H 2 S) = -2.0
0.1'
0.0025 )
0.2
Zn (ppm)
0:0020
1fT (K-1)
0.1
pH = 4.5
log I.S = -2.5
log (I.SO,vI.H 2 S) = -2.0
,
0.0025
Zn (ppm)
pH 5.5
log I.S = -2.0
log (I.SO,vI.H 2S) = -2.0
0.1'
0:0025
0.Ob20
1fT (K-1)
Figure 2 (includes figure on facing page). The solubility of Zn in hydrothermal fluids as a function of temperature and salinity. Ore fluid compositional fields are taken from Table 1. Thermodynamic data
are from Johnson et at. (1992) and Ruaya & Seward (1986).
100
20
Temperature (OC)
150
250
pH 3.5
log IS -2.5
log (ISO,vIH 2 S)
0~
3:
350
100
20
=hm-py
10
-a!b
-..
300
Zn (ppm)
10
200
200
~IJ+
IIII
250
-..
0~
3:
U
CO
Z
CO
300
150
Cu-Au-Bi
10
Olympic Dam
pH 5.5
log IS -2.0
log (ISO,vIH 2 S)
-a~
0.5
"at:>o
....
g
-..
0~
U
CO
Z
0.5
0.5
....
100
0.0020
(K-1)
0.1
0.2
Zn (ppm)
1fT
=hm-py
pH 4.5
log IS -2.5
log (ISO,vIH 2S)
0.0025
- 0.01
=hm-py
1fT
0.0020
(K-1)
0.1
0.0025
300
3:
0.2
0.0025
"00
0.2
0.1
250
'0
....0
I
200
Zn (ppm)
Fe-oxide-hosted~
Temperature ( 0C)
100
20
350
"at:>a
....
Temperature ( 0C)
150
0.0020
1fT (K-1)
'--
350
Temperature (DC)
100
20
150
200
250
300
350
100
Temperature (DC)
150
200
250
300
350
Temperature eC)
100
150
200
250
I:j
300
350
20ir---------r-------r---~~--_,_r_,
t-'
e
en
o.
10
10
10
.~
cu
Z1
0.5
0.2
0.1 1
1\
....
o.
-~
o.
==
cu
cu
Z1
0.5
0.2
Cu (ppm)
pH = 3.5
log ~s = -2.5
log (~SO.vIH2S) = -2.0
0.0025
1rr (K-1)
0.5
Cu (ppm)
pH = 4.5
log ~s = -2.5
log (~SO.vIH2S) = -2.0
0.1'
__ ~
Cu (ppm)
pH = 5.5
~
log ~s = -2.0
q,.
log (~SO.vIH2S) = -2.0
0.1'
0.0025
\ 0.0020
1rr (K-1)
Figure 3 (includes figure on facing page). The solubility of Cu in hydrothermal fluids as a function of temperature and salinity. Ore fluid compositional fields are taken from Table 1. Thermodynamic data
are from Johnson et al. (1992) and Walshe & Solomon (1981).
100
Temperature (0C)
150
200
250
300
100
20
350
2o.--------.-------.-----.----.--.0
L
'\
10
10
~
o
2
0~
..:;
3:
ca
111l!
250
300
350
100
20
ca
Temperature caC)
150
200
250
300
350
Fe-oXide-hosted~
Cu-Au-Bi
10
Olympic Dam
...
'0...
0~
..:;
3:
uca
{3
Z
~t~
200
Temperature (0C)
150
0",
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.2
0.2
0.2
Cu (ppm)
pH =3.5
log IS =-2.5
log (ISO<tfLH 2 S) = hm-py
<?o"
0.1 '-----;;0:-::.0~0~25::-------------;;0:-::.0~0~20::------------'
11T (K-1)
Cu (ppm)
pH =4.5
log IS =-2.5
log (ISO<tfLH 2 S) =hm-py
0.1 '-----=0--=
.0,..,.07:
25=-------------=0-::.0,..,.0-=-20=------------'
11T (K-1)
Cu (ppm)
pH =5.5
log IS = -2.0
log (ISO<tfLH 2S)
=hm-py
0.1 '-----;;0:-::.0~0~25::-------------;;0:-::.0~0~20::--'-------'----'
11T (K-1)
tv
tv
Temperature (0C)
100
150
200
250
Temperature (OC)
350
300
150
200
250
300
Temperature eC)
100
20
350
~"'1
150
200
250
o
r-300
350
10
-'"
51-
-'#.
