Arab J Geosci
DOI 10.1007/s12517-013-1013-3
ORIGINAL PAPER
Magnetic susceptibility of volcanic rocks in geothermal areas:
application potential in geothermal exploration studies
for identification of rocks and zones of hydrothermal alteration
Kailasa Pandarinath & Rajasekhariah Shankar &
Ignacio S. Torres-Alvarado & Anish Kumar Warrier
Received: 1 February 2013 / Accepted: 11 June 2013
# Saudi Society for Geosciences 2013
Abstract Magnetic susceptibility and petrographic studies
of drilled rock cuttings from two geothermal wells (Az-26
and Az-49) of the important electricity-generating geother-
mal system, Los Azufres, Mexico, were carried out to deter-
mine the relation between the magnetic susceptibility of
rocks, the concentration of magnetic minerals and hydrother-
mal alteration. For this purpose, low-frequency magnetic sus-
ceptibility (χlf) was measured and compared its distribution
trends with those of magnetic and Fe–Mg silicate minerals,
and with the extent of hydrothermal alteration in rocks of the
two geothermal wells. The study indicates a decrease in χlf
values with depth in the two geothermal wells corresponding
with: (1) an increase in the reservoir temperature and hydro-
thermal alteration; and (2) a decrease in the concentrations of
Fe–Mg silicates and opaque minerals. The data suggest that
ferromagnesian minerals and opaque minerals like ilmenite
are the main contributors to the χlf of rocks. The decrease in
χlf, ilmenite, and Fe–Mg mineral contents with an increase in
the hydrothermal alteration degree, pyrite and haematite con-
tents suggests the hydrothermal alteration of ilmenite and Fe–
Mg minerals (characteristic of high χlf values) to pyrite,
haematite and other opaque minerals (with low χlf values).
Ignacio S. Torres-Alvarado deceased
K. Pandarinath (*) : I. S. Torres-Alvarado
Departamento de Sistemas Energéticos, Instituto de Energías
Renovables, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Privada
Xochicalco s/n, 62580 Temixco, Morelos, Mexico
e-mail: pk@cie.unam.mx
R. Shankar : A. K. Warrier
Department of Marine Geology, Mangalore University,
Mangalagangothri, 574199 Karnataka, India
Present Address:
A. K. Warrier
National Centre for Antarctic and Ocean Research (NCAOR),
Headland Sada, Vasco-da-Gama, Goa, India 403 804
The interaction of hydrothermal fluids with rocks results in the
hydrothermal alteration of primary minerals. In a geothermal
area, an anomaly of low magnetic susceptibility values of
rocks in a homogenous litho unit characterized by high mag-
netic susceptibility may suggest hydrothermal alteration.
Magnetic susceptibility can be a useful parameter, during the
initial stages of geothermal exploration, in identifying hydro-
thermally altered rocks and zones of hydrothermal alteration
both at the surface and from drilled wells in geothermal
systems.
Keywords Magnetic susceptibility . Los Azufres
Geothermal System . Geothermal wells . Hydrothermal
alteration . Magnetic minerals
Introduction
In geothermal areas, hydrothermal fluids reach the Earth’s
surface through faults, fractures, gaps, and cracks. These
geothermal fluids react with the sub-surface and surface
rocks. Some minerals (primary) present in the rocks become
unstable as a result of interaction with the geothermal fluids.
Due to this instability, a new equilibrium is attained between
the minerals and geothermal fluids through dissolution of
primary minerals and precipitation of new mineral phases
known as hydrothermal (secondary) minerals. The type,
concentration, and distribution of hydrothermal minerals
are controlled by the composition of primary minerals, the
temperature, and the chemical composition of fluids (partic-
ularly pH), permeability of the rocks, duration of fluid-rock
interaction, and kinetics of the alteration processes (Browne
1984). Therefore, the distribution of a zone of hydrothermal
minerals provides information on the size of a geothermal
system, the nature of fluid-rock interaction processes and
thermal conditions prevailing at depths (reservoir). These

