Skip to content
LITHOEN

Deposit

Voisey’s Bay

A magmatic nickel-copper-cobalt sulfide deposit in the Torngat orogen of Labrador, Canada, discovered in 1993 and dated by the USGS model at 1,333 ± 1 million years.

Classification

recognition basis
publishedDepositModel
realm
northAmerica

What this record is, and who says so

Recognised on the basis of

Published deposit model

A deposit model publication that describes this body as a worked example of the class it defines.

A deposit is an occurrence of sufficient size and grade that it might, under the most favourable circumstances, be considered to have economic potential. Lithoen records that a named authority made that judgement. It is not a statement that anything here is recoverable, and it is not a resource or a reserve.

How it is interpreted

A deposit is not a mineral system. A source interprets it as an example of one, and interpretations change while the rock does not.

  • Interpreted as an example of Magmatic nickel-copper-PGE sulfide system

    By — USGS SIR 2010–5070–I, table 2–1.

    The interpretation belongs to the source named in the model qualifier, not to the deposit. Another author may classify this body differently, and the record holds the interpretation rather than replacing the object with it.

Commodities documented here

  • Cobalt (commodity)documented association

    The source documents the commodity in this deposit and states no economic role. Lithoen records the association and infers nothing about how it would be worked.

  • Copper (commodity)documented association

    The source documents the commodity in this deposit and states no economic role. Lithoen records the association and infers nothing about how it would be worked.

  • Nickel (commodity)documented association

    The source documents the commodity in this deposit and states no economic role. Lithoen records the association and infers nothing about how it would be worked.

Reported figures, and what each one is

A sample assay, a deposit average, a compiler total and a reported reserve are different quantities. Each figure below carries which one it is; none of them is a current resource or reserve.

136.7 Mt

Geological estimate

A size estimate made on geological grounds without a formal reporting framework. Often historical, and never to be presented as a resource.

The USGS magmatic sulfide model gives Voisey’s Bay a size of 136.7 million metric tons. The table heads this column "Size (Mt)" without defining it further, and each row cites its own reference — so Lithoen records it as a geological size estimate compiled from the literature, not as a resource, a reserve or production.

0.85 wt%m Copper

Deposit average

An average grade attributed to a whole deposit by a compiler, over a tonnage defined by that compiler at a stated cut-off. Not a measurement of anything: a summary of an estimate.

The USGS magmatic sulfide model gives Voisey’s Bay a copper grade of 0.85 weight percent, over the same size.

1.59 wt%m Nickel

Deposit average

An average grade attributed to a whole deposit by a compiler, over a tonnage defined by that compiler at a stated cut-off. Not a measurement of anything: a summary of an estimate.

The USGS magmatic sulfide model gives Voisey’s Bay a nickel grade of 1.59 weight percent, over the size the same table records. It is a deposit-wide figure compiled from the literature, not an assay and not a reported resource grade.

Where it is

Lithoen holds no coordinate for Voisey’s Bay. The USGS magmatic sulfide model locates it by naming the Torngat orogen of Labrador, Canada in its example table and by a global figure at continental scale, and neither of the two deposit databases Lithoen accepted covers magmatic nickel deposits. No position is taken from a gazetteer and none is read off a figure.

How this record is known

1
Directly recorded
Observed or measured, reported by the party that made the observation.
4
Settled consensus
Cited as the accepted position of the discipline.
1
Open questions
Sourced statements that the answer is not currently known.

6 of 6 claims on this page cite at least one registered source. Counts describe how each statement is known, not how likely it is to be true.

What Lithoen records

Each claim states how it is known and cites its evidence.

Established0.85 wt%m Copper

Reported for this deposit

The USGS magmatic sulfide model gives Voisey’s Bay a copper grade of 0.85 weight percent, over the same size.

  • scope: depositAverage
  • definition basis: USGS SIR 2010–5070–I table 2–1, referenced per row.
  • assertion basis: SOURCE_REPORTED

Evidence support: Supported by the cited evidence one source

Evidence: Schulz 2014 Primary authority

Measured1,333 ± 1 Ma before present

Measured at this deposit

The USGS magmatic sulfide model dates Voisey’s Bay at 1333 ± 1 million years. The table gives one age per deposit, sourced to its own geochronological reference, and the report does not state which material was dated or which event the age records — so this is the age of the mineralising system as that compilation gives it, and not separately an intrusion age, an alteration age or a metamorphic overprint.

  • method: Geochronology as compiled in USGS SIR 2010–5070–I table 2–1, each row referenced to its own study.
  • precision note: The table states an uncertainty of ±1 Ma. What was dated is not stated.
  • assertion basis: SUBJECT_MEASURED

Evidence support: Supported by the cited evidence one source

Evidence: Schulz 2014 Primary authority

Established1.59 wt%m Nickel

Reported for this deposit

The USGS magmatic sulfide model gives Voisey’s Bay a nickel grade of 1.59 weight percent, over the size the same table records. It is a deposit-wide figure compiled from the literature, not an assay and not a reported resource grade.

  • scope: depositAverage
  • definition basis: USGS SIR 2010–5070–I table 2–1, referenced per row.
  • precision note: The model separately states that deposits of this class typically run 0.5 to 3 percent nickel, which is the range this figure should be read against.
  • assertion basis: SOURCE_REPORTED

Evidence support: Supported by the cited evidence one source

Evidence: Schulz 2014 Primary authority

EstablishedRecognised as an example deposit by USGS SIR 2010–5070–I, table 2–1 (Torngat orogen, Labrador, Canada, discovered 1993).

How a source classifies it

Voisey’s Bay is recorded as a deposit because the USGS occurrence model for magmatic sulfide-rich nickel-copper-PGE deposits presents it in its table of example deposits of that class, with its location, discovery year, age, size, grades and its own references. Recognition rests on a Tier A deposit model, not on a database entry.

  • definition basis: Inclusion in the model’s worked-example table, which the report describes as selected representatives of the class.
  • assertion basis: SOURCE_CLASSIFICATION

Evidence support: Supported by the cited evidence one source

Evidence: Schulz 2014 Primary authority

Open question

Derived by Lithoen

Lithoen holds no coordinate for Voisey’s Bay. The USGS magmatic sulfide model locates it by naming the Torngat orogen of Labrador, Canada in its example table and by a global figure at continental scale, and neither of the two deposit databases Lithoen accepted covers magmatic nickel deposits. No position is taken from a gazetteer and none is read off a figure.

  • precision note: The geological setting is recorded through relations, which is where the geography of this record actually lives.
  • assertion basis: LITHOEN_DERIVED

Evidence support: Supported by the cited evidence one source

Evidence: Schulz 2014 Primary authority

Established136.7 Mt

Reported for this deposit

The USGS magmatic sulfide model gives Voisey’s Bay a size of 136.7 million metric tons. The table heads this column "Size (Mt)" without defining it further, and each row cites its own reference — so Lithoen records it as a geological size estimate compiled from the literature, not as a resource, a reserve or production.

  • tonnage category: geologicalEstimate
  • definition basis: USGS SIR 2010–5070–I table 2–1, column "Size (Mt)", which the report does not define beyond its heading.
  • precision note: Because the column is undefined, this figure must not be compared with the compiler totals from the porphyry and sediment-hosted databases, which have an explicit and different definition.
  • assertion basis: SOURCE_REPORTED

Evidence support: Supported by the cited evidence one source

Evidence: Schulz 2014 Primary authority

In the knowledge graph

Record last updated 2026-09-07. Corrections follow the published corrections policy; superseded claims are retained, never silently edited.