TN295 
 
 Mk^k--: 
 
 m 
 
 :'fe 
 
 m.' 
 
 Ill 
 
 wm9' 
 
 
 ';i': '■ 
 
 ,'.>'<,■'''. 
 
 ■:''('':f|i 
 
 1; liV' ,. 
 
 F i:;!(!'v: iVl'i-l'Ki'i 
 
 
 
 |iii|v||;: 
 
 ■', ,■>■'-!;-■'■ ,, 
 
 ^^Hb'I i ''1)1, illitlf.^y'ii' 'ii''' 
 
 ;■;!,; ■;-V,::;-:i, '■■; 
 
 
 '■;■;';.'" ;i';'; 
 
 ^^^^^^^^wii'''tl}['^ '''''''' '' ' 
 
 V;irv' ' !■ 
 
 ^^^^^^^^^^H ' 1 1 H r'.' 1 ,' ' ' ' 
 
 tiiriv!--' •;,,:;; 
 
 ^gif,;!-'' 
 
 ■v^'- ■. ...'!:'■•" 
 
 
 ill 
 

 i> ^-c oV/MW* >V^ ■^^ .rails* a'? ^^ 
 
 
 
 
 -;S'^\./^^^^fe' "^ /V^"\ ^'^^^''\ /^^'^"\ ^ '^^-^ 
 
 <^' 
 
 
 < 
 
 '^^/^rrr-^- ^'?-' 
 
 
 
 
 '5> .o"-^ <{.. *° ^-^ .^'B^ -^^ 
 
 
 .-o, -^ V'^^.^J.:^-* /^Ci^ .0 .. 
 
 ^^•i^ 
 
 
 .<^^ cO""* ^ 
 
 
 
 
 ^°-^^^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 .^ 
 
 
 ,1^ » 
 
 
 
 *^ "*. 
 
 
 
 .A. 
 
 .-^^^ 
 
 0^^ \''f>.^'A^ V^^\0^ \-.^\'V %-*^:Tf^\G^' 
 
 
 '^'' 6 <"">* '*<>'. 
 
 <• 
 
 . N 
 
 ^^0^ 
 
 4 o^ 
 
 
 
 "^^ 
 
 
 V .^L'A^-^ c> 
 
 
 
 
 .\. rP*..- '^% -^o. 
 
 
 'bV" 
 
 
 ./X '^ 
 
 5.* 
 
 
 i-^^vt. « 
 
 V .^^\^;»^^% ./.v¥/;^%. .^^\^^^*^V .^^.^-^'-^^ 
 
 
 "vo^^^ 
 
 ^^-v. 
 
 ^\ 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 -^^^^^ 
 
 ^^^, 
 
 :* . '^'' ""^ . -.^^.^ ./ '^U. < 
 
 
 
 
 ^ *"^* .<i> 
 
 
 
 /.c:^% 
 
 <! 
 
 'bV" 
 
 >0 
 3^ 
 
 4 ex 5 
 
 
 \^ .^^--^^ V 
 
 ^^:^^-/ %^^^\^^' %'^^*/ \^?tf:.V %'^^%°'' \' 
 
 
 '^^''\ ^'' 
 
 
 / "^^^ %^^^\^.* , ^^ ^^ 
 
 
 
 ■'■°"° \ .'^--^^-^ /«-^i-\ .'°':^a.'> y«-^&'\ cov----*^ 
 
 
 > 
 
 *-,..* i^- \/ .•^', %,♦* .-m-v \/ ■ 
 
 <Pu *"^* <r 
 
 V^' 
 
 
 .C^ ^/^. o 
 
 A-*''^. 
 
 ■o- 
 
 4 o^ 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■^ # ^i? 
 
 
 / 
 
 
 o5°o 
 
 sO 
 
 .0 
 
 ^ov* :^ 
 
 
 o > 
 
 
 /J.* ** 
 
 •; .«"=- '.' 
 
 3>^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 "V A 
 
 ■" * O « O » IJ,^ "^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^j^. A 
 
Bureau of Mines Information Circular/1986 
 
 Availability of Elemental Sulfur 
 and Pyrite Concentrate— IVIarket 
 Economy Countries 
 
 A Minerals Availability Appraisal 
 
 By D. A. Buckingham 
 
 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 
 
Information Circular 9106 
 
 w 
 
 Availability of Elemental Sulfur 
 and Pyrite Concentrate— Market 
 
 Economy Countries 
 
 A Minerals Availability Appraisal 
 
 By D. A. Buckingham 
 
 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 
 Donald Paul Hodel, Secretary 
 
 BUREAU OF MINES 
 Robert 0. Norton, Director 
 
As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has 
 responsibihty for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This 
 includes fostering the wisest use of our land and water resources, protecting our fish and 
 wildlife, preserving the environment and cultural values of our national parks and 
 historical places, and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The 
 Department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to assure that their 
 development is in the best interests of all our people. The Department also has a major 
 responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in 
 island territories under U.S. administration. 
 
 
 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data 
 
 Buckingham, D. A. (David A.) 
 
 Availability of elemental sulfur and pyrite concentrate— market 
 economy countries. 
 
 (Information circular ; 9106) 
 
 Bibliography: p. 16 
 
 Supt. of Docs, no.: I 28.27:9106 
 
 1. Sulphur industry. 2. Sulphur mines and mining. 3. Pyrites. I. Title. II. Series: Infor- 
 mation circular (United States. Bureau of Mines) ; 9106. 
 
 TN295.U4 
 
 [HD9585.S82] 
 
 622 8(338.27668] 
 
 86-600186 
 
Ill 
 
 PREFACE 
 
 The Bureau of Mines is assessing the worldwide availability of selected minerals 
 of economic significance, most of which are also critical minerals. The Bureau iden- 
 tifies, collects, compiles, and evaluates information on producing, developing, and ex- 
 plored deposits, and on mineral processing plants worldwide. Objectives are to classify 
 both domestic and foreign resources, to identify by cost evaluation those demonstrated 
 resources that are reserves, and to prepare analyses of mineral availability. 
 
 This report is one of a continuing series of reports that analyze the availability of 
 minerals from domestic and foreign sources. Questions about, or comments on, these 
 reports should be addressed to Chief, Division of Minerals Availability, Bvu-eau of Mines, 
 2401 E St., NW., Washington, DC 20241. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 Page 
 
 Preface iii 
 
 Abstract 1 
 
 Introduction 2 
 
 Commodity overview 3 
 
 Production 4 
 
 Consumption 4 
 
 Commodity prices 4 
 
 Methodology 6 
 
 Cost estimation 7 
 
 Economic analysis 7 
 
 Availability curves 7 
 
 Geology 7 
 
 Native sulfur deposits 8 
 
 Pyrite deposits g 
 
 Sulfur resources 9 
 
 Extraction and processing technology 11 
 
 Capital and operating costs 11 
 
 Capital costs 12 
 
 Operating costs 12 
 
 Elemental sulfur 12 
 
 Pyrite concentrate 12 
 
 Elemental sulfur and pyrite concentrate 13 
 
 Elemental sulfur availability 13 
 
 Pyrite concentrate availability 14 
 
 Conclusion 16 
 
 References I6 
 
 ILLUSTRATIONS 
 
 TABLES 
 
 Page 
 
 1. Estimated distribution of world production of all forms of sulfur by source, 1984 4 
 
 2. Sulfur-H2S04 supply and end-use relationship 5 
 
 3. Minerals Availability program deposit evaluation procedure 6 
 
 4. Location of elemental sulfur and pyrite concentrate operations 8 
 
 5. Mineral resource classification categories 10 
 
 6. Comparison of world sulfur resource estimates 10 
 
 7. Section through a typical Frasch sulfur production well 11 
 
 8. Total availability of elemental sulfur 13 
 
 9. Total annual elemental sulfur availability from producing operations 14 
 
 10. Total annual elemental sulfur availability from temporarily closed operations 14 
 
 11. Total availability of pyrite concentrate 14 
 
 12. Annual availability of total primary and coproduct pyrite concentrate 15 
 
 Page 
 
 1. Evaluated properties, status, mining and beneficiation methods, and sulfur products recovered 3 
 
 2. Estimated 1984 world sulfur production in all forms, by country and source 4 
 
 3. Elemental sulfur market prices, f.o.b. mine or plant 6 
 
 4. Pyrite concentrate and commodity market prices 6 
 
 5. Estimated world sulfur resources, by deposit type 9 
 
 6. Estimated resources of elemental sulfur and pyrite concentrate 10 
 
 7. Estimated average capital cost investments for elemental sulfur and pyrite concentrate operations 12 
 
 8. Summary of estimated operating costs, elemental sulfur operations 12 
 
 9. Summary of estimated operating costs, pyrite concentrate operations 13 
 
 10. Estimated total elemental sulfur availability 13 
 
 11. Estimated total pyrite concentrate availability 14 
 
 12. Comparison of total potential pyrite concentrate availability, by country 15 
 
VI 
 
 
 UNIT OF MEASURE ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS REPORT 
 
 °c 
 
 degree Celsius 
 
 Mmt/yr 
 
 million metric tons per year 
 
 km 
 
 kilometer 
 
 pet 
 
 percent 
 
 lb 
 
 pound 
 
 tr oz 
 
 troy ounce 
 
 mt 
 
 metric ton 
 
 US$/mt 
 
 U.S. dollar per metric ton 
 
 Mmt 
 
 million metric tons 
 
 yr 
 
 year 
 
AVAILABILITY OF ELEMENTAL SULFUR AND PYRITE CONCENTRATE- 
 MARKET ECONOMY COUNTRIES 
 A Minerals Availability Appraisal 
 
 By D. A. Buckingham^ 
 
 ABSTRACT 
 
 Engineering and economic evaluations were performed by the Bureau of Mines on 14 
 Frasch sulfur, 1 native sulfur, and 21 metal sulfide operations in 11 market economy 
 countries. The evaluation included discounted-cash-flow rate-of-retum economic 
 analyses at 15 pet to determine the average total cost of production of these two com- 
 modities and the potential availability of elemental sulfur (S) and pyrite concentrate. 
 
