The geophysical data available on the Greenland Mineral Resources Portal are both released company data and data acquired based on public funding (AEM and Aeromag surveys). The AEM Greenland 1994-1998 project, encompassed high resolution detailed multi-parameter surveys (electromagnetic, magnetic and partly radiometric) in the years 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998 survey 1 and survey 2 producing a total of 75 000 line kilometres. The Aeromag projects, encompassed high resolution magnetic surveys conducted in 1992, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2001, 2012 and 2013 producing a total of more than 550 000 line kilometres. The projects were financed by the governments of Greenland and Denmark. More detailed information on the available geophysical date is given in Geology and Ore No. 22.

Ujarassiorit is a mineral hunt competition open to residents of Greenland. Participants can submit rock samples from Greenland to the Ministry of Minerals Ressources (MMR) for evaluation and may be selected for a prize.

All active exploitation licences. The data are converted from the WFS that th ministery of mineral resources (MMR) in Greenland provides. Links are provided in the online resources

The Samba database among other things contains information about deep wells in the Danish sector, acquired according to the Danish Act on the Use of the Subsoil. That is: exploration, appraisal, delimitation and production wells related to oil/gas. Also wells with other purposes such as: geothermal energy, gas storage, salt production and scientific research. The data sets contains technical, administrative and geological information about the well and about the geophysical measurements undertaken in the well (well logs and reports). Data are submitted by the company to whom the permission has been granted. The database is updated on an ongoing basis.

Exploration companies are obliged to report their activities to the Ministry of Minerals and Resources (MMR). Now reports are delivered in digital format, but were previously delivered in paper, to the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland (GEUS). They are scanned and released reports are available under Reports. Digital restoration The data that the reports hold is thus available, but stored as images in scanned pdf?s. The geochemical data of 4 reports (Allen & Harris, 1980; Coppard et al., 1992; Harris et al., 1992 and Pearson & Joudrie, 1995) have been digitized. I.e. the reports have be optically characterised and the sample locations georeferenced. The matching of the sample locations and geochemically referenced samples does not always match. Meaning that a sample that has coordinate may not have geochemical results, and a sample with geochemical measurements might not have coordinate. The reporting of the analytical facilities and precision is sparse. Detection limits, analytical uncertainty and reliability are generally not reported. Analytical methods and analysed grain fractions of sediment samples also not reported. When all these issues have been listed, it should be noted that errors may occur. From the digital restoration of scanned paper to optically characterisation of the scanned text and numbers errors may be introduced. The user is cautioned to these issues. Upload to data base To make the data available on the web, upload to GEUS sample data base is required. To fit into the sample data base, some adjustments had to be made. Sample names modified, collector created etc., resulting in modified sample names, relative to the ones used in the reports. The reports from which the samples occur in are not mentioned in the data base. Hence the four reports and links to them are listed below:

Non-confidential mineral exploration licence reports and other geoscientific reports have been recieved by Greenlandic authorities and subsequently send to GEUS in accordance with the Mineral Resources Act of Greenland (1 January 2010) and associated regulations. This dataset allows to search in the database using alphanumeric and geographic search criteria and to access report metadata. It is also possible to download the actual report as a PDF file.

The Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland has previously conducted sampling campaigns of heavy mineral concentrate in Greenland. The sampling methods are described according to their sampling years below. Unfortunately, not all the samples have reported as the campaigns in have not been undertaken on regional scale and therefore fallen under smaller projects or sampled under projects that have had other objects, and not all elements were considered relevant in the reports, translating to that metadata concerning the analyses are missing. All together there are geochemical analyses of 725 heavy mineral concentrate samples. The samples that are mentioned in reports below, are 319 in number, and do not comprise all heavy minerals samples collected the specified years. Samples collected in un-mentioned campaigns do occur in the full list. Use of data that is not mentioned here, needs caution and the quality should be weighed against other data. Years 1982-1986 A regional sampling campaign was conducted between 1982 and 1986, these samples are described in Appel 1989. These samples comprise the analysis batch numbers 10, 36 and 55. Numbers 10, 36 are analysed at Activation Laboratories and 55 analysed at Bondar-Clegg and Co. Ltd., both in Canada. In this campaign 210 samples were collected and are all sampled in the area around Nuuk. Sampling procedure: In the field: The coastal areas were accessed by boat while inland areas were accessed by helicopter. Four litres of coarse gravel and sand were collected and sieved through a 6 mesh of brass. The fines (c. 10 %) was panned and inspected in ultraviolet light and the scheelite grains counted. In the laboratory: The samples were dried and separated by bromoform, the heavy material was weighed and the scheelite grains counted again. A small splitter separated c. 0.5 gram of each sample for analysis of W, Mo, Pb, Cu, Cr, Co, V, Mn, Zr, Ni and Fe. During the years the sampling programme as well as the analysis methods changed. In 1983 the four litres were added up to five. In 1985 the material increased to 5-6 litres (or 10 kg). In 1986 a plastic sieve with 1 mm holes used and filled three times (5-8 kg) for each sample, the volume of fines was measured. C. 10 gram of each sample was analysed by Bondar-Clegg for (Sc, Cr, Fe, Co, Ni, As, Se, Rb, Mo, Ag, Cd, Sb, CS, BA, La, Eu, Tb, Yb, Hf, Ta, W, Ir, Au, Th and U) analyses. The reader should note that the analyses below detection limit is given as "0" (zero) and not analysed as "-1" for the samples collected in this campaign (year 1982-1986, i.e. batch numbers 10, 35 and 55). Year 1991 In 1991, 106 streams were sampled for heavy mineral concentrate, in the southern part of the Nuuk area, between 62°30?N and 64°N. Sample procedure was as follows: 5-10 litres of detrital material, < 5 cm, were collected, from 2-5 sub-localities in the stream bed. Wet sieving split the sample in less-than and bigger-than 0.5 mm, and the coarser fraction inspected for economic minerals. The fine fraction was heavy minerals concentrate was produced using a rotary panning device "goldhound" (see Erfurt et al., 1992 for reference). The heavy mineral concentrate was shipped to Denmark and dried and further spilt for analytical purposes. Activation Laboratories, Canada, analysed the samples for 35 elements including gold, with INAA and ICP-ES. Analyses batches are numbered 10 and 36. Unique samples number 103 for these two batches. In additional batch 41, has analysed Pb, Cu, Ni and Zn. Year 2004 The analyses batch no. 193 and 194 have been described in GEUS report 2004/42, and were sampled in 2003 in the Qaanaaq region in North-West Greenland. Six samples were collected in this campaign and sieving of 1.0 mm material on site and a pre-concentrate by panning of the fine fraction. In Copenhagen minerals with > 2.8 g/cm3 density was produced by heavy liquid separation. The rest The remaining 406 samples (analyses batch numbers: 10, 15, 21, 35, 36, 41, 55, 165, 166, 193, 194, 374, 375, 376, 1014, 1015, 1016, 1017, 1029, 1030, 1051, 1052, 1077 and 1078) have been analysed in addition to the laboratories mentioned above, at Risø National Laboratory in Denmark. As reports have not been available for writing up these analyses, the description is limited to the analyses. Chances are, however, that sampling procedures are similar to the descriptions above. The analyses below detection limits of the remaining 406 unique samples have not been consistent, but are presented as "0" or as negative values and elements that have not been measured as "0" or empty cells.