aspects are of great importance during the initial phase of
geothermal exploration. The study of hydrothermal minerals
can also help to determine the geo-hydrological parameters
of the system, locate potential producing areas, and identify
changes in the thermal history of hydrothermal systems
(Browne 1970; Reyes 1990; Patrier et al. 1996).
Magnetic susceptibility of a sample is a measure of the ease
with which it can be magnetized under the influence of an
external magnetic field (Walden et al. 1999). It is a measure of
the magnetic mineral concentration in a sample, though it may
be influenced to a certain extent by magnetic grain size, orien-
tation of minerals, etc. Important magnetic minerals that con-
tribute to the magnetic susceptibility of a sample are ferrimag-
nets like magnetite, maghemite, titanomagnetite, and greigite,
followed by antiferromagnets like hematite and goethite.
Paramagnetic minerals like clay minerals, olivine, pyroxenes,
and carbonates of iron and manganese become important when
ferrimagnets and antiferromagnets are absent or very low in
content (Thompson and Oldfield 1986). Magnetic susceptibil-
ity measurement is simple, quick, non-destructive, and sensi-
tive. It is usually measured as volume susceptibility (k; dimen-
sionless units, ratio of the material magnetization per unit
volume to the weak external magnetic field) and may be
expressed as mass susceptibility (χlf; units of cubic meter per
kilogram; ratio of the material magnetization per unit mass to
the weak external magnetic field; Hunt et al. 1995).
Volcanic rocks such as basalts, andesites, dacites, and
rhyolites characterize geothermal systems. Ferrimagnetic min-
erals (e.g., magnetite, titanomagnetite, etc.) present in signif-
icant amounts contribute to the high values of magnetic sus-
ceptibility of volcanic rocks (for example, χlf of 6,500×10−8,
8.4 to 6,100×10−8, and 10 to 1,500×10−8 m3/kg for andesites,
basalts, and rhyolites, respectively; Hunt et al. 1995). Upon
interaction with hydrothermal fluids in a hydrothermal envi-
ronment, many minerals (including ferrimagnetic minerals) in
volcanic rocks get altered to new minerals, which are more
stable in the newer hydrothermal conditions. In general, the
hydrothermal alteration of volcanic rocks results in the alter-
ation of primary ferrimagnetic minerals such as magnetite,
ilmenite, and titanomagnetite to hydrothermal minerals like
pyrite, leucoxene, sphene, hematite, and clay minerals. The
replaced hydrothermal minerals generally have much lower
susceptibility values compared to the original primary min-
erals. Apart from this, depending on the alteration grade
and other factors, other primary minerals too (for exam-
ple, biotite, chromite, pyroxenes, olivine, etc.) alter to
minerals with lower values of magnetic susceptibility (for
example, feldspars, chlorite, and clay minerals; Thompson
and Oldfield 1986; Hunt et al. 1995). Therefore, an anomaly
of low magnetic susceptibility values of rocks in a homoge-
nous litho unit that is characterized by high magnetic suscep-
tibility, in a geothermal area, may be an indicator of hydro-
thermal alteration.
Arab J Geosci
In this investigation, an attempt is made to test this hypothesis
in two drilled geothermal wells of the Los Azufres Geothermal
System, Mexico (Fig. 1). Rocks at the surface of the geothermal
wells are relatively fresh or unaltered; however, they have
undergone increasing hydrothermal alteration with increasing
depth. Hence, a study of the magnetic susceptibility of rock
cuttings from different depths in the geothermal wells should
help determine its relation with the grade of hydrothermal alter-
ation and the thermal gradient of the system. The Los Azufres
Geothermal field has been extensively studied for its mineralog-
ical and geochemical aspects and thus is a suitable test case for
evaluating the relationship between magnetic susceptibility and
hydrothermal alteration of rocks in the geothermal wells. For
this, low-frequency magnetic susceptibility of the subsurface
rocks from two wells of this geothermal system was measured
and correlated the obtained values with the data on bore-hole
temperature, petrography and degree of hydrothermal alteration.
Magnetic susceptibility (χlf) of rocks, sediments and soils
has been used for various applications: for example, as a
paleorainfall proxy in the tropics (e.g., Shankar et al. 2006;
Shankar and Pandarinath 2008; Vázquez-Castro et al. 2008;
Warrier and Shankar 2009), as a proxy for particulate and
heavy metal pollution (e.g., Schmidt et al. 2005; Sandeep
et al. 2010), as a tool to measure soil erosion and redistribu-
tion (e.g., de Jong et al. 1998) and to estimate the opaque and
heavy mineral contents of placer samples (e.g., Shankar et al.
1996). However, there are no previous studies that addressed
the relationship between χlf and hydrothermal alteration in
geothermal wells by directly comparing data on χlf, bottom-
hole temperature (BHT), petrography, and hydrothermal al-
teration degree. Some studies though reported low values of
magnetic susceptibility in highly altered rocks: (1) Lapointe
et al. (1986) measured the magnetic susceptibility of bore-
hole cores from the Eye–Dashwa lakes pluton, an Archaean
granitic pluton near Atikokan, Ontario. They interpreted
variations in magnetic susceptibility in terms of the alteration
level; highly altered rocks had a low magnetic susceptibility
signal and vice versa; and (2) Soengkono and Hochstein
(1995), Hochstein and Soengkono (1997), and Soengkono
(2001) employed airborne magnetic surveys to determine the
areal extent of rocks with a low magnetic signal resulting
from hydrothermal alteration; these observations were con-
firmed by studies of down-core variation of total magnetiza-
tion in the geothermal fields of New Zealand and Indonesia.
Los Azufres Geothermal System
Los Azufres geothermal field (LAGF, Michocán, Mexico) is
one of the four important Mexican geothermal fields pres-
ently being used for electricity generation, with a total
installed capacity of 199.5 MWe (Bertani 2005). The geolo-
gy of the Los Azufres area has been well documented (e.g.,
Arab J Geosci

Fig. 1 Schematic presentation of

the geology of the Los Azufres
Geothermal Field (LAGF) along
with locations of the geothermal
fields. The inset is an index map
of Mexico with the locations of
four important electricity-
producing geothermal fields
(modified from Pandarinath et al.
2006; Pandarinath 2011)

Gutierrez and Aumento 1982; Dobson and Mahood 1985;
Verma 1985; Verma et al. 2005). So, only a brief summary is
provided here. Figure 1 presents a simplified geological map of
the LAGF, and shows the locations of the two geothermal
wells, Az-26 and Az-49, selected for this study. The choice of
the wells was based on their locations (representing different
parts of the geothermal system) and availability of drilled rock
cuttings. Both the selected geothermal wells selected, Az-26
and Az-49, are producers (Arellano 2004).
Drilling activity at LAGF began in 1976; currently there are
75 drilled wells at depths ranging between 700 and 3,500 m. At
present, the installed electricity capacity of this geothermal
system is 188 MW. In general, LAGF may be divided into
two zones. The south zone presents the highest temperatures
and accounts for a larger proportion of production of the field.
The original thermodynamic states of the two zones are differ-
ent. The north zone represents the compressed liquid region and
the south zone is in the vapor dominated, liquid dominated and
compressed liquid region depending on depth. Presently, there
are 43 producing wells, supplying steam to the power units
(Torres-Rodríguez et al. 2005). The geothermal well (Az-26)
that we studied is from the south zone whereas the well Az-49 is
from the north zone.
The geothermal field is characterized by extensive Neogene
volcanic rocks, dominated by andesite and basalt, which un-
conformably overlie metamorphic and sedimentary rocks of

