Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Biotech

Pandora Says Laboratory-Made Diamonds Are Forever (bbc.com) 165

An anonymous reader quotes a report from the BBC: The world's biggest jeweller, Pandora, says it will no longer sell mined diamonds and will switch to exclusively laboratory-made diamonds. Concerns about the environment and working practices in the mining industry have led to growing demand for alternatives to mined diamonds. Pandora's chief executive, Alexander Lacik, told the BBC the change was part of a broader sustainability drive. He said the firm was pursuing it because "it's the right thing to do." They are also cheaper: "We can essentially create the same outcome as nature has created, but at a very, very different price." Mr Lacik explains they can be made for as little as "a third of what it is for something that we've dug up from the ground."

Pandora's lab-made diamonds are being made in Britain, and the UK is the first country where they will be sold. The new diamond jewelry will start at $350. [...] One problem with lab-made diamonds, though, is that they can take a lot of energy to produce. Between 50% and 60% of them come from China, where they are made in a process known as "high-pressure, high-temperature technology." The use of coal powered electricity is widespread. However in the United States, the biggest retail market for lab-grown diamonds, there is a greater focus on using renewable energy. The largest US producer, Diamond Foundry, says its process is "100% hydro-powered, meaning zero emissions." Both types are chemically and physically identical to mined diamonds.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Pandora Says Laboratory-Made Diamonds Are Forever

Comments Filter:
  • But (Score:4, Funny)

    by know-nothing cunt ( 6546228 ) on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @05:03PM (#61348062)

    are they still a girl's best friend?

  • Let's be clear (Score:4, Interesting)

    by franzrogar ( 3986783 ) on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @05:12PM (#61348100)

    Alrosa and De Beers are the two companies that sell diamonds.

    Both of them have HUGE stocks of diamonds OUT-OF-MARKET to keep the PRICES HIGH-AS-HELL.

    In truth, diamonds should be gifted with a cereal box if they released everything they have been hoarding.

    So, machine-made diamonds? Well, those are JUST THE SAME as the one excavated. Ditch those from those companies.

    Just like with Aspirine (a brand name) and acetylsalicylic acid (the real chemical deal).

    • Re:Let's be clear (Score:5, Insightful)

      by bloodhawk ( 813939 ) on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @05:15PM (#61348106)
      No, machine made diamonds are generally of higher quality. Was funny to listen to De Beers and co when the tech to do it was first coming up, "man made diamonds will never match the quality of natural diamonds", now it is "The flaws in natural diamonds can't be replicated in man-made diamonds which is what gives them their uniqueness and value"
      • Re:Let's be clear (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Registered Coward v2 ( 447531 ) on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @05:26PM (#61348126)
        DeBeers needs to keep its monopoly position to keep making money. Their marketing is designed to make people think anything but “real” diamonds are somehow less and thus an insult if you give them.
        • DeBeers needs to keep its monopoly position to keep making money.

          DeBeers hasn't had a diamond monopoly for almost 30 years [sawongam.com].

        • DeBeers needs to keep its monopoly position to keep making money. Their marketing is designed to make people think anything but “real” diamonds are somehow less and thus an insult if you give them.

          Well ... sure. But let's be honest; diamonds have been valued as much or more for being super expensive as for being pretty.

          We've had diamond substitutes that look the same or better (to anyone not wearing a loupe) for a long time. They have not, let's be honest, been accepted as being as nice gifts as diamonds.

          "Diamonds are a girl's best friend" because they are expensive. Will be interesting to see how this develops.

          • We've had diamond substitutes that look the same or better (to anyone not wearing a loupe) for a long time. They have not, let's be honest, been accepted as being as nice gifts as diamonds.

            Well, the substitutes are not quite the same as diamonds, and I do not need a loupe to spot the difference. But there are other stones that are arguable better. Clean clear bright is nice, but colored are stones are often nicer, once you actually sit down and consider different stones and different settings seriously.

            Once this is established and accepted, I expect colored artificial diamonds to dominate most of the market.

          • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward
            Diamonds used to be considered not a great gift at all, they were a lesser gem. The reason they are considered that now is the massive marketing that DeBeers performed early last century, prior to that diamonds were definitely not the most acceptable gift at all. So acceptance is purely a manufactured thing and as such it can and should be changed.
      • by GuB-42 ( 2483988 )

        No, machine made diamonds are generally of higher quality.

        Are you sure about that? Artificial diamonds are not perfect, the largest artificial diamonds are also smaller than the largest natural diamonds, by far. The imperfections may be different, and you can get higher quality / bigger artificial diamonds for the same price, but can they compete at the top end? It may happen eventually, but we are not here yet.

        Diamond is not sapphire. You can get huge (hundreds of kg), flawless sapphire crystals for cheap, not so much with diamond.

        • Re:Let's be clear (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Cyberax ( 705495 ) on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @08:44PM (#61348638)

          Are you sure about that? Artificial diamonds are not perfect, the largest artificial diamonds are also smaller than the largest natural diamonds, by far.

          You can now buy flawless 10ct artificial diamonds if you have spare $200k lying around: https://www.77diamonds.com/dia... [77diamonds.com] (they don't have a 10ct stone right now, this is the closets one at 8ct). The largest gem-quality artificial diamond is 112ct (but it's a black one) and the largest CVD diamond is something like 80ct in the form of a flat disk.

          Natural diamonds can indeed be bigger, but anything above 20ct is a unique find worth millions. You certainly won't be able to flood the market with them. Artificial diamonds with this weight will be mass-produced within several years.

          • I find the really tiny diamonds in polishing compounds to be excellent value and super useful.
            Large multi carat rocks of the stuff are not nearly as useful.

            • Large multi carat rocks of the stuff are not nearly as useful.

              No one's been making use of them because they're very expensive. Diamond has 10 times the thermal conductivity of copper while being a good electrical insulator. And if you can get large consistent wafers, then semiconductor processes become economically feasible. If you can run transistors at 300 degrees C, then transferring the heat out becomes a lot easier.

        • Different techniques create different qualities - old heat-and-pressure methods created relatively flawed diamonds, usually colored, with unusual physical properties that could be used to identify them (e.g. fluorescing yellow under x-rays) . Vapor deposition on the other hand is capable of growing diamond so utterly flawless it would be suitable for making microprocessors - something any natural diamonds is grossly inadequate for. Basically, the only way to tell them from natural diamond is that they're

        • yes I am very sure about that, you are way out of date. mass market diamonds up to a several ct's are now easily produced. The old original methods of pressure had the the imperfections and size problems.
      • Re:Let's be clear (Score:5, Insightful)

        by sjames ( 1099 ) on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @06:09PM (#61348300) Homepage Journal

        "The flaws in natural diamonds can't be replicated in man-made diamonds which is what gives them their uniqueness and value"

        Says the company that spent years talking up the price of "flawless" diamonds.

    • Re:Let's be clear (Score:5, Informative)

      by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @05:46PM (#61348188)

      Alrosa and De Beers are the two companies that sell diamonds.

      Both of them have HUGE stocks of diamonds OUT-OF-MARKET to keep the PRICES HIGH-AS-HELL.

      Diamonds are ALL marketing ... This article from 1982 is still a good read:

      Have You Ever Tried to Sell a Diamond? [theatlantic.com]
      "An unruly market may undo the work of a giant cartel and of an inspired, decades-long ad campaign."

    • by Dracos ( 107777 )

      Diamonds weren't particularly desirable gemstones until DeBeers unleashed a massive marketing campaign about a century ago. They're more common than all forms of corundum (ruby and sapphire).

    • Those diamonds in vaults have a paper value of many billions. Man made diamonds can be very cheap - industrial diamonds are colored yellow to keep them from being used as jewelry. I wonder if pandora has some deal with De Beers to only produce a very small amount of diamonds. There are persistent rumors that companies that start manufacturing gem diamonds find themselves getting an offer they can't refuse to sell their business. I wonder if there is any truth to that - time will tell.
  • Honestly I just don't get it, really, why so-called 'precious stones' are 'precious' in the first place. Just look at how much human suffering they've caused over centuries.
    • Because they are pretty and rare.