GEUS' Earthquake Portal provides information on all recorded earthquakes in Greenland. The data are extracted from GEUS' earthquake database and are updated daily. As a result, the timing, locations, and magnitudes of events may change as new data are added and existing events are revised. Continuous quality control is carried out, aiming to identify and remove explosions – typically related to military exercises or the removal of old munitions. Therefore, the list may change over time, and some uncertainty may be associated with the determination of epicentres and depths. The portal displays information for each earthquake, including the time of occurrence (year, month, day, hour, minute, second) in Greenwich Mean Time (GMT), the geographical location and depth of the epicentre, and the local magnitude measured on the Richter scale. Earthquake data can be exported from the portal according to the defined zoom level and map extent.

The digital geological map shows the surface geology. The map is a result of the systematic geological mapping of Denmark. The map is digitized from maps originating from fieldwork, where sediment samples are collected at 1m depth using a hand auger with a sample spacing of 100 - 200 m. This version 6 from 2021 classifies 91 % of Denmark's area. The map is supplemented in an ongoing process. The legend shows 82 different sediment types. The map is published in GEUS report 2021/68, where further information is available in Danish.

Greenland mineral assessment workshops have been held on Sedimentary-hosted Copper, type: redbed-, revett- and reduced-facies type in 2009, Various Rare Earth Elements deposit types in 2010 (this workshop was not carried out according to the 'three-part quantitative assessment' method), Sedimentary-hosted zinc SEDEX- and MVT-type in 2011, Magmatic nickel; komatiite-hosted, contact- and conduit-type in 2012 and Vein- and skarn type Tungsten in 2013 and Orogenic gold type in 2014. Most of the workshops, besides the one on rare earth elements, have been following the processes and methodologies used in the 'three-part quantitative assessment' method of the U.S. Geological Survey described by Singer (1993). The method does not define deposits or provide mineral resource or reserve estimates according to industrial or international recognised certified standards. The objective is to produce a probabilistic estimate of unknown/undiscovered deposits and corresponding probabilistic estimates of the total amount of metals down to one kilometre depth. The estimates do not take into account economic, technical, social or environmental factors. In the 'three-part quantitative assessment' method, an expert panel reviewed and discussed all available knowledge and data for a specific region (Tract) to assess the possibility of finding new undiscovered deposits within this Tract. The expert panels consisted of geologists from universities, research institutions, Surveys as well as private exploration and mining companies. The experts have either expertise in/worked with the deposit type in focus, with the regional and/or local geology relevant for the tracts being assessed or have expertise from exploration/mining projects for the deposit type in focus elsewhere in the world. One or two international top-experts on the mineral deposit type in focus for the different workshops have also participated in the workshop. After reviewing the available knowledge and data the members of the panel made their individual estimates (bids) of the number of undiscovered deposits they believed could be found under the best circumstances in a tract. The bids are based on the characteristics derived from descriptive mineral deposit models and a number of key-literature on the mineralisation type. In several of the workshops, critical elements have also been considered in the mineralising system (e.g. McCuaig & Hronsky 2014) associated with the deposit type in focus, when carrying out the bids. A panel discussion of the bids led to a consensus bid, which was used as input to a statistical Monte Carlo simulation. Based on established grade-/tonnage models of e.g. known tungsten deposits worldwide, this simulation can provide a prediction on how much undiscovered metals could be found within a Tract. The 'Tracts' are spatial polygons that define a certain area that was found to be permissive for the concerned mineral deposit type and which constitutes the same level of geology, knowledge and data coverage. Tracts are named with a unique name, tract area is given in square kilometre and consensus bids from team under N90, N50, N10, N05 and N01 headings of undiscovered metals deposits at different confidence levels. The statistics from the Monte Carlo simulation is shown under the headings Numbers of unknown deposits and Deposit density.