 The Bureau evaluated the potential availability of elemental sulfur and pyrite con- 
 centrate. Approximately 279 million metric tons (Mmt) of pyrite concentrate at 46 pet S 
 is potentially recoverable from 422 Mmt of in situ metal sulfide ore. Nearly 89 pet of the 
 total pyrite concentrate is available at an average total cost of production below the 
 January 1984 pyrite concentrate market price ($43/mt). About 185 Mmt S is potentially 
 recoverable from 253 Mmt of in situ elemental sulfur. About 99 pet of this sulfur is 
 available at an average total cost of production below its January 1984 market price 
 ($131/mt). 
 
 'Geologist, Minerals Availability Field Office, Bureau of Mines, Denver, CO. 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 This Bureau of Mines report evaluates the availability of 
 elemental sulfur and pyrite concentrate from market 
 economy countries (MEC's). Some coproduct pyrite concen- 
 trate is evaluated here because it is recovered, for its sulfur 
 content, along with other metal concentrates. Secondary 
 sulfur, such as recovered elemental sulfur from the 
 desulfurization of sour natural gas, petroleum, and tar 
 sands, and byproduct sulfuric acid (H2SO4) from conversion 
 of roaster and smelter off gases, is not included. Byproduct 
 pyrite concentrates are not included since they are generally 
 considered waste and are not recovered for their sulfur con- 
 tent. Recovery of secondary sulfur sources is nondiscre- 
 tionary and cannot be adjusted to sulfur demand, since pro- 
 duction from secondary sources is based on market re- 
 quirements for low sulfur or sulfur-free products, or on 
 removal of sulfur and its compounds for environmental 
 reasons. 
 
 This report is part of a continuing series of reports in 
 which the availability of selected mineral resources from 
 domestic and foreign sources and factors affecting their 
 availability are analyzed. The purpose of the analysis is to 
 quantify engineering, economic, and resource parameters 
 that would affect this availability. 
 
 Table 1 lists the 21 pyrite concentrate properties and 15 
 elemental sulfur properties included in this analysis. Jacobs 
 Engineering Group, Inc., obtained information on 21 
 foreign properties under Bureau contract J0225020. 
 Domestic deposit information was provided by personnel at 
 the Bureau's Intermountain Field Operations Center, 
 Denver, CO. Elemental sulfur and pyrite resources located 
 
 in the Soviet Union, China, and other centrally planned 
 economy countries (CPEC's)^ were not analyzed in this 
 study. Production cost estimates could not be supported 
 because of the difficulty in collecting quantitative resource 
 information. 
 
 This study consoUdates past work and recent information 
 from nimierous sources as of January 1984. For each prop- 
 erty demonstrated resources and commodity grades were 
 defined, capital investments and operating costs for the ap- 
 propriate mining and beneficiation methods were 
 estimated, transportation costs to the nearest market were 
 assessed, and an economic evaluation was performed. The 
 analysis was performed in terms of January 1984 U.S. 
 dollars. Individual property evalutions were aggregated in- 
 to availability curves and tables to show potential elemental 
 sulfur and pyrite concentrate availabilities at various 
 average total costs of production. 
 
 Selection of properties is limited to known operations that 
 have significant demonstrated resources of native sulfur or 
 pyrite ore that can be mined using existing technology. The 
 objective was to analyze the availability of at least 85 pet of 
 known MEC resources from producing, past producing, 
 developing, and explored deposits. 
 
 ^ CPEC's: Centrally planned economy countries comprise the following: 
 Albania, Bulgaria, China, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, the German Democratic 
 Republic, Hungary, Kampuchea, the Republic of North Korea, Laos, 
 Mongolia, Poland, Romania, the U.S.S.R., and Vietnam. 
 
TABLE 1.— Evaluated properties, status, mining and benefication methods, and sulfur products recovered 
 
 Property 
 
 Production 
 status' 
 
 Mining 
 method 
 
 Beneficlation 
 method 
 
 Sulfur 
 product' 
 
 Map 
 reference' 
 
 Cyprus: 
 Kambia (Kampia) 
 
 Mathiatis 
 
 Sha (Shia) 
 
 Iraq: Mishraq 
 
 Italy: 
 
 Campiano 
 
 Fenice Capanne 
 Niccloleta 
 
 Japan: 
 
 Hanaoka 
 
 Kosaka 
 
 Shakanal 
 
 Toyoha 
 
 Yanahara 
 
 Mexico: 
 
 Coachapa 
 
 Jaltipan 
 
 Texistepec 
 
 Norway: 
 Grong Gruber . . . 
 Sulitjeima 
 
 Portugal: 
 
 Aljustrei 
 
 Lousai 
 
 Spain: 
 
 Herrerias 
 
 La Zarza-Calanas 
 Tharsis 
 
 Sweden: 
 
 Kristlneberg 
 
 Langsele-Udden 
 
 Turkey: 
 
 Asikoy' 
 
 Keciborlu 
 
 United States: 
 Louisiana: 
 Caillou Island* — 
 
 Caminada 
 
 Garden Island Bay 
 Grand Isle 
 
 Texas: 
 Boling Dome . . . . 
 Comanche Creek 
 
 Culberson 
 
 Fort Stockton' . . . 
 
 Long Point 
 
 Phillips Ranch . . . 
 
 P 
 
 NP 
 NP 
 P 
 
 P 
 
 NP 
 
 P 
 
 P 
 
 NP 
 
 NP 
 
 Open pit 
 ..do.... 
 ..do.... 
 
 Frasch . . 
 
 Room and pillar . 
 
 . . do 
 
 Sublevel stoping 
 
 Flotation 
 ..do.... 
 ..do.... 
 
 Filtration 
 
 Sizing . . 
 Flotation 
 Sizing . . 
 
 Horizontal cut and fill 
 
 ..do 
 
 ..do 
 
 ..do 
 
 Sublevel stoping 
 
 Flotation 
 ..do.... 
 ..do.... 
 ..do.... 
 Sizing . . 
 
 Frasch 
 ..do.. 
 ..do.. 
 
 None* . . 
 Filtration 
 . .do . . . . 
 
 Open stoping . . 
 Room and pillar 
 
 Flotation 
 ..do.... 
 
 Horizontal cut and fill 
 Opening stoping 
 
 Room and pillar 
 Fill stoping .... 
 Open pit 
 
 Sizing 
 . .do . . 
 
 ..do.. 
 Sizing 
 . .do . . 
 
 Horizontal cut and fill . 
 ..do 
 
 Open pit-underground . 
 Open pit-horizontal cut 
 and fill. 
 
 Frasch 
 ..do .. 
 ..do.. 
 ..do.. 
 
 Flotation 
 ..do.... 
 
 ..do 
 
 Flotation and 
 direct melting. 
 
 None* 
 ..do. 
 ..do . 
 ..do. 
 
 .do 
 .do 
 .do 
 .do 
 .do 
 .do , 
 
 ..do.... 
 ..do.... 
 ..do.... 
 ..do.... 
 ..do.... 
 Filtration 
 
 Pyr 
 
 17 
 
 Pyr 
 
 18 
 
 Pyr 
 
 19 
 
 S 
 
 14 
 
 Pyr 
 
 20 
 
 Pyr 
 
 22 
 
 Pyr 
 
 21 
 
 Pyr 
 
 33 
 
 Pyr 
 
 34 
 
 Pyr 
 
 35 
 
 Pyr 
 
 36 
 
 Pyr 
 
 32 
 
 S 
 
 13 
 
 S 
 
 11 
 
 S 
 
 12 
 
 Pyr 
 
 31 
 
 Pyr 
 
 30 
 
 Pyr 
 
 26 
 
 Pyr 
 
 27 
 
 Pyr 
 
 25 
 
 Pyr 
 
 23 
 
 Pyr 
 
 24 
 
 Pyr 
 
 29 
 
 Pyr 
 
 28 
 
 Pyr 
 
 16 
 
 S 
 
 15 
 
 S 
 
 7 
 
 S 
 
 8 
 
 S 
 
 10 
 
 S 
 
 9 
 
 8 
 
 5 
 
 S 
 
 4 
 
 S 
 
 2 
 
 S 
 
 3 
 
 S 
 
 6 
 
 S 
 
 1 
 
 ' P= Producer; NP = Nonproducer; D = Developing. 
 
 2 Pyr = Pyrlte concentate; S = elemental sulfur. 
 
 ' Refers to location on figure 4. 
 
 ' No beneficlation is performed. 
 
 ' Property Is scheduled to come on stream by mid-1985. 
 
 ' Property was closed in May 1984. 
 
 ' Property closed permanently owing to depleted resources in May 1985. 
 
 COMMODITY OVERVIEW 
 
 Sulfur differs from most major mineral commodities in 
 that it is used as a processing and manufacturing reagent. 
 Many agricultural and industrial products (phosphatic fer- 
 tilizers, Ti02 pigments) use intermediate sulfur chemicals in 
 their manufacturing and processing. Elemental sulfur and 
 other sulfur compounds must be converted to these in- 
 termediate chemicals (H2SO4 or CS2) prior to use. After the 
 use of these intermediate chemicals, most, if not all, of the 
 sulfur content is discarded as a waste product and not incor- 
 porated into the final product. The consumption of sulfur in 
 one form or another has been regarded as an index of a Na- 
 tion's industrial development. 
 
 Sulfur occurs in a wide variety of forms, from native 
 sulfur to sulfur compounds. Most elemental sulfur is ob- 
 tained from native sulfur deposits and the desulfurization of 
 sour natural gas, petroleum and tar sands. Sulfur also oc- 
 curs in the form of pyrites, in ferrous and nonferrous metal 
 sulfide deposits, from which pyrite and metal concentrates 
 can be recovered. These concentrates are roasted to pro- 
 duce SO2 which is converted to H2SO4 (1, p. 877-898).3 
 
 ' Italic numbers in parentheses refer to items in the list of references at the 
 end of this report. 
 
PRODUCTION 
 
 Approximately 65 pet of the world's total sulfur produc- 
 tion comes in the form of elemental sulfur from native sulfur 
 deposits and the refining of sour natural gas, petroleum, 
 and tar sands. The remaining sulfur production comes from 
 pyrites, metallurgical operations, and other sources such as 
 coal gasification and gypsum. Most of this sulfur is 
 recovered as H2SO4. Figure 1 illustrates estimated world 
 production distribution of all forms of sulfur by source for 
 1984 {2, pp. 831-849). 
 
