No: the 2024 study did not announce a newly discovered iron ore deposit or establish a $5.7 trillion reserve. It directly dated the main preserved high-grade hematite deposits in Western Australia’s already-known Hamersley Province, finding they formed 1.4–1.1 billion years ago. The dollar figure comes from separate secondary coverage and is a theoretical gross estimate, not a formal valuation of recoverable ore.
What did geologists actually find?
The peer-reviewed study, “A billion-year shift in the formation of Earth’s largest ore deposits,” was published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on July 23, 2024. Its finding was a revised age for known deposits in the Hamersley Province of Western Australia’s Pilbara region—not the discovery of a new deposit.
![GEOLOGY AND IRON ORES OF STEEP ROCK LAKE [Ontario, Canada]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/01RmK+J4pJL.gif._SL160_.jpg)
Using uranium–lead geochronology on iron oxide minerals, the authors dated the hematite itself rather than relying only on the ages of associated minerals. They concluded that the major preserved banded-iron-formation-hosted deposits formed between 1.4 and 1.1 billion years ago. The study describes its result this way: “Direct dating demonstrates that the major iron ore deposits in the region formed during 1.4 to 1.1 Ga.” Read the PNAS study.
Curtin University’s announcement and ABC News coverage also describe the work as a direct dating study that revises understanding of the deposits’ formation, not as a new reserve discovery. Curtin University’s announcement | ABC News coverage.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
#1 Best Overall
Why are two different ages discussed?
The paper identifies an older iron-enrichment episode, dated to 2.2–2.0 billion years ago, in hematite clasts—fragments incorporated into the ore. The authors interpret these clasts as evidence of early mineralization that is now largely eroded. That older signal is distinct from the 1.4–1.1-billion-year age of the main preserved high-grade deposits mined today.
Earlier age constraints relied on clasts and phosphate minerals associated with hematite. Directly dating hematite allowed the authors to distinguish the older enrichment record from the later formation of the major preserved deposits.
How did the researchers date the hematite?
The team used in situ uranium–lead analysis on hematite grains. The paper reports 235 individual hematite spot analyses. At Mt. Tom Price, analyses from three areas produced an intercept date of 1,387 ± 30 million years, based on 105 analyses. These are study measurements, not estimates of the province’s total ore tonnage.
The authors describe the studied martite–microplaty hematite deposits as having iron content above 64% by weight. That figure characterizes the ore types examined; it should not be read as the grade of every deposit or all material across the Hamersley Province.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errors2Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minute3Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsRank #3
What does the $5.7 trillion figure mean?
The PNAS paper does not calculate a $5.7 trillion value, nor does it publish a new 55-billion-metric-ton reserve estimate. Those figures appear in separate secondary coverage. Geoengineer.org describes the dollar figure as a theoretical valuation based on commodity prices, and Indian Defence Review repeats the headline framing. Neither makes it a formal reserve valuation supported by the dating study. Geoengineer.org’s coverage | Indian Defence Review’s coverage.
A gross in-ground calculation is not the same as the money a company or investor could realize. It does not by itself establish how much material is economically recoverable, the costs of extraction and processing, or revenue after transport, taxes, and other expenses. Iron ore prices also change, so a price-based theoretical estimate is not a fixed asset value.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What might the age revision mean for exploration?
The authors correlate the main preserved mineralization interval with tectonic events during the amalgamation of Australia after the breakup of the Columbia supercontinent. This is a proposed relationship, not proof of a single cause for the deposits. They argue that understanding the timing may help guide exploration for similar geological settings elsewhere.
The practical implication is a better geological framework for deciding where and when to look—not evidence that a new resource has already been found or that its commercial value has been established.
Recommended Free Tools
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
