If you can bring yourself to wear a diamond that is not a small portion of the planet’s finite supply, but is chemically identical to the original product and denies warlord funding, then Pandora is your store. Tallest in the world jeweler (in product volume), known for charm bracelets, announced that it will only sell lab-grown diamonds in the future and market them as “affordable and sustainably created products”. They don’t use the word “cheap”, but we all know what we’re getting out of it.
While “eco-friendly” claims about lab-grown diamonds are still uncertain, the diamond mining industry’s rationale for its continued existence seems hopeless. The National Diamond Council, an association of diamond mining companies, runs what looks like a trends blog, with an article inform us this they are offering “diamonds”, a term that only applies to “natural diamonds” “of the Earth”. The treasures, they remind us, formed on average about one to three billion years ago under immense heat and compression 160 km below the earth’s crust, catapulted upwards by the explosion of underground volcanoes. . You, a discerning collector, can have this. Or you, a waste consumer, may have a bit of costume jewelry associated with words like “synthetic” and “factories” and “for industrial use,” a pale fake marred by “telltale marks” visible to the eye. eye of a specialist.
The “real” diamonds are not mentioned are inexorably linked arms trafficking and perpetuation bloodshed. Laboratory diamonds are structurally the same, so you can just lie. They are up to ten times cheaper than “real” diamonds, according to a Annual Report by the consulting firm Bain & Company. And lab-grown diamonds are an amazing human feat that is only possible because of the Big Bang and the approximately 3.5 billion year process of intelligent life form on Earth evolving.
One of the members of the NDC De Beers has already ceded to the allure of laboratory diamond manufacturing.
Sellers of lab-grown diamonds and “real” diamond miners have claimed their stones are more “environmentally friendly,” and the two have yet to definitively prove it. A study conducted by Trucost, a for-profit organization that analyzes the carbon output of large companies and environmental impacts, found that mined diamonds accounted for a third of the carbon spent compared to lab-grown diamonds (160 kg of CO2 per carat versus 511 kg, respectively). But it’s riddled with disclaimers. The study was conducted on behalf of the Diamond Producers Association (DPA), now the Natural Diamond Council. Rick Lord, Trucost analyst told Vogue that it does not take into account significant costs such as “mine closure, diamond cutting and polishing, retail sale and post-consumer phases of the diamond life cycle”. Speaking to Vogue, Saleem Ali, professor of energy and environment at the University of Delaware, said the finding “defies common sense.”
Meanwhile, the study relied solely on publicly available data to measure the carbon cost of lab-grown diamonds, noting that “the disclosure on greenhouse gases and the broader environmental impact of the production of laboratory diamonds is poor. In 2019, the FTC sent warning letters to eight jewelry makers warning them against unsubstantiated claims that lab-grown diamonds are “eco-friendly”, “eco-friendly” or “sustainable.”
Pandora claims that by next year their diamonds will be produced entirely using renewable energy.
Anyway, I can only IMAGINE what this portends for a war torn culture America with many varied and cutting-edge opinions on Twitter.