Chapter 29: Future of 3D Geological Mapping and Modelling at Geological Survey Organizations Richard C. Berg 1 , Holger Kessler 2 , Kelsey E. MacCormack 3 , Hazen A.J. Russell 4 , and L. Harvey Thorleifson 5 1 2 3 4 5 Illinois State Geological Survey, Prairie Research Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 615 East Peabody Drive, Champaign, IL 61820, USA; rberg@illinois.edu British Geological Survey, Environmental Science Centre, Nicker Hill, Keyworth, Nottingham, NG12 5GG, UK; hke@bgs.ac.uk Alberta Energy Regulator / Alberta Geological Survey, 4999 98th Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada; kelsey.maccormack@aer.ca Geological Survey of Canada, 601 Booth St., Ottawa, ON K1A 7E8, Canada; hazen.russell@canada.ca Minnesota Geological Survey, 2609 West Territorial Road, St Paul, MN 55114-1009 USA; thorleif@umn.edu Berg, R.C., Kessler, H., MacCormack, K.E., Russell, H.A.J., and Thorleifson, L.H. 2019. Future of 3D geological mapping and modelling at geological survey organizations; Chapter 29 in 2019 Synopsis of Current Three-Dimensional Geological Mapping and Modelling in Geological Survey Organizations, K.E. MacCormack, R.C. Berg, H. Kessler, H.A.J. Russell, and L.H. Thorleifson (ed.), Alberta Energy Regulator / Alberta Geological Survey, AER/AGS Special Report 112, p. 302–305. Introduction The “Next Steps” section contained within each of the 22 geological sur- vey organization (GSO) submissions provided useful insights on directions and significant impacts of 3D geolog- ical modelling both in the short and long term. Highlighted is the positive global impact of these modelling pro- jects and initiatives at multiple scales, the result of which will continue to prove essential for addressing a myr- iad of societal and research issues re- lated to water and mineral resources, natural hazards and risk mitigation, the environment, and infrastructure development. Major emphasis of fu- ture work include (1) expanding the use and diversity of 3D geomodelling activities within GSOs, (2) improving data management strategies, (3) better understanding and improving work force and work flow issues, and (4) enhancing the dissemination of 3D models and associated data to users and stakeholders. Expansion of 3D Geomodelling Scales and Applications An overarching theme of future plans by the GSOs emphasizes expansion of 3D geomodelling activities within their jurisdictions, and this includes: 1) Infilling coverage gaps (enhancing regional coverage). 2) Shifting 3D geomodelling empha- ses from small scale to large scale and vice versa. 3) Flexibility and adaptability to in- corporate models and geological interpretations (point data, maps, grids) created by external organi- zations. 4) Leveraging a variety of geomo- delling methods to include specific geologic units and structural fea- tures of interest. 5) Geomodelling to support multi- disciplinary themes and scientific investigations. 6) Ensuring that models are adaptable and can include very complex and detailed geomodels that are re- quired for assessing the subsurface of urban areas. 7) Interoperability for data descrip- tion and exchange, as well as the ability to access models online within a sharable structure. All of the above are dependent on the various geomodelling capabilities of the GSOs, levels of known subsurface information, and needs of constituents and stakeholders. Constituent and stakeholder needs will drive the prior- itization for enhancing geological characterization in areas of strategic importance (e.g., urban regions, groundwater and mineral resource ar- eas, transportation corridors, recre- ation areas, environmentally sensitive regions, as well as for attracting external investment opportunities). The 3D modelling priorities for the 22 jurisdictions, and whether they are transitioning to larger scaled or smaller scaled 3D models, vary de- pending on where and how they be- gan their modelling activities. Some jurisdictions started building models at a small (nation, state, or provincial) scale and are now in the process of infilling and transitioning to more de- tailed models of specific counties or regions, while others started by mod- elling counties and regions and are now working to integrate these local- ized models into large jurisdiction- wide models. The advantage to initi- ating geomodelling activities with large jurisdiction-wide models is that it provides a framework and context for construction of the more detailed large-scale models. The advantage of developing numerous local-scale geomodels is that it allows modelling teams to focus their efforts on devel- oping 3D models in high-priority re- gions more quickly. Many organiza- AER/AGS Special Report 112 • 302