(Page 3 of 3)
Credit for the modern cult of the diamond goes primarily to South Africa-based De Beers, the world's largest diamond producer. Before the 1940s, diamond rings were rarely given as engagement gifts. But De Beers' marketing campaigns established the idea that the gems are the supreme token of love and affection. Their "A Diamond Is Forever" slogan, first deployed in 1948, is considered one of the most successful advertising campaigns of all time. Through a near total control of supply, De Beers held almost complete power over the diamond market for decades, carefully hoarding the gemstones to keep prices—and profits—high. While the company has lost some of its power to competitors in Canada and Australia over the past few years, it still controls almost two-thirds of the world's rough diamonds.
Diamond growers are proud of the challenge they pose to De Beers and the rest of the natural diamond industry. Apollo's slogan is "A Diamond Is for Everyone." So far, though, Apollo's colorless gems cost about the same as natural stones, while the company's pink, blue, champagne, mocha and brown diamonds retail for about 15 percent less than natural stones with such colors, which are very rare and more expensive than white diamonds. Meanwhile, consumers may well be receptive to high-quality, laboratory-produced diamonds. Like most open-pit mines, diamond mines cause erosion, water pollution and habitat loss for wildlife. Even more troubling, African warlords have used diamond caches to buy arms and fund rebel movements, as dramatized in the 2006 movie Blood Diamond. Actor Terrence Howard wears a diamond lapel pin with Apollo stones. He told reporters, "Nobody was harmed in the process of making it."
Half a dozen other companies have begun to manufacture gem-quality diamonds using not CVD but a process that more closely mimics the way diamonds are created in the earth. The method—basically an improvement on how scientists have been making diamonds since the 1950s—requires heat of more than 2,000 degrees and pressure 50 times greater than that at the surface of the earth. (Both the heat and pressure are more than what CVD requires.) The washing machine-size devices can't produce stones much larger than six carats. These HPHT diamonds—the initials stand for high pressure and high temperature—have more nitrogen in them than CVD diamonds do; the nitrogen turns the diamonds amber-colored. For now, though, the process has a significant benefit over CVD: it's less expensive. While a natural, one-carat amber-colored diamond might retail for $20,000 or more, the Florida-based manufacturer Gemesis sells a one-carat stone for about $6,000. But no one, Gemesis included, wants to sell diamonds too cheaply lest the market for them collapse.
Gemologists plying everyday tools can seldom distinguish between natural and lab-grown diamonds. (Fake diamonds such as cubic zirconia are easy to spot.) De Beers sells two machines that detect either chemical or structural characteristics that sometimes vary between the two types of stones, but neither machine can tell the difference all the time. Another way to identify a lab-produced diamond is to cool the stone in liquid nitrogen and then fire a laser at it and examine how the light passes through the stone. But equipment is expensive and the process can take hours.
Diamonds from Apollo and Gemesis, the two largest manufacturers, are marked with a laser-inscribed insignia visible with a jeweler's loupe. Last year, the Gemological Institute of America, an industry research group, began to grade lab-grown stones according to carat, cut, color and clarity—just as it does for natural stones—and it provides a certificate for each gem that identifies it as lab grown.
The diamond-mining companies have been fighting back, arguing that all that glitters is not diamond. De Beers' ads and its Web sites insist that diamonds should be natural, unprocessed and millions of years old. "Diamonds are rare and special things with an inherent value that does not exist in factory-made synthetics," says spokeswoman Lynette Gould. "When people want to celebrate a unique relationship they want a unique diamond, not a three-day-old factory-made stone." (De Beers does have an investment in Element Six, the company that makes thin industrial diamonds.)
The Jewelers Vigilance Committee (JVC), a trade group, has been lobbying the Federal Trade Commission to prevent diamond manufacturers from calling their stones "cultured," a term used for most of the pearls sold today. (People in the mined diamond business use less-flattering terms such as "synthetic.") The JVC filed a petition with the agency in 2006, claiming that consumers are often confused by the nomenclature surrounding lab-grown diamonds.