 No single coimtry is the dominant producer or supplier of 
 sulfur and sulfur compounds. Approximately 50 pet of the 
 world's total sulfur production comes from countries in 
 which the industry is either partially or entirely government 
 owned and/or operated. Table 2 lists total estimated 1984 
 world sulfur production by country and source. The CPEC's 
 produce an estimated 35.6 pet of the world's sulfur; during 
 1984 the U.S.S.R. produced 9.3 Mmt; Poland, 5.4 Mmt; and 
 China, 2.5 Mmt. The leading MEC producers in 1984 were 
 the United States with 10.7 Mmt; Canada, 6.6 Mmt; Japan, 
 2.6 Mmt; and Mexico, 1.9 Mmt (i, pp. 877-898; 2, pp. 
 831-849). 
 
 FIGURE 1.— Estimated distribution of worid production of 
 ail forms of sulfur, by source, 1984. 
 
 TABLE 2.— Estimated 1984 world sulfur production in all forms, by country and source 
 
 (Thousand metric tons of 100 pet S equivalence) 
 
 Country 
 
 Natural gas 
 
 and 
 petroleum 
 
 Frasch and 
 native 
 sulfur 
 
 Pyrite 
 
 Metallurgy 
 
 Other 
 
 Total 
 
 Share of 
 
 total, 
 
 pet 
 
 MEC's: 
 
 Canada 
 
 Japan 
 
 Mexico 
 
 Portugal 
 
 Spain 
 
 United States 
 
 Other MEC's 
 
 CPEC's: 
 
 China 
 
 Poland 
 
 U.S.S.R 
 
 Other CPEC's 
 
 Total 19,848 
 
 Source: Morse (2). 
 
 5,727 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 875 
 
 
 
 6,609 
 
 12.8 
 
 1,140 
 
 
 
 260 
 
 1,172 
 
 
 
 2,572 
 
 5.0 
 
 461 
 
 1,364 
 
 
 
 100 
 
 
 
 1,925 
 
 3.7 
 
 
 
 
 
 105 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 110 
 
 .2 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 1,100 
 
 120 
 
 3 
 
 1,230 
 
 2.4 
 
 5,214 
 
 4,193 
 
 W 
 
 962 
 
 283 
 
 10,652 
 
 20.5 
 
 4,661 
 
 710 
 
 2,004 
 
 1,716 
 
 1,041 
 
 10,132 
 
 19.5 
 
 
 
 200 
 
 2,100 
 
 
 
 350 
 
 2,650 
 
 5.1 
 
 30 
 
 5,000 
 
 
 
 300 
 
 20 
 
 5,350 
 
 10.3 
 
 2,600 
 
 2,600 
 
 3,300 
 
 800 
 
 40 
 
 9,340 
 
 18.0 
 
 8 
 
 5 
 
 682 
 
 30 
 
 589 
 
 1,314 
 
 2.5 
 
 14,072 
 
 9,558 
 
 6,075 
 
 2,331 
 
 51,884 
 
 100 
 
 CONSUMPTION 
 
 COMMODITY PRICES 
 
 Sulfur is consumed in a wide variety of forms; the most 
 common are elemental sulfur and H2SO4. Figure 2 details 
 the sulfur-H2S04 supply and end-use relationship. These 
 two materials find a wide variety of uses including 
 agricultural products, nonferrous metal and iron and steel 
 processing, plastic and synthetic products, paper and pulp 
 manufacturing, and pigment production. In 1983, total 
 world consvmiption of all forms of sulfur was about 53.5 
 Mmt: Production of H2SO4 accounts for nearly 85 pet of the 
 consumption of all forms of sulfur. Fertilizer manufacture 
 consumes 55 pet of all forms of svilfur, mostly as elemental 
 sulfur that is converted to H2SO4. The United States and the 
 U.S.S.R. are the world's leading consumers of all forms of 
 sulfur, each consuming about 11 Mmt/jT {3, p. 783). 
 
 After 1965, the historically stable elemental sulfur market 
 experienced a period of short supply in MEC's, with the 
 deficit being made up by heavy withdrawals from producers' 
 stocks in the United States. This, coupled with a rapid 
 growth in the fertilizer industry, resulted in abnormally 
 high prices in 1967 and most of 1968. In late 1968, a serious 
 oversupply developed, the effects of which were magnified 
 by a retrenchment in the fertilizer sector, the entrance of 
 low-priced imports, and a weakening of export prices. The 
 subsequent general collapse of the sulfur market continued 
 through most of 1973. Prices began to rise again in 1974, 
 decreased in 1977, then after a slight increase in 1978, 
 became quite volatile, resulting in record high prices by 
 1981. 
 
Frasch sulfur 
 
 Recovered 
 elemental sulfur 
 
 Pulp and 
 paper products 
 
 Paints and 
 
 allied products, 
 
 industrial organic 
 
 cfiemicalst and other 
 
 chemical products 
 
 Other industrial 
 inorganic 
 chemicals 
 
 Synthetic rubber, 
 
 cellulosic fibers, 
 
 and other plastic 
 
 materials and 
 
 synthetics 
 
 Agricultural 
 chemicals 
 
 Petroleum refining 
 
 and petroleum and 
 
 coal products 
 
 Imported 
 elemental sulfur 
 
 Pyrite, H2S, 
 SO2 
 
 Reclaimed 
 H2SO4 
 
 Byproduct 
 H2SO4 
 
 H2SO4 
 
 Pulp mills 
 
 Nitrogenous 
 fertilizers 
 
 Other chemical 
 products* 
 
 Other inorganic 
 chemicals* 
 
 Inorganic pigments 
 
 paints and allied 
 
 products 
 
 Water treating 
 compounds 
 
 Undefined 
 sources 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Petroleum 
 refining'and other 
 petroleum and 
 coal products * 
 
 
 
 Cellulosic fibers 
 including rayon 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Copper ores 
 
 
 
 Pharmaceuticals 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Uranium and 
 vanadium ores 
 
 
 
 Soaps and 
 detergents* 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Other ore 
 
 
 
 Industrial 
 organic 
 chemicals" 
 
 
 Other primary 
 metals 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Other paper 
 products 
 
 Other 
 agricultural 
 chemicals 
 
 Steel pickling" 
 
 
 
 
 
 Nonferrous 
 metals 
 
 Storage 
 batteries-acid* 
 
 Unidentified 
 
 Exports 
 
 Sources of spent acid 
 for reclaiming 
 
 FIGURE 2.-— Sulfyr-H2S04 supply and end-use relationship. 
 
The reasons for these price increases were relatively com- 
 plex and include (1) a rapid increase in demand by fertilizer 
 manufacturers, both domestically and worldwide; (2) the 
 high profitability of the fertilizer sector, which allowed high 
 sulfur prices to be passed on to consumers; (3) the recogni- 
 tion that sulfur production costs, especially those of Frasch 
 sulfur, has increased substantially; and (4) logistical prob- 
 lems that restricted deliveries. The economic recession that 
 began in late 1981 caused a decrease in sulfiu" demand both 
 domestically and worldwide through 1982 and into 1983. 
 
 In 1982 and 1983, Saudi Arabia brought large volumes of 
 recovered elemental sulfur to the world market, and Iraq, 
 despite the ongoing war with neighboring Iran, was able to 
 return to the world marketplace. Because of this, sulfur 
 prices softened in 1982 and fell fiui;her in 1983 (3, p. 790; 2, 
 pp. 831-849). In 1984, elemental sulfur prices began to rise, 
 reaching their highest level since 1981, partially because of 
 decreased production from Saudi Arabia, owing to damage 
 to their Jubial sulfur-prilling facilities, and to decreased oil 
 production. Table 3 lists the average reported price for 
 elemental sulfur over the last 5 yr. 
 
 Prices for a pyrite concentrate containing 45 to 51 pet S 
 have remained stable over the past 10 yr owing to low de- 
 mand. However, with the recent increase in demand and ris- 
 ing price for elemental sulfiu", more interest has been given 
 to pyrite production. Table 4 lists the pyrite concentrate and 
 other commodity prices used in the economic analysis. 
 
 TABLE 3.— Elemental sulfur market prices,^ f.o.b. mine or plant 
 
 Year Price,' US$/mt 
 
 1980 $97.36 
 
 1981 121.11 
 
 1982 120.74 
 
 1983 100.76 
 
 1984' 130.90 
 
 ' Listed prices are U.S. market prices, f.o.b. plant or Gulf port, 
 Louisiana and Texas. 
 ' Actual year dollars. 
 ' Elemental sulfur market price used in this analysis. 
 
 Sources: Morse (2, p. 834); Engineering and Mining Journal {4, p. 27). 
 
 TABLE 4.— Pyrite concentrate and commodity market prices' 
 
 Price, January 
 
 Commodity 1984 US$ 
 
 Pyrite concentrate, 51 pet S' per mt. . $42.99 
 
 Copper per lb . . .71 
 
 Gold per tr oz. . 370.89 
 
 Lead per lb. . .25 
 
 Silver pertroz.. 8.18 
 
 Zinc per lb. . .49 
 
 ' Based on U.S. market prices. 
 
 ' Market price of a pyrite concentrate used In this analysis. 
 
 Source: Engineering and Mining Journal {4, p. 27). 
 
 METHODOLOGY 
 
 The Bureau of Mines (5) has developed a methodology for 
 the analysis of long-run mineral resource availability. An in- 
 tegral part of this system is the supply analysis model 
 (SAM) (6), "developed by personnel of the Bureau's Minerals 
 Availability Field Office. This interactive computer system 
 is an effective mathematical tool for analyzing the effects of 
 
 various parameters upon the economic availability of 
 domestic and foreign resources. The flow of the Bureau's 
 Minerals Availability program (MAP) evaluation procedure 
 from deposit identification to development of availability in- 
 formation is illustrated in figure 3. 
 
 Identification 
 
 and 
 
 selection 
 
 of deposits 
 
 Tonnage 
 
 and grade 
 
 determination 
 
 Engineering 
 and cost 
 evaluation 
 
 ■" Mineral "" 
 
 Industries 
 
 Location 
 
 System 
 
 (MILS) 
 
 data 
 
 MAP 
 
 computer 
 
 data 
 
 base 
 
 Taxes, 
 
 royalties, 
 
 cost indexes, 
 
 prices, etc... 
 
 Deposit 
 
 report 
 
 preparation 
 
 MAP 
 
 permanent 
 
 deposit 
 
 files 
 
 Data 
 
 selection and 
 
 validation 
 
 Variable and 
 
 parameter 
 
 adjustments 
 
 Economic 
 analysis 
 
 Sensitivity 
 analysis 
 
 Availability 
 curves 
 
 Analytical 
 reports 
 
 Data 
 
 Availability 
 curves 
 
 Analytical 
 reports 
 
 FIGURE 3.— Minerals Availability program deposit evaluation procedure. 
 
