@missy some interesting "fact check" of the "echo friendly" of MMD, "the smaller physical footprint lab diamonds offer as one advantage?"
News, analysis and comment from the Financial Times, the worldʼs leading global business publication
www.ft.com
"The US Federal Trade Commission issued a warning to eight companies last April over their misleading marketing of lab-grown diamonds. The admonition exposed a simmering war of words between the producers of those diamonds and the miners of natural stones, a row that centres on claims around environmental standards and sustainability"
. ..
Trucost estimated that, in 2016, greenhouse gas emissions associated with lab-grown diamond production are approximately three times greater than natural diamonds produced by DPA members. This was probably an underestimate, it noted, due to a lack of publicly available information.
..
"Jean-Marc Lieberherr, who stepped down in December after almost four years as chief executive of the DPA, accuses some growers of making false claims about using renewable energy. “Some say that they have no carbon footprint, but given the incredibly high temperatures they need to run their reactors, solar or wind energy is not sufficient,” he says.
“Only hydropower would deliver that. How many have access to hydropower? They may have some renewable energy in their grid or buy solar credits but that is not quite the same.”
Given the high temperatures inside the reactors in which the diamonds are grown “15m litres of water are needed every year to cool them off”, Mr Lieberherr says. “In areas where there are already water shortages, that is not great. You have to hold people to account on the claims they make.”
...
"the importance for diamond growers to focus on becoming carbon neutral but, as Mr Mathuram points out, it will not be an easy process. “Many growers are based in China, which has caused market instability, undercutting prices,” he says, questioning “how would they qualify for sustainability"
www.hollowaydiamonds.com.au
