Metallic Mineral Resources in Finland and Fennoscandia: A Major European Raw-Materials Source for the Future

  • Pekka A. NurmiEmail author
  • Pasi Eilu
Part of the Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences book series (LNESS, volume 137)


Mineral-based materials and products are used either directly or indirectly in almost every area of our life. The growth of the world’s population, rapid development in emerging economies, urbanization and the expanding middle class have led to increasing competition for mineral raw materials, and created challenges to discover and develop new ore deposits.

Finland is part of Fennoscandian, which is a traditional producer of mineral raw materials. In spite of a long mining history in the region, very large mineral resources still remain unexploited. Big deposits and extensive metal range are explained by the complex and lengthy plate-tectonic evolution of the crust of the Earth in the region. Based on 2007 levels of consumption within the European Union, the known and assumed mineral resources of Fennoscandia would potentially cover the consumption of chromium, lithium, nickel, rare earth elements, tantalum, titanium, vanadium and probably also of niobium for more than 50 years. In addition to these metals, there also are considerable resources for a number of other commodities.

The most important ore deposits in Finland, on the basis of the nominal in situ value of the remaining known and assumed mineral resources, host significant volumes of nickel, chromium, copper, vanadium, iron, zinc, niobium, gold, platinum and palladium. Most of Finland’s ore deposits can geologically be classified as follows: (1) chromium, platinum group metals, nickel, and iron-vanadium ores associated with mafic–ultramafic intrusive rocks; (2) copper–zinc ores associated with volcanic rocks; (3) orogenic gold ores; (4) unique Outokumpu-type copper–cobalt ores; and (5) the gigantic and unique graphitic mica schist-hosted nickel–zinc–copper ore of Talvivaara. The ore output of metallic mines in Finland is estimated to increase to 70 million tons by 2020. It can also be expected that a number of new deposits will be discovered and many new commodities, critical for modern industries, will be produced in Finland for both domestic use and for world markets in the coming decades.