Resurce grade and tonnage data included in this report 
 are derived from contractor-supplied company data, 
 published and unpublished sources, and Bureau and U.S. 
 Geological Survey sources and estimates. Tonnage quan- 
 tities and grade as of January 1984 are evaluated based on 
 these data in relation to physical and technological condi- 
 tions that exist at each deposit. Certain assumptions are in- 
 herent in this evaluation. First, all operations are assumed 
 to produce at full design capacity throughout the productive 
 life of the deposit, except when the actual production capaci- 
 ty is known. Second, operations are assumed to be able to 
 sell all of their elemental sulfur or pyrite concentrate output 
 at the determined average total cost of production and ob- 
 tain at least the minimum specified discounted-cash-flow 
 rate of return (DCFROR) of 15 pet. 
 
 COST ESTIMATION 
 
 Capital investments and operating costs for appropriate 
 mining and processing methods are evaluated for each 
 operation. Actual costs are used where available. However, 
 if actual data are lacking, costs are developed based on data 
 from similar existing operations or from the Bureau's cost 
 estimating system (CES) manual (7). Where appropriate, 
 capital and operating costs have been updated to January 
 1984 U.S. dollars according to local currency exchange 
 rates and individual country inflation indices, weighted pro- 
 portionately by the percentage share of labor, energy, 
 equipment, and materials and supplies within each category 
 on a countrywide basis. 
 
 Capital expenditures are determined for acquisition, ex- 
 ploration, and development; purchase and construction of 
 mine and mill equipment and facilities; infrastructure; and 
 working capital. Infrastructure includes capital costs for 
 development of the operation that cannot be allocated to 
 specific elements (mine, mill, smelter), such as access roads, 
 utilities, personnel accommodations, and port facilities. The 
 working capital is a revolving cash fund calculated on the 
 basis of 60 days of operating expenses. Environmental costs 
 for items such as water treatment and land reclamation are 
 included if known. Initial capital costs are depreciated from 
 the actual investment year to January 1984. The 
 undepreciated portion is treated as a capital investment in 
 January 1984. Reinvestments varied according to capacity, 
 production life, and age of facilities. Total operating costs 
 include labor, materials, overhead, utilities, and research. 
 Transportation costs to market facilities (port terminal, 
 sulfuric acid plant, or smelter) are also determined for each 
 operation. 
 
 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS 
 
 Data are entered into the Bureau's SAM system, once all 
 costs and engineering parameters are estimated. Economic 
 analyses are performed on each operation, using DCFROR 
 techniques to estimate the constant-dollar long-run price at 
 which elemental sulfur and pyrite concentrate would need 
 to be sold so that revenues are sufficient to cover all costs of 
 production, including a prespecified rate of return on invest- 
 ment. For this analysis, a 15-pct DCFROR was considered 
 necessary to cover the cost of capital plus risk. The 
 DCFROR is most commonly defined as the rate of return 
 that makes the present worth of cash flow from investments 
 equal to the present worth of all after-tax investments (8). 
 
 The SAM system contains a separate tax-records file for 
 each nation and State. Relevant taxes under which a mining 
 firm would operate include corporate income taxes, proper- 
 ty taxes, and any royalties, severance taxes, or other taxes 
 that pertain to mining and processing of elemental sulfur 
 and pyrite concentrate. These taxes are applied to each 
 property with the assumption that each operation 
 represents a separate corporate entity. 
 
 AVAILABILITY CURVES 
 
 Upon completion of the DCFROR analysis, all evaluated 
 properties are simultaneously analyzed and aggregated into 
 a total availability curve. This availability curve is the total 
 amount of elemental sulfur and/or pyrite concentrate poten- 
 tially available from the evaluated operations. Two total 
 availability curves were generated: one for the elemental 
 sulfur properties and one for the pyrite concentrate proper- 
 ties. 
 
 Elemental sulfur and pyrite concentrate availability are 
 presented in these curves as a function of the average total 
 cost of production associated with each operation, ordered 
 from properties having the lowest average total cost of pro- 
 duction to those having the highest. The potential availabili- 
 ty of each commodity is determined by comparing these 
 values with a long-run constant-dollar market price. The 
 total recoverable tonnage potentially available at or below 
 this price-cost value is read directly from the availability 
 curves. 
 
 Annual availability curves can also be constructed. These 
 curves represent the total availability of elemental sulfur 
 and/or pyrite concentrate in any given year, based on the 
 development and production schedules proposed for each 
 operation. 
 
 GEOLOGY 
 
 Sulfur is widely distributed in nature. It is found in a wide 
 variety of rocks and environments in its elemental form, as 
 combined sulfide and sulfate minerals, and as organic com- 
 pounds in fossil fuels. It is the 13th most abundant element 
 and constitutes 0.6 pet of the earth's crust. Sulfur- 
 containing deposits can be divided into six types: elemental 
 or native, petroleum and tar sands, sour natural gas, coal 
 and oil shale, metal sulfide (pyrite), and sulfate (gypsum) 
 
 deposits. Elemental or native sulfur deposits, metal sulfide 
 (pyrite) deposits, and sour natural gas are the most impor- 
 tant and supply most of the world's sulfur. Only native 
 sulfur and pyrite deposits are discussed in the following sec- 
 tions, since they are the only deposit types covered in this 
 report. Figure 4 shows the location of the elemental sulfur 
 and pyrite concentrate operations {1, pp. 882-883: 9, pp. 
 607, 613-617). 
 
United StQt'-b 
 / Phillips Ronch 
 2 Culberson 
 
 Fort Stockton 
 
 Comanche CreeK 
 
 Boling Dome 
 
 Long Point 
 
 CoiMou Island 
 
 Commodo 
 
 Grond Isle 
 
 Gordefi Island Bay 
 
 Me 
 
 // Jaltipan 
 
 12 Temsteper 
 
 13 Lotirhupo 
 
 Mothiotis 
 Shu 
 
 IX. 
 
 14 Mishroq 
 Turhpy 
 
 15 Keciborlu 
 
 16 Asihoy 
 
 17 Kambio 
 
 H^ Compiono 
 Zl Nicrioletu 
 22 Fenice Caponne 
 Spoin 
 
 P'.rtugo 
 
 26 Aljustrel 
 
 27 Lousal 
 Sweden 
 
 28 Longsele-Udden 
 
 29 Knstineberg 
 
 NorviOy 
 
 JJ Honooko 
 
 54 Kosoka 
 
 35 Shokanai 
 
 36 Toyohj 
 
 ^^ Lq Zorza-Colonas 
 24 Tharsis 
 i") Helenas 
 
 30 Sulitjelmo 
 
 31 Grong Gruber 
 Jopon 
 
 LEGEND 
 ^ E'emental sulfur operations 
 • Pyite concentrate operotrons 
 
 32 Yonohora 
 
 FIGURE 4.— Location of elemental sulfur and pyrite concentrate operations. 
 
 NATIVE SULFUR DEPOSITS 
 
 Elemental sulfur deposits are associated with anhydrite 
 caprock overlying salt diapirs and bedded anhydrite 
 evaporite formations. Bacterial attack on anhydrite pro- 
 duces lenses of limestone impregnated with elemental sulfur 
 {9). Examples of these types of salt diapir deposits occur on 
 the gulf coasts of Louisiana and Texas in the United States, 
 and of Vera Cruz, Mexico {10). Bedded evaporite deposits of 
 exploitable native sulfur occur both in west Texas, and in 
 the Mogul region of northern Iraq. The west Texas deposits 
 are associated with lenses or chimneys of anhydrite collapse 
 breccia. The Iraqi deposit is associated with a dome-shaped 
 anticline structure (11-12). The only native sulfur deposit of 
 volcanic origin evaluated in this report is the Keciborlu 
 sulfur operation in western Turkey. Sulfur mineralization 
 occurs in a soft, highly altered, and decomposed rhyolite 
 dike as veinlets and irregular nodules, and was formed as a 
 sublimate from sulfur-rich volcanic gases (IS). 
 
 PYRITE DEPOSITS 
 
 Ferrous and nonferrous metal sulfide deposits are also 
 sources of sulfur. Ferrous metal sulfide deposits are the 
 most important; they are generally massive high-grade ore 
 bodies containing pyrite averaging about 40 pet S. These 
 deposits are primarily exploited for their sulfur content in 
 
 the form of pyrite concentrates, which can be converted to 
 H2SO4. These deposits may also contain small amounts of 
 copper, lead, zinc, gold, and silver that can be recovered as 
 byproducts. Such deposits occur widely throughout the 
 world. 
 
 Examples are found in the Iberian Pyrite Belt of southern 
 Portugal and southwestern Spain. Stratiform polymetallic 
 pyritic ore bodies occur within a suite of felsic and mafic 
 volcanic rocks and siliceous sediments. Three types of 
 sulfide mineralization are recognized. The first two types 
 are massive and disseminated pyritic ores ranging from less 
 than 35 to 51 pet S; both are syngenetic-sedimentary in 
 origin. The third type is epigenetic stockwork pyritic ore of 
 about 5 to 25 pet S {U, p. 63, 65; 15, p. 32). 
 
 The ferrous metal sulfide deposits of Cyprus occur as 
 both massive and disseminated pyritic ore bodies associated 
 with pillow lavas, which fringe the Troodos Massif. Ore 
 bodies that occur as disseminations in the pillow lava 
 average about 20 pet S. Massive ore bodies, where replace- 
 ment of the pillow lava is more complete, range from 40 to 
 48 pet S. Shapes and sizes of individual ore bodies vary from 
 irregular to near horizontal-lenticular and range from 200 m 
 wide and 600 m long to 15 m wide and 100 m long (16, pp. 
 38-39). 
 
 Italy's three pyrite operations are associated with 
 hydrothermal deposition along faulted contacts between 
 phylhtic schists and cavernous limestones of the Tuscany 
 series. Both massive and disseminated vein pyrite ore 
 
bodies are present. The sulfur grade of the pyrite for the 
 three operations ranges from about 8 to 41 pet S. 
 