Late Mesozoic to Oligocene age. The pre-volcanic basement
consists of gently folded shales, sandstones, and conglomer-
ates. The oldest volcanic activity ∼18 Ma ago gave rise to
andesitic flows. Approximately 2,700-m-thick interstratified
lava flows and pyroclastic rocks (18 to 1 Ma age) of andesitic
to basaltic composition form the local basement. The massive
andesitic unit constitutes the main aquifer in which geothermal
fluids flow principally through fractures. After the last andesitic
lava eruption, there was silicic volcanism, giving rise to a
sequence of rhyodacite, rhyolite, and dacite, ranging in age
between 1.0 and 0.15 Ma and having a thickness of up to
1,000 m (Dobson and Mahood 1985).
The BHT of the drilled wells of LAGF varies between 248
and 352 °C in general and those of wells, Az-26 and Az-49,
are 278 and 298 °C, respectively (González-Partida et al.
2005). Chemical reactions between the rocks and geothermal
fluids of the wells are close to equilibrium. Hydrothermal
alteration has affected most rocks in this geothermal field.
Extensive studies have been carried out on reservoir temper-
ature and the effects of hydrothermal alteration on the chem-
ical composition and mineralogy of the rocks recovered from
the wells of this geothermal system (e.g., Cathelineau et al.
1985; Verma et al. 1989; Torres-Alvarado 2002; Pandarinath
et al. 2006; Pandarinath 2011).
Materials and methods
Drilled core cuttings were selected from different depth in-
tervals of the two geothermal wells, Az-26 (n=55; maximum
depth=1,200 m) and Az-49 (n=120; maximum depth=2,360-
m). Standard thin sections of rock samples were prepared for
petrographic and mineralogical studies. Mineral contents were
estimated by comparison with standard charts of relative
percentage areas (for e.g., Shelley 1992). Similarly, hydrother-
mal minerals were identified under the microscope; the degree
of hydrothermal alteration is expressed as percentage. For
magnetic susceptibility studies, 31 and 61 rock samples from
Az-26 and Az-49, respectively, representing their entire
depths were selected.
Small pieces of rock cuttings were filled in non-magnetic,
plastic sample holders of 8-cm3 capacity. Low-frequency mag-
netic susceptibility (at 0.47 kHz, χlf) was measured using a
Bartington magnetic susceptibility meter (model MS2B) with a
dual-frequency sensor. After switching the instrument on, it was
allowed to stabilize for half an hour. The sensor was calibrated
using the standard (1 % Fe3O4) provided by the manufacturer.
The average of two “air” measurements made before and after
each sample measurement was deducted from the sample value,
which was measured in the 0.1 range. Mass-specific magnetic
susceptibility (χlf, in units of 10−8 m3 kg−1) was calculated from
the data obtained with the MS2B meter. The diamagnetic effect
of the plastic sample holder is negligible.
Arab J Geosci
Results
Lithology
The volcanic rocks in Az-26 are rhyolite (up to 20 m),
followed by rhyodacite (40–180 m), rhyolite (200–280 m),
rhyodacite (300–360 m), rhyolite (380–500 m), andesite
(520–600 m), augitic andesite (620–700 m), basaltic andesite
(720–800 m), and andesite (820–1,200 m depth; Fig. 2).
In Az-49, the volcanic rocks are pumice tuff (up to 20 m),
followed by basalt (20–40 m), andesite (120–240 m), basal-
tic andesite (260–300 m), andesite (320–620 m; except a thin
layer of basaltic andesite at 520 m), basaltic andesite (640–
720 m), and andesite (740–2,494 m; but for thin layers of
basaltic andesite at 740, 1,060–1,080, 1,180, 1,300, 1,360,
1,580, 1,840–1,860 m, and thin layers of augitic andesite at
1,420, 1,460–1,480, 1,540, 1,880, and 2,020 m depths).
Petrography
Petrographic studies indicate that the degree of hydrothermal
alteration is up to 80 % in Az-26 (Fig. 2). Zone-wise details
of hydrothermal alteration are: 0–18 % (<300 m), 9–34 %
(320–700 m), and 44–80 % (720–1,200 m). The degree of
hydrothermal alteration is higher in Az-49, going up to 90 %.
The alteration degree varies from 3–55 % in the top 740 m to
17–90 % in deeper levels (760–2,494 m).
Opaque mineral concentration in Az-26 rocks ranges from
<10 % (<50 m depth) through 2–25 % (500–1,000 m) to 5–
40 % (1,020–1,200 m). In general, haematite, ilmenite, and
pyrite are the main opaque minerals. Ilmenite constitutes the
bulk of opaque minerals (60–90 %) in the 560–660-m depth
interval. Small quantities of other opaque minerals like rutile
and chalcopyrite are also present at some depths.
In Az-49, the opaque mineral concentration is 10–35 %
(<340 m), 2–10 % (360–500 m), 10–30 % (520–760 m), and
2–25 % (780–2,494 m; Fig. 4). Ilmenite, haematite, rutile,
pyrite, and chalcopyrite are the opaque minerals present.
The concentration of ferromagnesian minerals (mainly
biotite, olivine, augite, and hypersthene) in rocks of Az-26
is 2–14 % in the top 180 m, but absent from 200 to 540 m. It
is high (8–20 %) in the 560–700-m depth range. Below
700 m depth, ferromagnesian minerals are almost absent
but for occasional occurrences (0–5 %; Fig. 2). In Az-49,
the concentration of ferromagnesian minerals (mainly of
biotite, olivine, augite, and hypersthene) is 2–15 % in the
top 560 m. Below this depth, they are absent. They occur
occasionally (0–5 %) at some depths (Fig. 4).
Magnetic susceptibility
Magnetic susceptibility in Az-26 varies between 13 and
1,132×10−8m3 kg−1 (Fig. 2). Zone-wise variations are: (1)
Arab J Geosci