AuHS o
(3
CIS
0~
(0)
=3.5
log IS =-2.5
0.1
0.0025
CIS
0.5
0.2
Au (ppb)
=4.5
log IS =-2.5
pH
=-2.0
0.0020
1fT (K-1)
0.1
Au(HS)i
(3
pH
0.2
5.
0.5
Au (ppb)
i===<~ :5=:t
0~
CIS
0.5
0.21-
Au(HS)i
Z1
I ~\
...
Z1
I I
51-
\ \ ~::l
0.0025
Au (ppb)
pH
=-2.0
0.1
=5.5
=
log IS -2.0
log (ISO.vIH 2S)
0.0025
=-2.0
0.0020
1fT (K-1)
Figure 4 (includes figure on facing page). The solubility of Au in hydrothermal fluids as a function of temperature and salinity. Ore fluid compositional fields are taken from Table 1. Thermodynamic data
are from Benning & Seward (1996), Gammons & Williams-Jones (1995), Johnson et al. (1992), and Shenberger & Barnes (1989).
~
~
Temperature (0C)
100
20
150
200
-0;!?.
...:
3:
Temperature (0C)
150
100
20
'I"
-#-
0
0
'"
AuHS o
Olympic Dam
'"
~
oI
Z
300
350
'"
150
10
AuCI;
\I
'"
0
2
0
0
'"
og
0.5
'"
oo
0.2
Au (ppb)
pH =3.5
log I S =-2.5
log (I SO.vIH2 S) =hm-py
I --=-0.- =-00=-=2:":"5------=-0.- =-00=-=2"""0-----'
0.1 L..J....
11T (K-1)
>-<
tJ
oo
0.2
Au (ppb)
pH =4.5
log I S = -2.5
log (ISO.vIH2 S) = hm-py
0.1 '----=-0-=.0-!:-:02=-=5------=-0.-=00-!:-:2:":"0------'
11T (K-1)
>-1
S
::r:
oo
0.2
AuHS o
0
0
'"
0.5
350
I _
AuCI 2
'"
300
...:
3:
'"
0
0.5
250
"''''==
200
20r----~--~r-~~-~~~
~
0
Temperature (OC)
100
Fe-oxide-hosted~:O
Cu-Au-Bi
'"
0
250
200
~W
IIIII
10
350
II I
300
10
250
'"
:;:0
>-1
::r:
trI
Au (ppb)
pH =5.5
log I S =-2.0
log (I SO.vIH 2S) =hm-py
0.1 '----=-0-=.0-!:-:02=-=5----.l....-70.700-!:-:2=0------I
11T (K-1)
trI
<:
.....
:;:0
trI
>-1
tv
Lithological association
Structural association
Jgneous association
References
t;I
::r:
c:::
Vl
Zn- Pb- Ag
Shelf carbonate .
None
Sediment-hosted
massive sulphide
(Selwyn type)
Zn- Pb- Ag
None
Sediment-hosted
massive sulphide
(M t Isa type)
Zn- Pb- Ag
Not established,
but oxidised
None
Stratabound in high-grade
metamorphic terranes that
are interpreted as rifts
Amphibolites and
possible felsic
volcanic rocks
Walters (1998)
Zn-rich skarn
and manto deposits
Zn- Pb-AgCu
Carbonate
Zn- Pb-AgAu
Stratigraphic breaks in
submarine volcanosedimentary sequences
Volcanic,
volcaniclastic
Pisutha-Arnond &
Ohmoto (1983) ;
Franklin et al. (1981)
Acid-sulphate
epithermal Au
AUCu
Spatially associated
with shallow intrusions
and hosted by coeval
volcanic rocks
Porphyry Cu
CUMoAu
Epigenetic; controlled
regionally by basement
faulting and pre-existing
structural fabrics
Roedder (1984);
Titley (199S)
Skarn CuAu
CuAu
Epigenetic
Einaudi (1982)
Fe-oxide hosted
Cu-Au
Cu- Au Bi
Epigenetic, massive
ironstone bodies
Late- to post-kinematic
No direct association,
but an inferred
association
CuAu
d
Z
Metal assemblage
Lithological association
StrllclUral association
Igneous association
References
Olympic Dam-type
Cu-U-Au
Cu-U-Au-Ag
Syenogranite
Epigenetic in breccias
Deposit has
indistinguishable age
to the host granite
Mt Isa-type Cu
Cu
None
CUAu
Stratigraphic breaks in
submarine volcano
sedimentary sequences
Volcanic,
volcaniclastic rocks ,
and subvolcanic
intrusions
Pisutha-Arnond
& Ohmoto (1983);
Franklin et al. (198 I)
Sediment-hosted Cu
Cu-Ag-Co
Reduced sediment s
stratigraph ically
above red beds
Stratabound
None
Adularia-sericite
epithermal Au
Au- Ag
Mainl y subaerial,
massive volcanic rocks
Veins, commonly in
structures associated with
calderas, doming or folding
Carlin-type Au
Au
No direct association
Shear-hosted Au
Au
No direct association
Hypothermal Au
Au
Carbonaceous sedimentary
rocks ,banded iron formation,