 Another system of sulfide ore bodies is the Kuroko type 
 deposits of the Akita Prefecture in northeastern Japan. 
 These ore bodies are stratabound polymetallic sulfide- 
 sulfate deposits that occur in acidic volcanic rocks. The 
 deposits are closely related to submarine volcanic eruptions 
 of dacite or rhyolite rock types and are important sources of 
 copper, lead, zinc, gold, and silver; but they are considered 
 here because of the large amount of pyrite contained in the 
 ore. Four ore zones have been recognized: a barite- 
 spharlerite-galena zone (Kuroko ore ) consisting mostly of 
 chalcopyrite, pyrite and tetrahedrite; a barite, pyrite, and 
 chalcopyrite zone (Han-Kuroko ore); a zone of almost all 
 pyrite and chalcopyrite (Ohko ore); and a zone of pyrite, 
 chalcopyrite, and quartz (Keikoh ore). Kuroko type deposits 
 can show very irregular shapes and variable sizes. Average 
 pyrite-sulfure grade can range from 19 pet (Keikoh ore) to 
 47 pet (Ohko ore). Kuroko deposits are consideed to be of 
 submarine hydrothermal sedimentary origin {17, p. 171; 18, 
 p. 137). 
 
 The Yanahara Mine in southwestern Japan in the 
 Okayama Prefecture is a massive ore body of almost pure 
 pyrite with some intrusions of rhyolite. Pyrrhotite and 
 magnetite are found near the margins. The average sulfur 
 grade of the pyrite is 46 pet. 
 
 The two Norwegian pyrite deposits are related to the 
 Koli Nappe sequences of the central Norwegian 
 Caledonides. The Joma deposit of the Grong Gruber opera- 
 tion is imbedded in a sequence of basaltic greenstones. This 
 deposit consists of (1) a massive pyritic layer interbedded 
 
 with meta-limestone and chlorite schist lenses, and (2) 
 layers of massive chalcopyrite-pyrrhotite. The average 
 grade of the pyrite is 32 pet S for this deposit. The Sulit- 
 jelma deposits lie at the base of the Sulitjelma Amphibolites 
 and contain massive pyrite, disseminated pyrite, and 
 chalcopyrite-pyrrhotite ore averaging approximately 14 pet 
 S {19, p. 745; 20, p. 311). 
 
 Sweden's principal pyrite mines, the Kristineberg, and 
 Langsele-Udden operations, are located in northeast 
 Sweden in the south-central part of the Skellefte field. 
 These ore bodies occur in the contact zone between a 
 volcanic and a phyllite series. A few occur several meters 
 below the contact. Ore bodies range in size from a few hun- 
 dred metric tons to several million metric tons. They are 
 generally elongated lenses and slab-shaped bodies of 
 massive pyrite with varying amounts of chalcopyrite, 
 sphalerite, galena, pyrrhotite, and arsenopyrite. Minor 
 amounts of antimony and bismuth as well as gold and silver 
 may also occur. Sulfur content of the pyrite ore ranges from 
 about 12 to 36 pet {21). 
 
 The Asikoy Mine is located in northern Turkey. The 
 associated ore body occurs in a lens of mafic volcanic rock 
 isolated within a younger graywacke-argillite sedimentary 
 sequence. Pyrite is dominant with variable amounts of 
 chalcopyrite and some bornite concentrated in the upper 
 part of the ore body. Two types of ore exist and are 
 somewhat gradational. The disseminated sulfide ore is prin- 
 cipally pyrite (35 pet S) disseminated in a pillow lava breccia. 
 The massive sulfide ore also consists of pyrite (42 pet S) with 
 some copper sulfide mineralizations. 
 
 SULFUR RESOURCES 
 
 Resources in this report are categorized according to 
 the mineral resource-reserve classification system 
 developed jointly by the U.S. Bureau of Mines and the U.S. 
 Geological Survey (USGS) {22). (See figure 5.) Table 5 lists 
 estimated world sulfur resources by type and level. World 
 sulfur resources are considerable. Estimates vary widely 
 owing to the different deposit types and the lack of data for 
 many of these deposits. 
 
 The Bureau has established a reserve base for sulfur. 
 This reserve base includes demonstrated resources 
 (measured plus indicated) that are currently economic, or 
 marginally economic (marginal reserves) and some that are 
 subeconomic (subeconomic resources). Figure 6 compares 
 Bureau and USGS resource estimates with the resource 
 estimates analyzed in this report. The demonstrated 
 resource evaluated in this report total approximately 675 
 Mmt (253 Mmt S and 422 Mmt pyrite ore). This tonnage 
 comprises about 2 pet of the USGS total of 32 billion mt and 
 about 25 pet of the Bureau's reserve base estimate of 2.7 
 billion mt {3, p. 785). 
 
 Table 6 compares the demonstrated resources of this 
 report with the Bureau's reserve base estimates. Direct 
 comparison of the demonstrated resources of this report 
 with the Bureau's reserve base is difficult owing to the lack 
 of a breakdown of the reserve base by deposit type. 
 
 TABLE 5.— Estimated world sulfur resources, by deposit type 
 
 (Million metric tons) 
 
 n^.^^., 1^^.,* Hypotlietlcal 
 Deposit type ^ -o- '^en^' 
 
 speculative 
 
 Natural gas and petroleum:' 
 
 United States NA 285 1,204 
 
 Remaining world' NA 1,037 2,107 
 
 Elemental sulfur: 
 
 United States 67 234 254 
 
 Remaining world' 186 386 203 
 
 Metal sulfides: 
 Pyrites: 
 
 United States NA 102 20 
 
 Remaining world 294 534 534 
 
 Base metals: 
 
 United States NA 102 305 
 
 Remaining world 128 290 168 
 
 Other:' 
 
 United States NA 29,059 104,044 
 
 Remaining world NA NA NA 
 
 Total 675 32,029 108,749 
 
 NA Not available. 
 
 ' Data from the 36 MEC properties evaluated in this report. 
 
 ' Includes demonstrated. 
 
 ' Includes tar sands. 
 
 ' Includes native sulfur in volcanic deposits. 
 
 'Includes other MEC's and CPEC's for the identified, hypothetical, 
 and speculative resources. 
 
 ' Estimate is large; Includes organic sulfur compounds and pyrite in 
 coal and oil shale, and sulfate (gypsum) desposits. 
 
 Source: Bedenlos (9, pp. 613-617). 
 
10 
 
 Cumulative 
 production 
 
 IDENTIFIED RESOURCES 
 
 Demonstrated 
 
 Measured indicated 
 
 Inferred 
 
 UNDISCOVERED RESOURCES 
 
 Hypothetical 
 
 Probability range 
 (or) 
 
 Speculative 
 
 ECONOMIC 
 
 MARGINALLY 
 ECONOMIC 
 
 SUB- 
 ECONOMIC 
 
 Reserve 
 
 base 
 
 Inferred 
 
 reserve 
 
 base 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 Other 
 occurrences 
 
 Includes nonconventional and low-grade materials 
 
 FIGURE 5.— Mineral resource classification categories {22). 
 
 Demonstrated 
 resources, 2.1 pot 
 
 Identified (USQS). 
 89.5 pet 
 
 n Reserve base 
 (Bureau of Mines), 
 8.4 pet 
 
 FIGURE 6.— Comparison of world sulfur resources esti- 
 mates (total 32,029 Mmt). 
 
 TABLE 6.— Estimated resources of elemental sulfur and 
 pyrlte concentrate 
 
 {Million metric tons) 
 
 Demonstrated resources* 
 Country' Reserve 
 
 In situ Recover- Recov- base' 
 able' ered* 
 
 ELEMENTAL SULFUR 
 
 Iraq 135.1 W W 200 
 
 Mexico 50.1 37.5 37.2 100 
 
 Turkey 1.4 W W NA 
 
 United States 66.5 66.5 66.4 175 
 
 Total 253.1 200.0 184.5 475 
 
 PYRITE CONCENTRATE 
 
 Cyprus W W W NA 
 
 Italy 36.9 35.4 29.1 15 
 
 Japan 75.6 78.2 29.7 10 
 
 Norway 25.4 26.8 11.0 NA 
 
 Portugal 139.3 97.4 97.4 NA 
 
 Spain 115.1 98.4 98.4 30 
 
 Sweden W W W NA 
 
 Turkey W W W NA 
 
 Total 421.6 363.4 278.9 55 
 
 NA Not available. 
 
 W Withheld to avoid disclosing company proprietary data; included in 
 total. 
 
 ' Data from other countries are not available. 
 
 ' Estimated as of January 1984, as analyzed in this report. 
 
 ' Pyrite concentrate estimate includes mine dilution; Japan and Nor- 
 way have the highest dilution, averaging 20 and 39 pet, respectively. 
 
 * Some loss may occur during processing. 
 
 ' Bureau of Mines estimate; total world reserve base for combined 
 sulfur in all forms is estimated at about 2.7 billion mt (3, p. 785). 
 
11 
 
 EXTRACTION AND PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY 
 
 Frasch mining and processing technology, developed by 
 Herman Frasch in 1894 {23, p. 40), involves injecting large 
 amounts of superheated water (163° C) dovi'n wells drilled 
 through the sulfur deposit. Heat from the water is transferred 
 to the formation, thus melting the sulfur, which, being heavier 
 than water, accumulates in a pool at the bottom of each well. 
 Compressed air is injected down each well to raise the molten 
 sulfur to the surface. Figure 7 is a cross section through a 
 typical Frasch sulfur production well. Once on the surface, 
 liquid sulfur (97 to 99.8 pet S) may require only filtration, 
 generally through a mixture of H2SO4 and diatomaceous earth 
 to remove organic impurities; it is then pumped to surface 
 storage facilities. Injected water migrates through the forma- 
 tion and is extracted through bleeder water wells located along 
 the flanks of the structure away from the mining area. In some 
 mining areas (e.g., Iraq and Poland) where the formation is not 
 porous enough to promote sulfur and water migration, the rock 
 is fractured by blasting the formation near the bottom of the 
 well. 
 
 The Frasch process is used exclusively on salt diapir forma- 
 tions along the Gulf of Mexico off Louisiana and Texas in the 
 United States and the State of Vera Cruz, Mexico, and on 
 bedded evaporite formations in west Texas, the Mogul region 
 of northern Iraq, southern Poland, and the U.S.S.R. 
 