Fig. 2 Variations of magnetic 0

susceptibility and mineral
contents with depth in the
geothermal well Az-26. The

Lithounit-1
200
dashed line marks the boundary
between the two litho units
(lithounit-1 and lithounit-2) and
the solid line the depth at which 400
sharp differences are
documented in magnetic

Depth (m)
susceptibility and mineral
600
contents in lithounit-2

Lithounit-2
800

1000

1200

0 200 0 600 0 50 0 10 20 0 20 40 0 20 40 0 10 20

(10 m kg )

silicates %
Hyd. Alt%

Pyrite%
Lithology

Hematite%
Mag. sus (lf)

Total opaque
Temp.

minerals %
-8 3 -1
(°C)

Fe-Mg
--Individual opaque--
minerals%

Rhyolite Rhyodacite Andesite Augitic-andesite Basaltic-andesite

low values (13 to 226×10−8m3 kg−1) from the surface to
460 m depth, (2) high values (145 to 1,132×10−8m3 kg−1)
from 560 to 680 m depth, and (3) low values again (22 to
194×10−8m3 kg−1) from 680 m to the well-bottom. In Az-49,
χlf varies between 13 and 1,517×10−8m3 kg−1(Fig. 4). Zone-
wise variations of χlf are: (1) high values (236 to
1,158×10−8m3 kg−1) up to 340 m depth, (3) moderate values
(30 to 706×10−8m3 kg−1) from 380 to 740 m, and (3) low
values (12 to 286×10−8m3 kg−1) from 780 to 2,360 m.
Discussion
In this section, the variations of χlf in the geothermal wells
Az-26 and Az-49 in relation to lithology, degree of hydro-
thermal alteration, and ferromagnesian and opaque mineral
contents are discussed and the possible reasons for the co-
and anti-variations are also presented.
Geothermal well Az-26
The lithology of Az-26 may broadly be categorized into two
litho units: (1) rhyolite and dacite (<500 m) and (2) andesite
with layers of augitic andesite and basaltic andesite (>500 m).
The two litho units are demarcated by a dashed line in Fig. 2.
As the litho units considerably differ in their mineralogy and
chemistry, it is likely that lithology has some influence on the
content of minerals and mineral-related parameters. Therefore,
the depth-wise changes in magnetic susceptibility and petro-
graphic data and their inter-dependence for the two litho units
are discussed separately.
Magnetic susceptibility (χlf) values within lithounit-1
(corresponding to rhyolites and rhyodacites) vary between
13 and 226×10−8m3 kg−1. There is a gradual decrease from
the top (49–226×10−8m3 kg−1; surface to 160 m depth) to the
bottom in this litho unit (13–114×10−8m3 kg−1; 200–460 m
depth). At the beginning of lithounit-2 (corresponding to
andesites) there is a sharp increase in χlf values at 560 m
depth (χlf =916×10−8m3 kg−1; t=between 64 and 88 °C).
The high values continue from 560 to 680 m depth. Further
deep, though the rocks are of a similar type (andesites;
lithounit-2), χlf values decrease sharply below 720 m
(χlf =28×10−8m3 kg−1; t=∼114 °C) and the low values pre-
vail up to the bottom of the well.
These contrasting χlf values of lithounit-1 and lithounit-2
may be explained by lithological differences. Lithounit-1 has
relatively low χlf values because it is composed of acidic
rhyolite and rhyodacite, which are characteristic of low concen-
trations of magnetic minerals. Lithounit-2, on the other hand
has high χlf values because it is composed of andesite, which
contains comparatively high contents of both ferromagnesian
minerals (mainly biotite, olivine, augite, and hypersthene) and
 Arab J Geosci

