Abstract Native hydrogen and helium have been considered important resources in assisting the energy transition. Hydrogen and helium seeps have been reported worldwide, which may indicate large reserves within the subsurface. However, generation of hydrogen and helium is complex; poorly understood and constrained for both generation processes and migration. One source of native hydrogen is ultramafic rocks, which have experienced serpentinization together with water radiolysis. In contrast, helium generation occurs as the result of the radioactive decay of uranium and thorium present within radiogenically enriched basement. An exploration tool, dedicated to identifying areas with the geological settings and conditions favourable for native hydrogen and helium generation, has been developed and tested. Several databases have been created and integrated as part of this study (geological and geochemical generation models) to support and focus the search for both hydrogen and helium. Machine learning algorithms which extract value from geospatial data types for detecting various accumulations have been implemented. The first machine learning results demonstrate the significant value in integrating data and machine learning for high grading areas more conducive to accumulating hydrogen and helium.

Abstract Recent developments in laser-ablation Lu–Hf dating have opened a new opportunity to rapidly obtain apatite ages that are potentially more robust to isotopic resetting compared to traditional U–Pb dating. However, the robustness of the apatite Lu–Hf system has not been systematically examined. To address this knowledge gap, we conducted four case studies to determine the resistivity of the apatite Lu–Hf system compared to the zircon and apatite U–Pb system. In all cases, the apatite U–Pb system records a secondary (metamorphic or metasomatic) overprint. The apatite Lu–Hf system, however, preserves primary crystallization ages in unfoliated granitoids at temperatures of at least c. 660°C. Above c. 730°C, the Lu–Hf system records isotopic resetting by volume diffusion. Hence, in our observations for apatites of ‘typical’ grain sizes in granitoids (c. 0.01–0.03 mm 2), the closure temperature of the Lu–Hf system is between c. 660 and c. 730°C, consistent with theoretical calculations. In foliated granites, the Lu–Hf system records the timing of recrystallization, while the apatite U–Pb system tends to record younger cooling ages. We also present apatite Lu–Hf dates for lower crustal xenoliths erupted with young alkali basalts, demonstrating that the Lu–Hf system can retain a memory of primary ages when exposed to magmatic temperatures for a relatively short duration. Hence, the apatite Lu–Hf system is a new insightful addition to traditional zircon (or monazite) U–Pb dating, particularly when zircons/monazites are absent or difficult to interpret due to inheritance or when U and Pb isotopes display open system behaviour. The laser-ablation-based Lu–Hf method allows campaign-style studies to be conducted at a similar rate to U–Pb studies, opening new opportunities for magmatic and metamorphic studies.