Actually, I never said ultramafic rocks are commonly associated with lithium — that’s just you twisting the argument to suit your own lack of understanding.
What I said (and what any geologist worth their salt knows) is that in certain regional settings — especially in structurally complex terrains like the Yilgarn Craton — lithium-bearing pegmatites can intrude or lie adjacent to ultramafic sequences. That’s not controversial. It’s textbook.
Take Greenbushes as a prime example — one of the world’s richest lithium deposits. It’s hosted in a spodumene-bearing pegmatite that intrudes a metamorphosed greenstone belt containing both mafic and ultramafic units. This is standard geological context in Western Australia — pegmatites cutting through greenstones.
USGS and GSWA mapping both support this. USGS Open File Report 2010–1090 clearly states lithium mineralisation is typically associated with evolved granitic rocks and pegmatites. But in WA, those pegmatites often intrude greenstone belts — which, again, include ultramafics.
So no — the ultramafic rocks aren’t the host. But if you think their presence automatically rules out lithium potential, then you clearly haven’t done your homework on how pegmatitic systems actually work.
Might be time to brush up before calling others out.
(20min delay)