 Elemental sulfur deposits not amenable to the Frasch proc- 
 ess use open pit and underground methods. High- to medium- 
 grade ore from these deposits can be roasted directly, with the 
 resulting SO2 gas converted to H2SO4. Low-grade ores are 
 treated by a wide variety of processes, including direct melting, 
 distillation, agglomeration, solvent extraction, and flotation to 
 produce elemental sulfur. Sulfur ores of the Keciborlu sulfur 
 operation near Isparta in western Turkey are mined by open 
 pit and horizontal cut-and-fill methods. Both direct melting and 
 flotation beneficiation processes are used to produce an 
 elemental sulfur product. 
 
 Open pit and underground mining methods are also used 
 on pyrite deposits. High-grade ore (45 pet S and above), after 
 minor beneficiation consisting of crushing, grinding, screening, 
 and washing, is roasted followed by direct conversion of the 
 SO2 gas to H2SO4. Examples of these types of operations can 
 be found in Cyprus and along the Iberian Pyrite Belt of 
 Portugal and Spain. 
 
 Lower grade pyrite ores are generally upgraded with flota- 
 tion methods from which a pyrite concentrate can be 
 recovered. This concentrate is then roasted, producing SO2 
 that is converted to H2SO4. Examples of these types of opera- 
 tions are the operations in Sweden and Norway and those in 
 the Kuroko type deposits of Japan. 
 
 \iMM^ 
 
 y\ 
 
 \y\\y\\y 
 
 FIGURE 7.— Section through a typical Frasch sulfur produc- 
 tion well. 
 
 CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS 
 
 Capital investments and operating costs were estimated 
 for each property. These costs vary greatly depending on 
 
 such factors as size of operation, mining and processing 
 method, deposit location, and geology. 
 
12 
 
 CAPITAL COSTS 
 
 Most of the 36 properties evaluated in this report have 
 been in operation for a considerable length of time; i.e., 
 longer than 10 yr. Therefore, some of their initial capital in- 
 vestment is assiuned to have been depreciated. Costs 
 presented in table 7 reflect the remaining undepreciated 
 portion of the original capital investment and investments 
 required for the replacement of capital to enable the opera- 
 tion to continue, or for construction of additional facilities or 
 expansion of existing facilities to enable the operation to in- 
 crease its production capacity. In some cases, costs reflect 
 the investment needed to reactivate past-producing opera- 
 tions. These properties are not specifically identified, as 
 confidentiality of data could be compromised. 
 
 OPERATING COSTS 
 
 Operating costs include labor, materials and supplies, 
 energy, overhead, taxes, royalties, and insurance. 
 Transportation costs cover the cost of storage, handling, 
 and shipping elemental sulfur or pyrite concentrates. Ship- 
 ment is generally to the nearest sidfuric acid plant, roaster 
 or smelter, or market terminal. Operating costs do not in- 
 clude the conversion of elemental sulfur or pyrite concen- 
 trates to H2SO4. 
 
 Elemental Sulfur 
 
 Weighted-average operating costs for the 15 elemental 
 sulfur operations are summarized in table 8. All but one 
 property (Keciborlu, Turkey, a combined surface- 
 underground operation) use the Frasch process to recover 
 elemental sulfur. Four use filtration, the only beneficiation 
 method generally required for Frasch elemental sulfur. The 
 deposits in Iraq and Turkey, which have the lowest and 
 highest operating costs, respectively, are included together 
 in table 8 to avoid disclosing company proprietary data. 
 
 The 15 properties have an average operating cost of 
 $50.82/mt of recoverable sulfur, with mining costs averag- 
 ing 73 pet of total costs, transportation costs 21 pet, and 
 milling (filtration) costs only 6 pet. After Iraq, Mexico has 
 the lowest costs, despite high filtration costs at two of its 
 three Frasch operations. Mexico's low overall operating 
 costs ($49.40/mt) result from lower energy and labor costs. 
 The Mexican Frasch operations are able to generate their 
 own electricity from waste boiler heat and/or by recycling 
 well bleed water, which requires less treatment and 
 reheating, thus lowering energy costs. 
 
 TABLE 7.— Estimated average capital cost investments for 
 elemental sulfur and pyrite concentrate operations 
 
 (January 1984 U.S. dollars, per metric ton sulfur) 
 
 Remaining Estimated 
 country Commodity und^eprec ^^^.^^^ 
 
 recovered^. 2 capital replacement 
 costs' costs* 
 
 Cyprus Pyr $5.99 $8.35 
 
 Italy Pyr 6.73 12.44 
 
 Iraq S W W 
 
 Japan Pyr .92 5.65 
 
 Mexico S 3.88 .88 
 
 Norway Pyr 9.13 25.73 
 
 Portugal Pyr 2.58 3.11 
 
 Spain Pyr .45 3.47 
 
 Sweden Pyr 5.67 1.90 
 
 Turkey Pyr, S WW 
 
 United States S ^9 .44 
 
 W Withheld to avoid disclosing company proprietary data. 
 
 ' Costs for the commodity pyrite (Pyr) are in terms of contained sulfur 
 in the recovered pyrite concentrate. 
 
 ' Costs for the commodity sulfur (S) are in terms of recovered 
 elemental sulfur. 
 
 ' Capital costs for mine and mill, development, plant and equipment, 
 and Infrastructure, remaining as of January 1, 1984. 
 
 * Estimated capital reinvestment for mine and mill development, plant 
 and equipment, and infrastructure to be recovered over the life of the 
 property. 
 
 In contrast, U.S. producing and nonproducing proper- 
 ties have costs nearly twice those in Mexico, despite far 
 lower milling (filtration) costs -none for the five producers. 
 Transportation costs account for 31 pet of the total for the 
 producers but only 15 pet for the five nonprodueers. The 
 much higher U.S. costs for transportation result from the 
 necessity to use rail transport, at about $30/mt S; however, 
 some operations use cheaper ocean barge and pipeline 
 transport, at just $0.77/mt S. Mexico's properties use river 
 barge transport at about $3.50/mt S, while Iraq and Turkey 
 use truck and rail. 
 
 Pyrite Concentrate 
 
 Weighted-average operating costs for the 21 pyrite 
 operations are summarized in table 9. Both surface and 
 underground mining methods are used; beneficiation 
 methods consist of flotation or sizing. As expected, surface 
 mining and sizing result in lower costs than underground 
 mining and flotation. 
 
 The 21 properties have an average operating cost of 
 $53.89/mt of contained sulfur in the pyrite concentrate. The 
 two Portuguese and three Spanish properties have the 
 lowest operating costs; all five use sizing beneficiation, but 
 four of the five are underground operations. These lower 
 
 TABLE 8.— Summary of estimated operating costs, elemental sulfur operations 
 
 (U.S. dollars per metric ton recovered sulfur) 
 
 Annual Operating costs 
 
 Number capacity 
 
 Country of range. Mine Mill Transportation 
 
 operations 10' mt 
 
 Iraq and Turl<ey 
 
 Mexico 
 
 United States 
 
 Producers 
 
 Temporarily closed' 
 
 Weighted average: 
 U.S. properties 
 
 All properties 15 NAp 37.12 2^81 10.89 
 
 NAp Not applicable. W Withheld to avoid disclosing company proprietary data. 
 ' Includes Caillou Island mine, which closed In May 1984. 
 
 Total 
 
 2 
 3 
 
 W 
 331-987 
 
 $15.72 
 39.41 
 
 $3.08 
 6.52 
 
 $4.48 
 3.47 
 
 $23.28 
 49.40 
 
 5 
 5 
 
 82-2,200 
 85-960 
 
 55.15 
 84.78 
 
 
 
 1.73 
 
 25.01 
 15.44 
 
 80.16 
 101.95 
 
 10 
 
 NAp 
 
 61.87 
 
 .39 
 
 22.84 
 
 85.10 
 
 50.82 
 
13 
 
 TABLE 9.— Summary of estimated operating costs, pyrite concentrate operations 
 
 (U.S. dollars per metric ton contained sulfur) 
 
 Annual Oper ating costs 
 
 Number capacity 
 
 Country of range, feline Mill Transportation 
 
 operations 10^ mt 
 
 Cyprus and Turkey 4 7-270 $39.35 $94.29 $9.95 
 
 Italy 3 16-360 46.69 13.08 5.01 
 
 Japan 5 14-160 107.19 51.09 47.68 
 
 Norway 2 W 38.52 20.81 14.28 
 
 Portugal 2 W 13.58 3.01 3.99 
 
 Spain 3 50-425 12.54 2.45 3.93 
 
 Sweden 2 W 82.05 45.53 26.32 
 
 Weighted average, 
 all properties 21 NAp 30.03 13.74 10.12 
 
 Processing method: 
 
 Mining:' 
 
 Surface 4 7-425 13.27 2.92 3.70 
 
 Underground 16 14-615 34.88 13.57 12.07 
 
 Beneficiation: 
 
 Flotation 13 7-270 93.50 58.97 36.86 
 
 Sizing 8 43-615 16.08 3^0 4.24 
 
 NAp Not applicable. W Withheld to avoid disclosing company proprietary data. 
 
 ' Does not Include 1 operation that uses a combined surface-underground mining method. 
 
 Total 
 
 $143.59 
 64.78 
 
 205.96 
 73.56 
 20.58 
 18.92 
 
 153.90 
 
 53.89 
 
 19.89 
 60.52 
 
 189.33 
 24.12 
 
 underground mining costs result from higher mining 
 capacities and ore feed grades. In contrast, the five 
 Japanese and two Swedish underground operations, all of 
 which use flotation to recover a pyrite concentrate, have the 
 highest operating costs. Each of these mines also recovers 
 various coproduct concentrates. 
 
 The two Norwegian operations are underground mines 
 using flotation, and one of the three Italian underground 
 operations also uses flotation; these three mines also 
 
 recover coproduct concentrates. The other two Italian 
 mines use sizing beneficiation. 
 
 Costs for Cyprus and Turkey (combined to avoid disclos- 
 ing company proprietary information) are somewhat 
 misleading, because they include the high cost of a combined 
 surface and underground mining method at the Turkish 
 operation. The three Cyprus operations are low-capacity 
 surface mines with average operating costs roughly half 
 that of the Turkish mine. All four use flotation beneficiation, 
 though no coproducts are recovered. 
 
 ELEMENTAL SULFUR AND PYRITE CONCENTRATE AVAILABILITY 
 
 Using a 15-pct-DCFROR analysis, the estimated 
 constant-dollar long-run average total cost of production for 
 each operation in January 1984 dollars was determined for 
 both elemental sulfur and pyrite concentrate. Their 
 availability is presented in curves and tables as a function of 
 the average total cost of production associated with each 
 operation. 
 