magnetic minerals (mainly magnetite, and ilmenite). Hunt et al.
(1995) compiled the magnetic data of different rocks and
materials and reported the magnetic susceptibility of rhyolites
as between 10 and 1,500×10−8m3 kg−1 and that of andesites as
6,500×10−8m3 kg−1. As the “within-litho unit” lithology is
almost the same for lithounit-1 and lithounit-2, lithological
control of mineralogical parameters should be negligible.
As mentioned earlier, in lithounit-1 (rhyolite and rhyodacite),
there is a gradual decrease in χlf from the top (49–
226×10−8m3 kg−1 for <160 m depth) to the bottom of this litho
unit (13–114×10−8m3 kg−1; 200–460 m depth). In contrast, the
grade of hydrothermal alteration, and the total opaque mineral
and pyrite contents register a gradual increase. The ferromagne-
sian mineral content, which is high (3 to 14 %) in the top 180 m
decreases to zero further down in this litho unit (Fig. 2). The
opaque mineral content increases gradually from the surface to
the bottom of this litho unit. Among the total opaque minerals, no
significant change is documented in the hematite content but the
pyrite content increases in the deeper parts of this litho unit. This
indicates that the gradual decrease in χlf values of rocks from the
surface to the bottom of lithounit-1 may be the result of hydro-
thermal alteration of primary magnetic minerals with high χlf
values (Fe–Mg silicate minerals like biotite, olivine, augite, and
hypersthene) to hydrothermal minerals with low χlf values (py-
rite and chlorite). In situ temperature (t) measured during the
perforation of Az-26 is nearly the same in the top 400 m (36°–
38 °C; corresponding to the lithounit-1), but sharply increases to
64 °C at 500 m depth (beginning of lithounit-2) and increases
further, reaching a value of 220 °C at the bottom of the well. As
the reservoir temperature increases and the interaction of hydro-
thermal fluids with reservoir rocks intensifies with depth, the
grade of hydrothermal alteration in these rocks increased and
produced higher contents of hydrothermal/secondary minerals
with depth. Such an increase in hydrothermal alteration with
depth is a common phenomenon in other geothermal systems
as well (e.g., Tecuamburro geothermal systems, Goff et al. 1992;
Los Humeros, Mexico, López et al. 2010). In general, the
products of hydrothermal alteration are silicates, zeolites, clays,
carbonates, sulfides, and Fe–Mn oxides. Except some of the Fe–
Mn oxides which are ferromagnetic, the rest are all paramagnetic
or diamagnetic. Hence, hydrothermal alteration decreases the χlf
of hydrothermally altered rocks.
As lithounit-2 (andesite) is approached, there is a sharp
increase in χlf at 560 m depth (χlf=916×10−8m3 kg−1;

Fig. 3 X–Y plots showing the 80 20 30

Hydrothermal alteration (%)

Fe-Mg silicate minerals (%)

Total opaque minerals (%)

relation between magnetic (a) r = -0.71 (b) r = 0.83 (c) r = 0.08
25
susceptibility, grade of 60 15
hydrothermal alteration and 20
mineral contents in lithounit-2 40 10 15
(below 500 m depth) of the
10
geothermal well Az-26. 20 5
Correlation coefficients (r) are 5
at 0.01 significant levels. The 0 0 0
correlation coefficients marked 0 400 800 1200 0 400 800 1200 0 400 800 1200
with bold and italics are
Mag. Sus (10-8m3kg-1) Mag. Sus (10-8m3kg-1) Mag. Sus (10-8m3kg-1)
statistically significant

25 20 25
Fe-Mg silicate minerals (%)

(d) r= -0.20 (e) r = -0.26 (f) r = -0.84

20 20
15
Hematite (%)

Pyrite (%)

15 15
10
10 10
5
5 5

0 0 0
0 400 800 1200 0 400 800 1200 0 20 40 60 80 100
Mag. Sus (10-8m3kg-1) Mag. Sus (10-8m3kg-1) Hydrothermal alteration (%)

30 25 20
Total Opaque mineral (%)

(g) r = -0.24 (h) r = 0.02 (i) r = 0.29

25 20
15
Hematite (%)

20
Pyrite (%)

15
15 10
10
10
5
5 5

0 0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 20 40 60 80 20 40 60 80
Hydrothermal alteration(%) Hydrothermal alteration (%) Hydrothermal alteration (%)
Arab J Geosci

t=64°–88 °C). As discussed above, high values of χlf are
expected for lithounit-2 (andesite) compared to lithounit-1
(rhyolite and rhyodacite) due to lithological differences. The
high χlf values continue up to 680 m depth. However, the
value drastically drops at 720 m depth (χlf =28×10−8m3 kg−1;
t=114 °C) in spite of the constant lithology of lithounit-2. The
low χlf values continue till the bottom of the well.
Correspondingly, the grade of hydrothermal alteration also
drastically increases at 720 m depth and continues to be high
till the bottom of the well. It is exactly below 720 m depth that
χlf values are profoundly low. Similarly, the ferromagnesian
(mainly biotite, olivine, augite, and hypersthene) and total
opaque mineral contents in lithounit-2 sharply decrease
whereas hematite and pyrite contents relatively increase below
this depth (720 m; Fig. 2). These trends suggest the hydro-
thermal alteration of primary magnetic minerals of high χlf
values (Fe–Mg silicates and some opaque minerals) to hydro-
thermal minerals of low χlf values (hematite, pyrite, and clay
minerals like chlorite and illite). Though similar trends of all
these parameters are discernible in both the litho units
(lithounit-1and lithounit-2) of the well, they are less dramatic
in lithounit-1.
The point to be underscored is that there are significant
variations in the various parameters within lithounit-2 (and
in a less impressive manner in lithounit-1), which cannot be
explained as due to lithological control but the process of
hydrothermal alteration has to be invoked.
The inference may be even more clearly seen in the bi-
plots of the parameters studied (Fig. 3) for lithounit-2. The
Fe–Mg mineral % is positively correlated with χlf r=0.83;
Fig. 3b), indicating that Fe–Mg minerals are the chief con-
tributors to magnetic susceptibility. There is a negative cor-
relation between χlf and degree of hydrothermal alteration
(r=−0.71; Fig. 3a), showing that hydrothermal alteration
decreases χlf. In fact, most of the intensely altered (>50 %)
samples show extremely low χlf values. Only a few of the
less altered (<30 %) ones have high χlf. The negative corre-
lation between Fe–Mg mineral % and grade of hydrothermal
alteration (r=−0.84; Fig. 3f) suggests that Fe–Mg minerals
get altered as the grade of hydrothermal alteration increases.
The degree of hydrothermal alteration exhibits a weak pos-
itive correlation with pyrite % (r=0.29) and no correlation
with haematite % (Fig. 3h, i), suggesting that pyrite and
haematite, both magnetically weak, are produced as a result
of hydrothermal alteration.
Overall there is an increase in the grade of hydrothermal
alteration from the surface to the bottom of the well; corre-
spondingly, there are alteration-related changes in magnetic

