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:

The area in South-East Greenland between 62°30’N and 66°30’N was targeted for its mineralisation potential through data collection and renewed mapping during the collaborative ‘SEGMENT’ project (2009-2014) between the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland (GEUS) and the Bureau of Minerals and Petroleum (BMP, now Ministry of Mineral Resources, MMR). The main aims of the ‘SEGMENT’ project included: • Compiling a regional stream sediment geochemical and till indicator mineral survey; • Compiling a regional aeromagnetic survey of South-East Greenland; • Conduct geological field investigations in order to characterise the main lithology and as the basis for geological research, including petrology, structural geology, geochemistry and geochronology; • Evaluate economic geology and mineral potential through field investigations, using geological parameter in order to be able to predict possible mineralisation; • Revise the existing 1:500 000 geological map of South-East Greenland; and • Integrated data interpretation to describe and provide a geological model for the geological evolution of South-East Greenland and assess the mineral of potential of the region. The details behind the data collection and mapping efforts under the ‘SEGMENT’ project are summarized in the GEUS report by Kolb et al. (2016) which provides an overview of the geology and the lithological units within the mapping area between 62°N and 66°30’N.

A series of Aster band ratios highlighting mineral distributions. Band ratio color composite images to distinguish variability of lithology in the area. Preprocessing of the Aster scenes encompasses atmospheric, radiometric and topographic corrections before masking non-outcrop pixels and generating the final mosaic. The calibrated radiance data is converted to apparent surface reflectance using a radiative transfer program, Atmospheric and Topographic Correction (ATCOR-3), in rugged terrain mode. The ATCOR rugged terrain mode utilizes a surface elevation model to adjust illumination levels. Calibration and adjusting the apparent surface reflectance values from the ATCOR-3 processing was not feasible due to lack of ground-based reflectance measurements.

The dataset contains outlines of archived historical unpublished geological maps and sections of Greenland mostly created by GGU and GEUS but also some other institutes from 1916 onwards at various scales.

applications for different types of activities in Greenland. The data are converted from the WFS that the ministery of mineral resources (MMR) in Greenland provides. Links are provided in the online resources

The dataset represents the location of towns, settlements and airfields in Greenland. Each town and settlement have the number of inhabitants updated officially from Asiaq September 2018.

Nationwide geophysical database for environmental and raw material data, also known as GERDA (GEophysical Relational DAtabase). The database contains various types of geophysics, including geoelectrics, electromagnetics, borehole logs and seismic. All data is freely available for download on the GEUS website. The database is updated continuously.

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.

Uniform aerial photographic coverage of Greenland was achieved in 1978-1987 at 1: 150 000 scale by Mark Hurd Aerial Surveys, Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota, U.S.A., for the Danish Geodetic Institute [Weidick, 1995]. The photography is now administered by the Danish Geodata Agency, see also http://eng.gst.dk/maps-topography/greenland/aerial-photos-of-greenland. The camera used for these black and white photographs was a Wild RC 10 with a super wide angle lens (focal length = 88 cm). The airplane used by Mark Hurd was a Gates Lear Jet 25C. By setting the flying height to app. 14 km the image scale of 1:150 000 was achieved [Bengtsson & Jørgensen, 1980]. In an attempt to avoid blind areas, caused by the precipitous mountainsides in combination with the use of a super wide angle lens, the photographs were taken with a length-lap of 80%, and a side-lap of 40%. In the subsequent use of the photography (for aerotriangulation, mapping and scanning) generally only every other image were used (as you will see from the photo number shown on this web-page). The photo center coordinates are from the aerotriangulation by the Danish Geodata Agency. Please contact GST for the high resolution photos.

This view presents data from stream sediment geochemical mapping of West and South Greenland (Steenfelt, 2001a). Stream sediment samples were collected from 1979 to 1998 with as even coverage as possible from low-order streams and with a sampling density between 1 sample per 5 km2 and 1 sample per 50 km2, mostly around 1 sample per 30 km2. With few exceptions, the 0.1 mm grain size fractions of 500-g samples were analysed for major and trace elements by two or three methods. After careful quality control and elimination of bias between analytical values determined by different methods or at different times (calibration), the most reliable analytical data were selected as the final consistent dataset, containing data from 7122 samples analysed for up to 43 elements (see Steenfelt 1999, 2001b for details on data selection and calibration). Major element oxides and volatiles are determined by X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometry (XRF) and loss on ignition, respectively. Loss on ignition mostly reflects the amount of organic material in stream sediment samples. As the aim is to show the regional variation in the chemistry of the minerogenic component of the stream sediment, volatiles are not included in the major element composition which is recalculated as volatile-free oxides. Instead, volatiles are listed in a separate column for documentation. Locally, high loss on ignition may be caused by high contents of carbonate in the stream sediment of streams draining rare occurrences of marble or carbonatites. For detailed or more accurate studies, the CO2 concentrations of the stream sediment samples should be measured, or the amount of carbonate minerals estimated by microscopy. Trace element data are from methods determining total concentrations (XRF, Instrumental Neutron Activation, Delayed Neutron Counting). The quality of the trace element data varies (see Steenfelt 1999, 2001b) In the present dataset, all values below lower detection limit are indicated by the digit 0. Sample location Before 1993, sample sites were originally marked on topographic maps at the scale 1:100,000 and their positions were later digitised and later again corrected, when a new topographic reference was introduced around year 2000. From 1993 onwards, GPS was used to determine sample positions.