 ELEMENTAL SULFUR AVAILABILITY 
 
 Figure 8 illustrates the potential total availability of 
 elemental sulfur. The 15 elemental sulfur properties 
 evaluated in this report have an estimated in situ 
 demonstrated resource of 253 Mmt. From this resource, a 
 potential of 185 Mmt S is available, approximately 99 pet 
 (182 Mmt) at an average total cost of production of $131/mt 
 (the January 1984 market price). At 1984 world production 
 rates of Frasch and native elemental sulfur, the total 
 resources available could supply elemental sulfur for about 
 13 yr. However, this life could be extended with the 
 discovery of new deposits or if identified resources are 
 reclassified to the demonstrated level. 
 
 Table 10 compares estimated total elemental sulfur 
 availability by country from producers and from temporari- 
 ly closed U.S. operations. Eight producers have nearly 169 
 Mmt S available at an average cost below $104/mt S. An ad- 
 ditional 13 Mmt, from four temporarily closed operations, is 
 potentially available at less than $131/mt S, and the remain- 
 ing 3 Mmt, from two temporarily closed and one govern- 
 ment owned and operated producing mine, is available at 
 costs ranging from $156/mt to $225/mt S. 
 
 80 100 120 140 
 
 T0T4L RECOVERABLE SULFUR, Mmt 
 
 FIGURE 8.— Totai avaiiabiilty of elemental sulfur. 
 
 TABLE 10.- 
 
 -Estimated total elemental sulfur availability 
 
 (Thousand metric tons) 
 
 Elemental 
 
 sulfur, 
 by source 
 
 Average total cos 
 
 t of production 
 
 $45.00- 
 $90.00 
 
 $90.01- 
 $131.00 
 
 $131.01- 
 
 $225.00 Total 
 
 United States: 
 
 Peoducers . . 
 
 Temporarily 
 closed .... 
 Mexico 
 
 producers . . . 
 Iraq and Turkey 
 
 producers . . . 
 
 34,844 
 
 
 
 . . . . 37,188 
 
 . ... 80,417 
 
 16,486 
 
 12,850 
 
 
 
 
 
 82 51,412 
 
 2,214 15,064 
 
 37,188 
 
 427 80,844 
 
 Total 
 
 . . . . 152,449 
 
 29,336 
 
 2,723 184,508 
 
14 
 
 Approximately 97 pet (64.2 Mmt) of the 66.5 Mmt S 
 available from the 10 U.S. Frasch operations can be pro- 
 duced for less than $131/mt S on the average; this includes 
 51.3 Mmt from four producers and 12.9 Mmt from four tem- 
 porarily closed operations. The remaining 2.3 Mmt, 
 available at costs exceeding $156/mt S, is from one produc- 
 ing and one temporarily closed operation. Taken together, 
 the five producers can supply 5.2 Mmt/yr S, 98 pet of which 
 is available at less than $131. mt; the five temporarily closed 
 properties could supply 1.7 Mmt/yr S, 95 pet of which for 
 less than $131/mt. 
 
 Approximately 37.2 Mmt S is available from Mexico's 
 three producing Frasch operations, from an estimated in 
 situ demonstrated resource of 50.1 Mmt S, at less than 
 $90/mt S average operating costs. These operations could 
 supply 2.1 Mmt/yr S for the next 14 yr, but by the early 
 2000's these estimated resources will have been depleted. 
 Most of Mexico's production is exported to the United 
 States and other world markets. 
 
 Turkish and Iraqi operations are government owned 
 and operated. Together, an estimated 81 Mmt S is potential- 
 ly available from these two properties; however, annual 
 availability from both countries is low, owing to low produc- 
 tion rate estimates. Most of the production is exported to 
 European and Mediterranean sulfur markets. 
 
 Total potential annual availability of producing elemen- 
 tal sulfur operations is shown in figure 9. Production 
 averaging 4.8 Mmt/yr S is possible from the 10 producers 
 evaluated, over 99 pet for less than $131/mt. At 1984 pro- 
 duction, most producers will have depleted their estimated 
 1984 recoverable demonstrated resources by the end of the 
 century; but three remaining producers, with less than 1.6 
 Mmt/yr S still available, could produce for less than the 1984 
 market price ($131/mt). 
 
 2,2SOr 
 
 9 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 ' 
 
 
 S 
 
 - 
 
 \ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 7 
 
 - 
 
 \ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 S 
 
 - 
 
 \ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 Z 5 
 
 
 
 "s 
 
 in 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 
 
 s 
 
 
 - 
 
 3 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 
 
 \ 
 
 
 - 
 
 2 
 
 - 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 \_ 
 
 
 \ - 
 
 1 
 n 
 
 1 
 
 \ 
 
 1 
 
 % 
 
 64 
 
 1967 
 
 1990 
 
 1993 
 
 I99« 
 
 1999 
 
 2002 
 
 20C 
 
 T 1 1 
 
 N Year preproduction 
 development begins 
 
 FIGURE 10.— Total annual elemental sulfur availability from 
 temporarily closed operations (below $225/mt S). 
 
 PYRITE CONCENTRATE AVAILABILITY 
 
 The 21 metal sulfide (pyrite) properties have in situ 
 demonstrated resources of nearly 422 Mmt pyrite, which 
 could supply about 279 Mmt pyrite concentrate at 46 pet S 
 (fig. 11). Table 11 lists the estimated availability of pyrite 
 concentrate at various average total costs of production. 
 
 Of the 279 Mmt pyrite concentrate recoverable, approx- 
 iniately 92 pet (257 Mmt) can be produced at average costs 
 lower than $43/mt pyrite concentrate (the January 1984 
 market price). At the 1984 rate of production, these 
 resources could supply pyrite concentrate for 29 yr. 
 
 aO 120 l«0 200 
 
 TOTAL RECOVERABLE PYWITE, Mint 
 
 FIGURE 9.— Total annual elemental sulfur availability from 
 producing operations (below $22S/mt S). 
 
 FIGURE 11.— Total availability of pyrite concentrate. 
 
 Because startup dates for the five temporarily closed 
 U.S. operations are not known, their potential annual 
 availability (fig. 10) was based on assumption that reactiva- 
 tion would begin in the year N. These properties together 
 have 695,000 mt/yr S potentially available, 88 pet of which 
 at production costs averaging less than $131/mt. Most of 
 these properties will have depleted their estimated 1984 
 recoverable demonstrated resource by the year N-t- 12. 
 
 TABLE 11.— Estimated total pyrite concentrate availability 
 
 (Thousand metric tons) 
 
 
 Average total cost of production 
 
 Pyrite concentrate 
 
 Oto 
 $43.00 
 
 $43.01- Above 
 $90.00 $90.00 
 
 Total 
 
 Primary 
 
 Coproduct 
 
 232,264 
 24,132 
 
 868 
 8,127 13,469 
 
 233,132 
 45,728 
 
 Total 
 
 256,396 
 
 8,995 13,469 
 
 278,860 
 
15 
 
 Pyrite concentrate producers that produce no other 
 metal concentrates account for 233 Mmt of the total 
 availability, about 99 pet of which is available for less than 
 $43/mt. Coproduct pyrite concentrate, which is defined as 
 any pyrite concentrate recovered for its sulfur content 
 along with other metal concentrates, accounts for the re- 
 maining 46 Mmt. More than half of this (24 Mmt) is available 
 for less than $43/mt, and about 845,000 mt of this is 
 available at an average cost of production of zero, because 
 revenues from other recovered products are able to cover 
 the cost of pyrite concentrate production. 
 
 Table 12 compares potential pyrite concentrate 
 availability by country over a range of production costs. 
 Spain and Portugal, with potential availability of nearly 98 
 Mmt concentrate each (together, nearly 70 pet of total 
 availability for MEC's), all at less than $30/mt, could 
 dominate the pyrite concentrate industry well into the next 
 century. However, at their 1984 annual production 
 capacities, these two countries account for only 13 pet of 
 estimated world production of pyrite concentrate. 
 
 Italy accounts for another 10 pet of MEC potential pro- 
 duction from the evaluated properties. Of the 29 Mmt poten- 
 tially available, 98 pet can by produced for less than $43/mt 
 concentrate; the other 2.0 pet is coproduct pyrite concen- 
 trate, for which all production costs are covered by other 
 commodities. 
 
 Japan, with 29.6 Mmt potentially available, accounts for 
 11 pet of total pyrite concentrate availability. About 55 pet 
 of this (16.2 Mmt) is available for less than $30/mt; nearly 
 8.2 Mmt is a coproduct with other commodities. The balance 
 of Japan's potential production, 13.5 Mmt, is coproduct 
 pyrite available for more than $90/mt concentrate. 
 
 Figure 12 illustrates estimated potential annual 
 availability of pyrite concentrate over various years. 
 Average production level throughout the analyses is 5.2 
 Mmt/yr pyrite concentrate, peaking at 5.9 Mmt in 1990. 
 Overall, 85 pet of this concentrate is available for less than 
 $43/mt concentrate on the average. Primary pyrite concen- 
 trate accounts for about 3.7 Mmt/yr, with 93 pet available 
 for less than $43/mt; coproduct production accounts for the 
 other 1.5 Mmt/yr. with approximately 50 pet potentially 
 available for less than $43/mt. 
 
 TABLE 12.— Comparison of total potential pyrite 
 concentrate availability, by country 
 
 (Thousand metric tons) 
 
 Average total cost of production 
 
 Country to $43.01- Above 
 $43.00 $90.00 $90.00 Total 
 
 Spain 98,352 98,352 
 
 Portugal 97,385 97,385 
 
 Japan 16,200 13,469 29,669 
 
 Italy 29,116 29,116 
 
 Norway and Sweden 15,343 15,343 
 
 Cyprus and Turkey . . 8,995 8,995 
 
 Total 256,396 8,995 13,469 278,860 
 
 FIGURE 12.— Annual availability of total, primary, and 
 coproduct pyrite concentrate (below $225/mt). 
 
 102S7 4.12 
 
16 
 
 CONCLUSION 
 
 Thirty-six properties (10 domestic and 26 foreign) were 
 evaluated to determine the total potentially available ton- 
 nage of elemental sulfur and pyrite concentrate. 
 