      • by Anonymous Coward
        Diamonds are not all that pretty and definitely not particularly rare. If it wasn't for the marketing aimed at women and the artificially maintained high prices by DeBeers diamonds would be a fraction of the current price.
        • by tlhIngan ( 30335 ) <slashdot&worf,net> on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @06:59PM (#61348452)

          Diamonds are not all that pretty and definitely not particularly rare. If it wasn't for the marketing aimed at women and the artificially maintained high prices by DeBeers diamonds would be a fraction of the current price.

          Diamonds weren't even a thing until the 20th century. If you wanted to get engaged, you got a ring, maybe with a precious stone, but never a diamond because they weren't particularly worthy for it.

          DeBeers did extensive marketing to the point where a ring has to be diamond and it's so woven into culture that you're forced to do it.

          Ditto anything else like it must cost you 3-5 months pay - again, all marketing by DeBeers.

        • Diamonds are not all that pretty and definitely not particularly rare.

          Doubly so the so-called "chocolate diamonds." Normally those are used on drill bits.

          If it wasn't for the marketing aimed at women and the artificially maintained high prices by DeBeers diamonds would be a fraction of the current price.

          The marketing is aimed at both genders. For men, the message is, "If you don't spend two months' salary on the ring, you don't love her." For women, it's "If he doesn't spend two months' salary on the ring, you should dump him for a guy who will."

          • I'm more of the mindset of "If she demands expensive jewelry then drop her like she's the venomous creature she probably is and look elsewhere".
      • This is the thinking of the first proto humans. "OOHH OOHH UGG EEE EE!", as they jumped up and down, their dicks flapping in the air, their balls swishing around, and their long body fur standing on end in excitement at seeing 'shiny rocks'.

        My question is, how come humans still haven't evolved past this crude, primitive way of thinking?

        • I think you've got that backwards. I doubt our ancient ancestors cared all that much about a bit of glassy rock. It's modern man and our obsession with the accumulation of material wealth that started making conspicuous displays of wealth in utterly impractical forms.

        • I've been asking myself that question pretty much every single day for decades now.
      • They used to be rare. Not so much these days.

      • Define 'rare'.

    • Humans like to collect things, especially things of value that (appear to) elevate your status. Perhaps a leftover evolutionary trait of when our ancestors had to select a mate it depended on the ability to secure resources.

    • It's the same reason beef that's been marinated in the tears of the cow that gave it after it watched its child slaughtered tastes the best.
    • by jwhyche ( 6192 )
      At least we agree on this. I've never thought of diamonds as pretty, and given their track record with blood diamonds, even less so. They are sparkly and all, but so is glitter and look what that shit does to the oceans.

      I do find Ruby, Sapphires, and Emeralds pretty but just because of the colors they have.

  • One foolish mistake is enough, no need to fund wars in Africa while doing it.

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @05:31PM (#61348134)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Re:Well Played! (Score:5, Interesting)

      by quonset ( 4839537 ) on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @06:08PM (#61348298)

      It's amusing to think of DeBeers stock holding all those natural diamonds

      You're forgetting the tons of diamonds Russia has in storage. I remember seeing a show on 60 Minutes (I think) back in either the 90s or 00s, where they got an inside look at one diamond repository. They couldn't show much, obviously, but they were allowed to see the inside of one room.

      Think of an oversized closet. Maybe 8' high and 5' across. On three of the walls were shelves with bags filled with uncut diamonds. This repository had hundreds of such rooms, and this was only one repository.

      Russia is perpetually broke due to the vast and wide ranging corruption so they've had to store these tons of diamonds to sell on the open market as needed. They're going to be in a world of hurt if/when diamond prices collapse due to the manufactured ones.