Fig. 4 Variations in magnetic 0

susceptibility and mineral
contents with depth in the
geothermal well Az-49. The
solid line demarcates the two
500
zones with sharp differences in
magnetic susceptibility and
mineral contents

1000
Depth (m)

1500

2000

2500

0 150 0 800 0 50 0 8 16 0 20 0 10 0 20 0 9 0 2 4
Hematite%

Ilmenite%
silicates %

Rutile%
(10-8m3kg-1)

Pyrite%
Lithology

Total opaque
Hyd. Alt%
Temp

Mag. Sus (lf)

(°C)

Fe-Mg

Min (%)

------ Individual opaque min. % -----

Pumice Tuff Basalts Andesites Basaltic andesite Augitic andesite

 Arab J Geosci

minerals and χlf. As the lithology of the entire well is not
constant, the trends of lithology-controlled parameters (min-
erals and χlf) do not indicate any particular trend when the
entire depth of the well is considered. However, when
lithounit-1 and lithounit-2 are considered separately, one
may discern significant trends that resulted from hydrother-
mal alteration. This clearly shows the lithological control of
the distribution of minerals and mineral-related parameters.
Geothermal well Az-49
This well consists almost entirely of andesite (with occasion-
al thin layers of basaltic andesite and augitic andesite at a few
depths) except pumice tuff in the top 20 m and basalt from 20
to 40 m depth. As the lithology is nearly uniform, the depth-
wise variations of parameters studied are free of any litho-
logical control.
High χlf values (236 to 1,158×10−8m3 kg−1) at the top
(<340 m; Fig. 4) decrease to moderate levels (30 to
706×10−8m3 kg−1) at 380–740 m depth and to low values
(12 to 286×10−8m3 kg−1) at 780–2,360 m depth. Noteworthy
is the sharp decrease in χlf at 780 m depth (shown by a thick
line). This depth appears to be crucial as there are sharp
changes in the other parameters also. There is a sharp in-
crease in borehole temperature (t; measured during perfora-
tion) at this depth. It was 48 °C at the first measured depth of
400 m and it increased sharply to 86 °C at 600 m, 142 °C at
1,000 m and 160 °C at 1,200 m depth. This shows that there
is interaction of hot hydrothermal fluids with rocks at
>780 m depth. As in geothermal well Az-26, χlf values
register a sharp decrease in this well too at a critical depth
of 780 m where the following characteristics are also
recorded: (a) a sharp increase in reservoir temperature (t),
this testifies the interaction of hydrothermal fluids with rocks
at this depth; (b) appreciable increase in the degree of hy-
drothermal alteration due to increase in reservoir tempera-
ture; (c) a sharp decrease in Fe–Mg silicate mineral % (main-
ly biotite, olivine, augite, and hypersthene), which may be
ascribed to the hydrothermal alteration of ferromagnesian
minerals; (d) a drastic decrease in the content of ilmenite
and a sharp increase in pyrite content and, to a lesser extent,
haematite content. Reasons for these changes are as follows:
On interacting with sulfur, ilmenite changes to pyrite+rutile
(Force 1991). Ilmenite may also be thermally altered to

Fig. 5 X–Y plots showing the 100 16 40

Fe-Mg silicate minerals (%)
Hydrothermal alteration (%)

Total opaque minerals (%)

relation between magnetic (a) r = -0.44 (b) r = 0.48 (c) r = 0.42
susceptibility, grade of 80
12 30
hydrothermal alteration and
60
mineral contents in the 8 20
geothermal well Az-49. 40
Correlation coefficients (r) are 4 10
at 0.01 significant levels. The 20
correlation coefficients marked
0 0 0
with bold and italics are 0 400 800 1200 0 400 800 1200 0 400 800 1200
statistically significant
Mag. Sus (10-8m3kg-1) Mag. Sus (10-8m3kg-1) Mag. Sus (10-8m3kg-1)

20 30 16
Fe-Mg silicate minerals (%)

(d) r = -0.08 (e) r = 0.69 (f) r = -0.44

16
12
Hematite (%)

20
Ilmenite (%)

12
8
8
10
4
4

0 0 0
0 400 800 1200 0 400 800 1200 0 20 40 60 80 100
Mag. Sus (10-8m3kg-1) Mag. Sus (10-8m3kg-1) Hydrothermal alteration (%)

40 20 30
Total opaque minerals (%)

(g) r = -0.33 (h) r = 0.08 (i) r = -0.46

30 15
Hematite (%)

Ilmenite (%)