 Availability analyses of the 36 properties indicate that 
 253 Mmt of elemental sulfur resources from 15 native sulfur 
 deposits could be depleted faster than the 422 Mmt of pyrite 
 resources from 21 sulfide deposits. Estimated total 
 recoverable elemental sulfur is 185 Mmt. Approximately 
 182 Mmt S (98 pet) is available below an average total cost 
 of production equal to the January 1984 market price 
 ($131/mt). Eight current producers (as of January 1, 1984) 
 account for 169 Mmt S available at about $104/mt. An addi- 
 tional 13 Mmt S would be available from four temporarily 
 closed operations at an average total cost of production of 
 less than $131/mt. Two producers, one government owned 
 and operated, and one other temporarily closed operation 
 account for the remaining 3 Mmt available from $156/mt to 
 $225/mt. At 1984 rates of production these availability ton- 
 nages would be depleted within 14 yr. However, this life 
 could be entended with the discovery of new deposits or 
 reclassifying identified resources to the demonstrated level. 
 
 Total estimated recoverable pyrite concentrate 
 available is 279 Mmt at 46 pet S; all 21 properties are pro- 
 ducers. Approximately 92 pet (257 Mmt) of this pyrite con- 
 centrate is available below an average total cost of produc- 
 tion equal to the January 1984 pyrite concentrate market 
 price ($43/mt). Primary pyrite concentrate producers ac- 
 count for 233 Mmt, and coproduct pyrite concentrate pro- 
 ducers 24 Mmt. An additional 22 Mmt (mostly as coproduct 
 pyrite concentrate) is available at average total costs of pro- 
 
 duction ranging at $52/mt to $223/mt. At 1984 production 
 rates these availability tonnages could last about 29 yr. 
 
 The United States and Mexico should continue to 
 dominate the North American native sulfur (Frasch) in- 
 dustry over the next decade. Potential average annual 
 availability over this period is about 4.8 Mmt from produc- 
 ing operations. All of this sulfur is available at about 
 $104/mt S. However, this estimated annual tonnage meets 
 only 14 pet of the 1984 world's total elemental sulfur produc- 
 tion level. The remainder could be made up by the produc- 
 tion of secondary sulfur sources; i.e., recovered elemental 
 sulfur could increase its share of the market if production 
 from high-sulfur crude oils and sour natural gas from Mex- 
 ico, the Near East, Alaska, California, Utah, and Wyoming 
 becomes available. 
 
 Italy, Japan, Portugal, and Spain will dominate the 
 pyrite concentrate industry into the next century, with ap- 
 proximately 255 Mmt of total pyrite concentrate available. 
 Most of this tonnage is primary pyrite concentrate, 
 available at less than $43/mt. The estimated annual pyrite 
 concentrate tonnage from these countries account for about 
 47 pet of the world's 1984 estimated pyrite concentrate pro- 
 duction. 
 
 These operations must supply pyrite concentrate at a 
 market price that is cost competitive with H2SO4 production 
 from elemental sulfur. Substantial increases in pyrite con- 
 centrate output other than to meet internal or local H2SO4 
 demand is unlikely, owing to the supply of sulfur from its 
 many sources. 
 
 REFERENCES 
 
 1. Shelton, J. E. Sulfur. Ch. in Mineral Facts and Problems, 1980 
 Edition. BuMines B 671, 1981. pp. 877-898. 
 
 2. Morse, D. E. Sulfur. Ch. in BuMines Minerals Yearbook 1984, 
 V. 1, pp. 831-849. 
 
 3. . Sulfur. Ch. in Mineral Facts and Problems, 1985 
 
 Edition. BuMines B 675, pp. 783-797. 
 
 4. Engineering and Mining Journal. V. 185, No. 1, Jan. 1984, p. 
 94. 
 
 5. Babitzke, H. R., A. F. Barsotti, J. S. Coffman, J. G. Thompson, 
 and H. J. Bennett. The Bureau of Mines Minerals Availability 
 System: An Update of Information Circular 8654. BuMines IC 
 8887, 1982, 54 pp. 
 
 6. Davidoff, R. L. Supply Analysis Model (SAM): A Minerals 
 Availability System Methodology. BuMines IC 8820, 1980, 45 pp. 
 
 7. Clement, G. K., Jr., R. L. Miller, P. A. Seibert, L. Avery, and 
 H. Bennett. Capital and Operating Cost Estimating System 
 Manual for Mining and Beneficiation of Metallic and Nonmetallic 
 Minerals Except Fossil Fuels in the United States and Canada. 
 BuMines Spec. Publ., 1981, 149 pp.; also available as-STRAAM 
 Engineers, Inc. Capital and Operating Cost Estimating System 
 Handbook -Mining and Benefication of Metallic and Nonmetallic 
 Minerals Except Fossil Fuels in the United States and Canada (con- 
 tract J0255026). BuMines OFR 10-78, 1977, 382 pp. 
 
 8. Stermole, F. J. Economic Evaluation and Investment Decision 
 Methods. Investment Evaluations Corp., Golden, CO., 2d ed., 1974, 
 449 pp. 
 
 9. Bodenlos, A. J. Sulfur. Ch. in United States Mineral 
 Resources. U.S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Paper 820, 1973, pp. 605-618. 
 
 10. Hanna, M. A. Geology of the Gulf Coast Salt Domes. Ch. in 
 Problems of Petroleum Geology. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol., Tulsa, OK, 
 Sidney Powers Mem. V., 1934, pp. 629-678. 
 
 11. Barker, J. M., D. E. Cochran, and R. Semrad. Economic 
 Geology of the Misraq Native Sulfur Deposit, Northern Iraq. Econ. 
 Geol., V. 74, 1979, pp. 484-495. 
 
 12. British Sulphur . Iraq. Ch. in World Sulphur Resources. 2d ed. 
 
 1974, pp. 155-157. 
 
 13. Turkey. Ch. in World Sulphur Resources. 2d 
 
 ed., 1974, pp. 52-56. 
 
 14. Strauss, G. K., J. Madel and F. F. Alosno. Exploration Prac- 
 tice for Strata-bound Volcanogenic Sulphide Deposits in the 
 Spanish-Portuguese Pyrite Belt: Geology, Geophysics, and 
 Geochemistry. Springer-Verlag, 1977, 93 pp. 
 
 15. British Sulphur. Portugal and Spain. Ch. in World Sulphur 
 Resources. 2d ed., 1974, p. 32. 
 
 16. Bear, L. M. The Mineral Resources and Mining Industry of 
 Cyprus. Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Geol. Surv. Dep., 
 Republic of Cyprus, Bull. 1, 1980, 208 pp. 
 
 17. Maruyama, S., and N. Sato. Geology and Exploration of the 
 Kurouo Deposits in Japan. Ch. 9 in Mineralogy and Metallurgy of 
 Lead, Zinc Deposits. AIME, 1970, v. 1, pp. 171-194. 
 
 18. Sato, T. Physiochemical Environments of Kuroko Mineraliza- 
 tion at Uchinota: Deposit of Kosaka Mine, Atita Prefecture. Ch. in 
 Geochemistry and Crystallography of Sulphide Minerals in 
 Hydrothermal Deposits. Soc. Min. Geol. Jpn., Spec. Issue 2, 1971, 
 pp. 137-144. 
 
 19. Olsen, J. Genesis of the Joma Stratiform Sulfide Deposit, 
 Central Norwegian Caledonides. Paper in Proceedings of the Fifth 
 Quadrennial lAGOD Symposium. E. Schweizerbart'sche 
 Verlagsbuchhandlung (Nagele U. Obermiller), Stuttgart, Fed. Rep. 
 of Germany, 1980, pp. 745-757. 
 
 20. Wilson, M. R. The Geological Setting of the Sulitjelma Ore 
 Bodies, Central Norwegian Caladonides. Econ. Geol., v. 68, 1973, 
 pp. 307-316. 
 
 21. British Sulphur. Sweden. Ch. in World Sulphur Resources. 2d 
 ed., 1974, pp. 46-52. 
 
 22. U.S. Geological Survey and U.S. Bureau of Mines. Principles 
 of a Resource/Reserve Classification for Minerals. U.S. Geol. Surv. 
 Circ. 831, 1980, 5 pp. 
 
 23. Haynes, W. Brimstone: The Stone That Bums. Van 
 Nostrand, 1959, 308 pp. 
 

 
 •- \/ 
 
 
 
 oSPa "^ <i^^^^^ • iP "7". " i 
 
 
 ^% /-if ^:/\ -«• .*^\.-W »/ ..-.,^. ;i 
 
 » e 
 
 
 
 
 V> ♦ * • o 
 
 
 a\.... "^^ 
 
 
 ^••\ 1^ ••^- °- /.-^e^-X *'°.-^&>- y.^^-\ '° -^^'A 
 
 
 
 
 • •t ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o H e 
 
 i^s* A 
 
 ^^^^ "Ml^'^^ '%^($ " 
 
 .0^ 
 
 o > 
 
 o » 
 
 
 
 
 «*i« 
 
 '^♦.^^'^^ y^i 
 

 
 
 
 
 .4 
 
 .-^^^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 )i.'^-^\/ V^^'/ \-^-^\/ V^^"/ \.*^^\/ V' 
 
 
 
 
 
 V''^*/ 'V'^*^?'* %'*^'/ "^-^/^^^Z "o^ 
 
 
 
 •-& A^ "i'j?' '^ V 
 
 
 
 ♦ .■^^''>. "."^XAW A^'-JU -.^ill^," S'^^, 
 
 ;* .4^ 
 
 
 c^^o 
 
 
 
 
 ,/%, 
 
 •3 
 
 0^' ,'"*' 
 
 A^^^'V 
 

 !:|;||i^$';i:l 
 
 ' ■ ''vl;:i'ii:;:il^;t?l 
 
 swills 
 
 : -^^;:i i^:;;! : i;; ill 
 
 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 002 955 949 1 
 
 ; r 
 
 ,■.;':;•,, /')■'. ;; ;; :,( : l;^,'; 
 
 
 ;,l'::: .::: 
 
 "'■;!!!!;yf.;i:|/i!:;!;ii;;t!i:.;ii;;'!l;:lv ■;';;!;|H 
 
 'M-::K:'mW§^!',M 
 
 
 
 -lliiiii 
 
 ,;: ■. ;',,»5}iS 
 
 
 ^'^^'S^^^i"^'