Marble is considered a non-renewable resource because it is a type of rock that is formed over long periods of time through natural geological processes. Once it is mined and used, it cannot be easily replaced within a human lifetime.
I think it's not renewable because if we use all the limestone in the world we wont have any left to know how to make it on our own, but it may be renewable cause it is made from our planet Earth. +++ I'm not sure I can follow that first answer. It is not renewable. Although new limestone is being formed in various places around the world, the rate of deposition and lithification, let alone uplift, is far lower than that of our removal of existing rock.
No, pumice is a volcanic rock that is not renewable in the short term.
Potash is considered a nonrenewable resource because it is mined from underground mineral deposits that have accumulated over millions of years. Once these deposits are depleted, it can take a significant amount of time for them to be replenished naturally.
Soil is considered a renewable resource because it can be replenished through natural processes like the decomposition of organic matter and rock weathering. However, soil depletion due to factors like erosion and pollution can make the process of soil renewal slower than the rate at which it is being degraded in some cases.
a rock is renewable
They can not grow more
Yes and no. Rock is not a renewable resource from my view but, some may not agree: At high temperatures rock can be melted down into its liquid form then reshaped and renewed. Like metal, we can continualy reuse rock. Now, most people don't reuse rock but we just get more. The dificulty with answering this question as "Yes" is that rock doesn't continually appear. Of course, in some instances the could be a stray asteroid or occasional lava flow but that is certainly not enough rock for everyone. In essence, a little amount of rock is created or found or cooled on earth but not enough for the world. Rock can be reused if melted down or built in a new way but the structure it was first would have to be removed. Personally, I believe rock is not renewable because unlike the sun, which is renewable, it doesn't keep appearing. In a way you can reuse rock but unless in special circumstances rock doesn't mysteriously appear.
Yes, granite is a rock that has formed over millions of years. It is non-renewable.
A non renewable resource of the Philippines is rock phosphate.
Yes. Leave them alone and they'll make new salmon all by themselves.
A biogenic sedimentary rock, and a fossil fuel.
Marble is considered a non-renewable resource because it is a type of rock that is formed over long periods of time through natural geological processes. Once it is mined and used, it cannot be easily replaced within a human lifetime.
Non renewable. The term is applied to a sedimentary rock typically laid down in the Paleozoic and Mesozoic eras -- fossilised mud, if you like.
I think it's not renewable because if we use all the limestone in the world we wont have any left to know how to make it on our own, but it may be renewable cause it is made from our planet Earth. +++ I'm not sure I can follow that first answer. It is not renewable. Although new limestone is being formed in various places around the world, the rate of deposition and lithification, let alone uplift, is far lower than that of our removal of existing rock.
No, pumice is a volcanic rock that is not renewable in the short term.
No, geologists study rocks and rock formations. Some geological surveys are done to locate fossil fuels. Their job specifics do not directly impact renewable fuel sources.