Controls on cobalt and nickel distribution in hydrothermal sulphide deposits in Bergslagen, Sweden - constraints from solubility modelling

26Citations
Citations of this article
27Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

We address controls on Co and Ni distribution, based on their solubility in hydrothermal fluids as functions of pH, ƒO2 and T, in two end-member types of sulphide deposits in Bergslagen, Sweden. Oxidized hydrothermal fluids, as have been suggested for the formation of the Zinkgruvan deposit, would efficiently transport Co and Ni in solution, even at 150 °C. Formation of Co and Ni sulphides and sulphosalts supersedes or overlaps the precipitation of other sulphides along a reduction or H2S-mixing path. This is consistent with the presence of Co and Ni sulphides and sulphosalts in vent-proximal Cu-Zn mineralization at Zinkgruvan. Reduced, acidic and hot (≥250 °C) hydrothermal fluids that have been invoked for the formation of deposits like Falun and Stollberg could also transport Co and Ni in solution. However, their solubility is strongly dependent on high T and low pH. Cooling and neutralization are here proposed as likely key triggers for the deposition of Co and Ni, yet, unlike in the Zinkgruvan scenario, saturation will occur within the pyrite stability field, whereby these metals may be sequestered as stoichiometric lattice substitutions in pyrite and other sulphides rather than forming minerals of their own. We conclude that at any T or realistic pH, hydrothermal systems involving oxidized brines have a greater ability to traverse and leach large rock volumes of Co and Ni. Consequently, areas hosting deposits that formed from such brines have a significant exploration potential for these metals, even in areas where Co-enriched source rocks are lacking or subordinate.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Jansson, N. F., & Liu, W. (2020). Controls on cobalt and nickel distribution in hydrothermal sulphide deposits in Bergslagen, Sweden - constraints from solubility modelling. GFF, 142(2), 87–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/11035897.2020.1751270

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free