20
20 10
10
10 5

0 0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Hydrothermal alteration (%) Hydrothermal alteration (%) Hydrothermal alteration (%)
Arab J Geosci
haematite (Brownlee et al. 2010). Being paramagnetic, pyrite
has a low χlf (1 to 100×10−8m3 kg−1; Hunt et al. 1995)
whereas haematite is antiferromagnetic and has a χlf of only
10 to 76×10−8m3 kg−1 Hunt et al. (1995); (e) low content of
rutile, which is intriguing because hydrothermal alteration of
ilmenite produces rutile, as explained in (d) above. Perhaps
there is some mechanism that is responsible for decreasing
content of rutile in this geothermal well, although the present
study did not reveal the exact mechanism responsible for it;
and (f) the total opaque mineral content does not indicate any
significant trend probably because while the content of some
individual opaque mineral content increases, that of another
decreases (Fig. 4).
The x–y plots of the parameters studied (Fig. 5) also
support the inferences made above. Magnetic susceptibility
is negatively correlated with the degree of hydrothermal
alteration (r=−0.44; Fig. 5a), with most of the intensely
altered samples exhibiting extremely low χlf values. It is
generally positively correlated with Fe–Mg silicate mineral
content (r=0.48; Fig. 5b), suggesting the contribution of
these minerals to χlf. It is positively correlated with ilmenite
content too (r=0.69; Fig. 5e), demonstrating the important
contribution made by this mineral to χlf. Overall, these plots
support the interpretation that ilmenite and Fe–Mg minerals
(with high χlf) have been hydrothermally altered to pyrite,
haematite, etc. (with low χlf). This is also supported by the
general positive correlation, though statistically not very
significant, between the degree of hydrothermal alteration
and haematite content (Fig. 5h). There is a negative correla-
tion between the degree of hydrothermal alteration and the
total opaque mineral % (r=−0.33; Fig. 5g). This is because
with hydrothermal alteration, the content of a primary
opaque mineral decreases whereas that of a hydrothermally
altered mineral increases.
Concluding remarks
The present study of magnetic susceptibility (χlf) and pe-
trography of rock samples from two wells (Az-26 and Az-
49) from the Los Azufres Geothermal System, Mexico has
enabled to draw the following conclusions:
1. A decrease in χlf and in Fe–Mg silicate and ilmenite
contents (characterized by high χlf values) and a corre-
sponding increase in the degree of hydrothermal alter-
ation and hematite and pyrite contents (characterized by
low χlf values) suggest hydrothermal alteration of ilmen-
ite and Fe–Mg silicates to pyrite, haematite, and other
alteration products. There is no lithological control on
the studied parameters.
2. Hence, low χlf in a homogenous litho unit that is typified
by high χlf may be the result of hydrothermal alteration.
If this is so, magnetic susceptibility may be a useful
parameter during the initial stages of geothermal explo-
ration in identifying hydrothermally altered rocks both at
the surface and from drilled holes in geothermal systems.
3. However, in order to lend support to this proposition,
more such studies are necessary for additional geother-
mal systems, for more wells with closer sampling in-
tervals and involving fresh rocks at the surface and
hydrothermally altered rocks from the subsurface.
Acknowledgments Magnetic susceptibility was measured using instru-
ments procured with grants from the Ministry of Earth Sciences, Govern-
ment of India, to RS. We thank K Sandeep and B G Harshavardhana, for
help in magnetic measurements and discussions. We express our sincere
thanks to the reviewers for the valuable comments which were helpful in
revising the earlier version of the manuscript.
References
Arellano VM (2004) Respuesta a la explotación (1982–2003) del
yacimiento geotérmico de Los Azufres, Mich. (México), Parte I:
Zona Norte: Geotermia 17:10–20
Bertani R (2005) World geothermal power generation in the period
2002–2005. Geothermics 34:651–690
Browne PRL (1970) Hydrothermal alteration as an aid in investigating
geothermal fields. Geothermics Spec Issue 2:564–570
Browne PRL (1984) Lectures on Geothermal Geology and Petrology:
National Energy Authority of Iceland & United Nations
University—Geothermal Training Programme, Iceland, 93 p
Brownlee SJ, Feinberg JM, Harrison RJ, Kasama T, Scott GR, Renne
PR (2010) Thermal modification of hematite-ilmenite inter-
growths in the Ecstall Pluton, British Columbia, Canada. Am
Mineral 95:153–160
Cathelineau M, Oliver R, Garfias A, Nieva O (1985) Mineralogy and
distribution of hydrothermal mineral zones in the Los Azufres
(Mexico) geothermal field. Geothermics 14:49–57
de Jong E, Nestor PA, Pennock DJ (1998) The use of magnetic suscep-
tibility to measure long-term soil redistribution. Catena 32(1):23–35
Dobson PF, Mahood GA (1985) Volcanic stratigraphy of the Los Azufres
geothermal area, Mexico. J Volcanol Geoth Res 25:273–287
Force ER (1991) Geology of titanium-mineral deposits. Geol Soc Am-Sci 112
Goff SJ, Goff F, Janik C (1992) Tecuamburro volanco, Guatemala:
exploration geothermal gradient drilling and results. Geothermics
21(4):483–502
González-Partida E, Carrillo-Chávez A, Levresse G, Tello-Hinojosa E,
Venegas-Salgado S, Ramírez-ilva G, Pal-Verma M, Tritlla J,
Camprubí A (2005) Hydro-geochemical and isotopic fluid evolu-
tion of the Los Azufres geothermal field, Central Mexico. Appl
Geochem 20:23–39
Gutierrez NA, Aumento F (1982) The Los Azufres, Michoacán,
Mexico, geothermal field. J Hydrol 56:137–162
Hochstein MP, Soengkono S (1997) Magnetic anomalies associated
with high temperatures in the Taupo Volcanic Zone (New
Zealand). Geothermics 26(1):1–24
Hunt PC, Moskowitz BM, Banerjee SK (1995) Magnetic properties of rocks
and minerals. In: Rock physics and phase relations, a handbook of
physical constants. Am Geophys Union (AGU) Ref Shelf 3:189–204
Lapointe P, Morris WA, Harding KL (1986) Interpretation of magnetic
susceptibility: a new approach to geophysical evaluation of the
degree of rock alteration. Can J Earth Sci 23(3):393–401