      • Re:Well Played! (Score:4, Interesting)

        by cheesybagel ( 670288 ) on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @09:42PM (#61348800)

        Russia mining industry isn't known for producing large diamonds. They mostly produce industrial diamonds.

        For what it's worth, most of the technology used today to produce diamonds, either the high pressure method, or the chemical vapor deposition method, was developed in the Soviet Union precisely to reduce the need for mined diamonds.

      • Re:Well Played! (Score:5, Interesting)

        by rahvin112 ( 446269 ) on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @09:56PM (#61348832)

        The DeBeers cartel pays Russia millions every year to keep most of those diamonds in Russia in the ground or in those vaults.

        DeBeers spends more on diversion schemes to keep diamonds scarce than they do on mining new diamonds.

    • You guys are all talking about DeBeers/etc stock of diamonds becoming worthless - but there's plenty of people that have "invested" in diamond jewelry as well, especially those recently married. Be nice if the normal peeps could "realize" a $7k depreciation in their diamond jewelry on their taxes. Maybe that's actually possible, and it's a thing that the normies of the world (myself included) could get some guidance on for the near future? Goodbye, insurance rider!
  • by misnohmer ( 1636461 ) on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @05:56PM (#61348236)

    I wonder what is more profitable today? Using electricity to make diamonds or to mine bitcoin? I would include the costs of infrastructure to make it a proper cost benefit analysis (a diamond making machine and staff to run it vs. or a bitcoin rig and staff to run it, then electricity needed to mine a bitcoin and sell it vs. electricity to create $50K worth of diamonds and sell them)?

    • by mhkohne ( 3854 )

      The long term profitability is going to be on the diamond side - you buy the gear and can run it for many years or even decades. It's possible a techology shift will render your gear obsolete, but given what you're doing it's not that likely.

      The Bitcoin mining rigs are probably going to be outdated in relatively short order, OR the bubble will burst again, and it won't be worth running them because you can't get enough to cover the power.

      It's possible you'll hit things at just the right time and make more o

      • Diamonds value can go down too, especially as there is a theoretically unlimited possible supply for manufactured diamonds (some newcomer can start flooding the market). I suspect the equipment break-even-ROI on bitcoin rig is shorter than diamond manufacturing factory too, staffing is cheaper for bitcoin rig, and selling (converting to the currency of your choice) is cheaper than with diamonds too.

  • In exchange for dumping the slave labor.

    Also, if this takes off (and I think it will), I'm going to have a lot of fun laughing at De Beers as the market erodes around them.

  • by jhylkema ( 545853 ) on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @07:31PM (#61348542)

    In addition to lab-grade diamonds, there are several other good alternatives. White sapphire comes to mind. In fact, if I were to pop the question (which sadly appears increasingly unlikely at my age, but I digress), I would get her a white sapphire. Why, you ask? Sapphire is aluminum(III) oxide, and white sapphire is transparent. Any woman I would be popping the question to would be over the moon happy to be wearing a chunk of transparent aluminum on her left finger.

    Slightly O/T. Deal.

  • Haha (Score:4, Interesting)

    by viperidaenz ( 2515578 ) on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @08:02PM (#61348574)

    The horrible company that is De Beers is going to be pissed.

    No more shady business practices, child labour, market manipulation, and blood diamonds

  • "Between 50% and 60% of them come from China"
    I'm starting to think the Chinese could literally counterfeit antimatter somehow if they tried hard enough.
  • by cascadingstylesheet ( 140919 ) on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @09:58PM (#61348840) Journal

    Er ... isn't the whole point of diamonds to be expensive? It's not as though we haven't had affordable diamond substitutes available for a very long time.

    Maybe the "traditional" wedding gift will have to become something with artificial scarcity, like NFTs or bitcoin ...

  • by Tom ( 822 )

    So, will they finally drop the market price of diamonds to its actual value? You know, that of very hard glass? Or is the cartel still powerful enough and the marketing still influencial enough to keep the bubble inflated?

  • To cents per diamond.

    Because, you know, usury is a crime too!

To be is to program.

Working...