Platinum Metal Layered Intrusion Orogenic Gold Deposit Ultramafic Intrusion London Metal Exchange 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Alapieti T, Kujanpää J, Lahtinen JJ, Papunen H (1989) The Kemi stratiform chromitite deposit, northern Finland. Econ Geol 84:1057–1077CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amelin YV, Heaman LM, Semenov VS (1995) U-Pb geochronology of layered mafic intrusions in the eastern Baltic Shield; implications for the timing and duration of Paleoproterozoic continental rifting. Precambrian Res 75:31–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anon (2010) Critical raw materials for the EU. Report of the Ad-hoc Working Group on defining critical raw materials. European Commission, June 2010.
  4. Australasian Joint Ore Reserves Committee (2004) Australasian Code for Reporting of Identified Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (The JORC Code), 2004 Edition Issued in December 2004. Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Australian Institute of Geoscientists, and Minerals Council of Australia, 20pp.
  5. Buchert M, Schüler D, Bleher D (2009) Critical metals for future sustainable technologies and their recycling potential. Öko-Institut e.V. United Nations Environment Programme.
  6. Eckstrand OR, Hulbert L (2006) Magmatic nickel-copper-platinum group element deposit. Geol Assoc Can, Miner Depos Div Spec Publ 5:205–222Google Scholar
  7. Eilu P (2011) Metallic mineral resources of Fennoscandia. In: Nenonen K, Nurmi PA (eds) Geoscience for society – 125th Anniversary volume. Geol Surv Finland Spec Paper 49:13–21Google Scholar
  8. Eilu P, Sorjonen-Ward P, Nurmi P, Niiranen T (2003) A review of gold mineralization styles in Finland. Econ Geol 98:1329–1354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Eilu P, Hallberg A, Bergman T, Feoktistov V, Korsakova M, Krasotkin S, Lampio E, Litvinenko V, Nurmi PA, Often M, Philippov N, Sandstad JS, Stromov V, Tontti M (2007) Fennoscandian ore deposit database – explanatory remarks to the database. Geological Survey of Finland, Report of Investigation 168Google Scholar
  10. Eilu P, Bergman T, Bjerkgård T, Feoktistov V, Hallberg A, Korsakova M, Krasotkin S, Muradymov G, Nurmi PA, Often M, Perdahl J-A, Philippov N, Sandstad JS, Stromov V, Tontti M (2009) Metallogenic map of the Fennoscandian Shield 1:2 000 000. Espoo: Trondheim: Uppsala: St. Petersburg: Geological Survey of Finland: Geological Survey of Norway: Geological Survey of Sweden: The Federal Agency of Use of Mineral Resources of the Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian FederationGoogle Scholar
  11. Ericsson M (2010) Global mining towards 2030. Geological Survey of Finland, Report of Investigation 187.
  12. Fennoscandian Ore Deposit Database (2010) Geological Survey of Finland, Geological Survey of Norway, the Federal Agency of Use of Mineral Resources of the Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation, Geological Survey of Sweden
  13. Finland’s Minerals Strategy (2010) Geological Survey of Finland,
  14. Galley A, Hannington M, Jonasson I (2006) Volcanogenic-associated massive sulfide deposits (VMS). Geol Assoc Can, Miner Depos Div Spec Publ 5:141–162Google Scholar
  15. Goldfarb RJ, Groves DI, Gardoll S (2001) Orogenic gold and geologic time: a global synthesis. Ore Geol Rev 18:1–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Groves DI (1993) The crustal continuum model for late-Archaean lode-gold deposits of the Yilgarn Block, Western Australia. Mineral Depos 28:366–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Groves DI, Condie KC, Goldfarb RJ, Hronsky JMA, Vielreicher RM (2005) Secular changes in global tectonic processes and their influence on the temporal distribution of gold-bearing mineral deposits. Econ Geol 100:203–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Iljina M, Hanski E (2005) Layered mafic intrusions of the Tornio–Näränkävaara belt. In: Lehtinen M, Nurmi PA, Rämö OT (eds) Precambrian geology of Finland – key to the evolution of the Fennoscandian shield. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 101–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. International Copper Study Group (2010) The World Copper Fact Book 2009.
  20. Kontinen A, Peltonen P, Huhma H (2006) Description and genetic modelling of the Outokumpu-type rock assemblage and associated sulphide deposits. Final technical report for GEOMEX JV. Geological Survey of Finland, Archived Report M10.4/2006/1Google Scholar
  21. Kukkonen IT, Heikkinen P, Heinonen S, Laitinen J, HIRE Working Group of the Geological Survey of Finland (2011) Reflection seismics in exploration for mineral deposits: initial results from the HIRE project. In: Nenonen K, Nurmi PA (eds) Geoscience for society – 125th Anniversary volume. Espoo. Geol Surv Finland Spec Paper 49:49–58Google Scholar
  22. Loukola-Ruskeeniemi K, Heino T (1996) Geochemistry and genesis of the black shale-hosted Ni-Cu-Zn deposit at Talvivaara, Finland. Econ Geol 91:80–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lydon JW (1988) Volcanogenic massive sulphide deposits. Part 2: Genetic models. In: Roberts R, Sheahan PA (eds) Ore deposit models. Geological Association of Canada. Geoscience Canada Reprint Series 3:155–182Google Scholar
  24. Moon CJ, Evans AM (2006) Ore, mineral economics, and mineral exploration. In: Moon CJ, Whateley KG, Evans AM (eds) Introduction to mineral exploration, 2nd edn. Blackwell Publishing, Malden, pp 3–18Google Scholar
  25. Mutanen T (1997) Geology and ore petrology of the Akanvaara and Koitelainen mafic layered intrusions and the Keivitsa-Satovaara layered complex, northern Finland. Geol Surv Finland Bull 395Google Scholar
  26. National Instrument 43-101 (2006) Standards for the disclosure of mineral projects. Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (CIM).
  27. Peltonen P, Kontinen A, Huhma H, Kuronen U (2008) Outokumpu revisited: new mineral deposit model for the mantle peridotite-associated Cu-Co-Zn-Ni-Ag-Au sulphide deposits. Ore Geol Rev 33:559–617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Puustinen K (2003) Suomen kaivosteollisuus ja mineraalisten raaka-aineiden tuotanto vuosina 1530–2001, historiallinen katsaus erityisesti tuotantolukujen valossa (In Finnish). Geological Survey of Finland, Archived Report M 10.1/2003/3Google Scholar
  29. Rasilainen K, Eilu P, Halkoaho T, Iljina M, Karinen T (2010) Quantitative mineral resource assessment of undiscovered PGE resources in Finland. Ore Geol Rev 38(3):270–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tiess G (2010) Minerals policy in Europe: some recent developments. Resour Policy 35:190–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tilton JE (2010) Is mineral depletion a threat to sustainable mining. SEG Newsletter 82, July 18–20Google Scholar
  32. Weihed P, Arndt N, Billström C, Duchesne JC, Eilu P, Martinsson O, Papunen H, Lahtinen R (2005) Precambrian geodynamics and ore formation: the Fennoscandian shield. Ore Geol Rev 27:273–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Weihed P, Eilu P, Larsen RB, Stendal H, Tontti M (2008) Metallic mineral deposits in the Nordic countries. Episodes 31:125–132Google Scholar
  34. Whateley KG, Scott BC (2006) Evaluation techniques. In: Moon CJ, Whateley KG, Evans AM (eds) Introduction to mineral exploration, 2nd edn. Blackwell Publishing, Malden, pp 199–252Google Scholar
  35. World Economic Forum (2010) Mining & metal Scenarios to 2030.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Geological Survey of FinlandEspooFinland

Personalised recommendations