and calcareous metasedi
mentary rocks
Commonly closely
associated with
granitoids
AuAg
26
D.L. HUSTON
Source
Processes in the
Ore fluids I Depositional
environment source environment
processes
First order
First order
Second order
Second orden
Deposit types
Deposit A
Deposit B
Active meta
morphic regime
Devolatilisation
Deposit C
hase
separation
Deposit D
Deposit E
Deposit F
Deposit G
Deposit H
Magmatic
provinces
Deposit I
Deposit J
Deposit K
Surficial water
circulation
Deposit L
Deposit M
Deposit N
Amagmatic,
tectonically
active basins
Deposit 0
Deposit P
Conna!e brine
expulsion
..
Fluid I
Deposit Q
Deposit R
Deposit S
Figure 5. Generalised diagram showing the interplay between source processes, depositional processes and the formation of mineral
deposits.
(1).
27
(2).
12Fe 20 3 + H 2S
(5).
i + 2H2 (g)
(6).
28
D.L. HUSTON
Conclusions
Over the last three decades, rapid improvements in technology
and geochemical knowledge have significantly improved our
understanding ofthe ore-forming environment, which has resulted
in better genetic and empirical models of ore formation to guide
mineral exploration. As processes leading to mineral deposition
are well documented in many classes of mineral deposits,
emphasis is shifting to other parts of the hydrothermal environ
ment in order to understand 'mineral systems' as a whole.
As discussed above, chemical processes govern whether a
particular hydrothermal fluid will form a mineral deposit.
Processes within the source environment determine if the fluid
can transport enough metal, and processes in the depositional
environment determine ifthe fluid can deposit metals. The large
range of processes in both the source and depositional environ
ments produces the great diversity of mineral deposits observed
in the Earth's crust. More importantly, the interplay of these
processes may produce a greater diversity of mineral deposits
than that known regionally or globally.
Acknowledgments
This contribution is the result of discussion with colleagues at
the University of Tasmania, the Geological Survey of Canada
and the Australian Geological Survey Organisation, including,
most recently, Kevin Cassidy, Dick Henley, Ken Lawrie, Terry
Mernagh, Roger Skirrow, and Lesley Wyborn. Early drafts were
reviewed by David Cooke, Greg Ewers, Terry Mernagh (twice)
and Doone Wyborn. However, the interpretations (and misin
terpretations) ultimately are the responsibility of the author.
References
Anderson, G.M. & Macqueen, R.W, 1982. Ore deposit models6. Mississippi Valley-type lead-zinc deposits. Geoscience
Canada, 9, 108-117.
Arribas, A.Jr., 1995. Characteristics ofhigh-sulfidation epithermal
deposits, and their relation to magmatic fluid. In: Thompson,
IF.H. (editor), Magmas, fluids and ore deposits. Minera
logical Association of Canada Short Course Series, 23, 419454.
Bagby, WC. & Berger, B.R., 1985. Geological characteristics of
sediment-hosted, disseminated precious-metal deposits in
the western United States. Reviews in Economic Geology,
2, 169-202.
Beaty, D.W, Taylor, H.P.Jr. & Coad, P.R., 1988. An oxygen
isotope study of the Kidd Creek, Ontario, volcanogenic
massive sulfide deposit: evidence for a high 180 ore fluid.
Economic Geology, 83,1-17.
Beaty, D.W, Landis, G.P. & Thompson, T.B., 1990. Carbonate
hosted sulfide deposits ofthe central Colorado Mineral Belt:
introduction, general discussion, and summary. Economic
29
30
D.L. HUSTON