López SR, Silva GR, Salgado EJ, Cecília LP (2010) Results of
geological-geophysical drilling of the Well H-43 the Geothermal
Field in Humeros, Pue. Mexico. Proceedings World Geothermal
Congress, Bali, Indonesia, 11p
Pandarinath K (2011) Solute geothermometry of springs and wells of
the Los Azufres and Las Tres Vírgenes geothermal fields, Mexico.
Int Geol Rev 53(9):1032–1058
Pandarinath K, Torres-Alvarado IS, Pushparani DE, Verma SP (2006)
X-Ray diffraction analysis of hydrothermal minerals from the Los
Azufres Geothermal System, Mexico. Int Geol Rev 48(2):174–190
Patrier P, Papapaanagoiotum P, Beaufort D, Traineau H, Bril H, Rojas J
(1996) Role of permeability versus temperature in the distribution of
the fine (<2 μm) clay fraction in the Chipilapa geothermal system
(El Salvador, Central America). J Volcanol Geoth Res 72:101–120
Reyes AG (1990) Petrology of Philippine geothermal systems and the
application of alteration mineralogy to their assessment. J Volcanol
Geoth Res 43:279–309
Sandeep K, Shankar R, Krishnaswamy J (2010) Assessment of
suspended particulate pollution in the Bhadra River Catchment,
Southern India: an environmental magnetic approach. Environmen
Earth Sci 62:625–637
Schmidt A, Yarnold R, Hill M, Ashmore M (2005) Magnetic suscepti-
bility as proxy for heavy metal pollution: a site study. J Geochem
Explor 85(3):109–117
Shankar R, Pandarinath K (2008) Mineral magnetic signature of the
early Holocene intense monsoon conditions recorded in sediments
from the Southwestern Indian continental margin. Jour Geol Soc
India 71(5):670–682
Shankar R, Thompson R, Prakash TN (1996) Estimation of heavy and
opaque mineral contents of beach and offshore placers using rock
magnetic techniques. Geo-Mar Lett 16:313–318
Shankar R, Prabhu CN, Warrier AK, Vijay Kumar GT, Sekar B (2006)
A multi-decadal rock magnetic record of Indian monsoon during
the past 3,700 years from a tropical Indian tank. Jour Geol Soc
India 68:447–459
Shelley D (1992) Igneous and metamorphic rocks under the micro-
scope: classification, textures, microstructures and mineral pre-
ferred orientation. Springer, New York, 468 pp
Arab J Geosci
Soengkono S (2001) Interpretation of magnetic anomalies over the
Waimangu geothermal area, Taupo Volcanic Zone, New Zealand.
Geothermics 30(4):334–459
Soengkono S, Hochstein MP (1995) Application of magnetic method to
assess the extent of high temperature geothermal reservoirs.
Proceedings, 20th Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering,
Stanford University. pp 71–78
Thompson R, Oldfield F (1986) Environmental magnetism. Allen &
Unwin, London, 227p
Torres-Alvarado IS (2002) Chemical equilibrium in hydrothermal sys-
tems: the case of Los Azufres geothermal field, Mexico. Int Geol
Rev 44:639–652
Torres-Rodríguez MA, Mendoza-Covarrubias A, Medina-Martínez M
(2005) An update of the Los Azufres Geothermal field, after 21
years of exploitation. Proceedings World Geothermal Congress
2005, Antalya, Turkey:1–8
Vázquez-Castro G, Ortega-Guerrero B, Rodríguez A, Caballero M,
Lozano-García S (2008) Mineralogía magnética como indicador
de sequía en los sedimentos lacustres de los últimos ca. 2,600 años
de Santa María del Oro, occidente de México. Rev Mex Cien Geol
25(1):21–38
Verma SP (1985) On the magma chamber characteristics as inferred
from surface geology and geochemistry: examples from Mexican
geothermal areas. Phys Earth Plan Int 41:207–214
Verma MP, Nieva D, Quijano L, Santoyo E, Barragán RM, Portugal E
(1989) A hydrothermal model of Los Azufres geothermal field. In:
Miles DL (ed) Proceedings of water-rock interaction. WRI-6.
Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 723–726
Verma SP, Torres-Alvarado IS, Satir M, Dobson P (2005) Hydrothermal
alteration effects in geochemistry and Sr, Nd, Pb, and O isotopes of
magmas from the Los Azufres geothermal field (Mexico): a sta-
tistical approach. Geochem J 39:141–163
Walden J, Oldfield F, Smith J (1999) Environmental magnetism: a
practical guide. Technical Guide, no. 6. Quaternary Research
Association, London, 243p
Warrier AK, Shankar R (2009) Geochemical evidence for the use of
magnetic susceptibility as a paleorainfall proxy in the tropics.
Chem Geol 265(3–4):553–562