From the beginning of his research with CVD more than 20 years ago, Robert Linares hoped that diamonds would become the future of electronics. At the heart of almost every electrical device is a semiconductor, which transmits electricity only under certain conditions. For the past 50 years, the devices have been made almost exclusively from silicon, a metal-like substance extracted from sand. It has two significant drawbacks, however: it is fragile and overheats. By contrast, diamond is rugged, doesn't break down at high temperatures, and its electrons can be made to carry a current with minimal interference. At the moment, the biggest obstacle to diamond's overtaking silicon is money. Silicon is one of the most common materials on earth and the infrastructure for producing silicon chips is well established.
Apollo has used profits from its gemstones to underwrite its foray into the $250 billion semiconductor industry. The company has a partnership Bryant Linares declines to confirm to produce semiconductors specialized for purposes he declines to discuss. But he revealed to me that Apollo is beginning to sell one-inch diamond wafers. "We anticipate that these initial wafers will be used for research and development purposes in our clients' product development efforts," Linares says.
Before I leave the Apollo lab, Robert and Bryant Linares take me into a warehouse-like room about the size of a high-school gym. It's empty, except for large electrical cables snaking along the floor. The space will soon be filled with 30 diamond-making machines, the men say, nearly doubling Apollo's production capacity. It will be the world's first diamond factory, they say. "There was a copper age and a steel age," Bryant says. "Next will be diamond."
Ulrich Boser is writing a book about the world's largest unsolved art heist.
Photographer Max Aguilera-Hellweg specializes in medical and scientific subjects.


Comments
The largest-known synthetic diamond is 34.80 carats grown by De Beers scientists in 1992.
Posted by Boris Feigelson on May 27,2008 | 07:58PM
Hello Ulrich and thanks for this fascinating article. Two questions for you: First, when you mention that diamond can be tweaked to hold an electrical charge, does it follow that diamond batteries could be on the horizon? Further research has turned up mention of no such thing. Second, I have always heard that natural diamonds come from coal. Have any of the researchers you encountered tried making diamond simply by squeezing lumps of coal? Thanks
Posted by Austin Alward on May 27,2008 | 11:39PM
When you speak about diamonds or diamond tools cutting this or that material, it should be understood that diamonds do not cut--- they merely abrade.
Posted by Elmore Easter on June 4,2008 | 11:17AM
Information was like a full-coarse meal.Very sastifying. There are so many choices,alittle history,facts and procedures.Even tested theories.Thanks,Cin
Posted by Cindy Moroni on June 9,2008 | 04:30PM
This article is well-thought out. The information is thourough and satisfying. Best wishes -Ricky
Posted by Ricky on June 10,2008 | 08:08AM
Excellent article. Very informative. Well researched and structured, as well as engaging.
Posted by Alex M on June 17,2008 | 02:58PM
Wired magazine had an article on this process and maybe even this company a year or two ago. There was talk then of diamond substrate integrated circuits. Maybe diamonds are about to get a loss less valuable from a financial perspective, and a lot more valuable functionally...
Posted by Mark on June 17,2008 | 03:02PM
Excellent article, I thoroughly enjoyed reading it. Well done. I'm looking forward to the diamond age.
Posted by Michael on June 17,2008 | 03:05PM
If you liked this story, you might like the novel "The Diamond Age" by Neal Stephenson, it's somewhat related. http://www.amazon.com/Diamond-Age-Illustrated-Primer-Spectra/dp/0553380966/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1213745617&sr=8-1
Posted by Aaron on June 17,2008 | 04:34PM
Wow, no doubt about it dude. Diamonds are a girls best friend. Dont matter if its mined or made, either or will be gladly accepted! JT
Posted by John BlueFoot on June 17,2008 | 07:23PM
Hello Ulrich and thanks for this fascinating article. Two questions for you: First, when you mention that diamond can be tweaked to hold an electrical charge, does it follow that diamond batteries could be on the horizon? Uh... no. transistors maybe. type IIb blue diamonds are semiconductive. the boron impurities change the conductivity. why diamond batteries? Further research has turned up mention of no such thing. for obvious reasons. Second, I have always heard that natural diamonds come from coal. Have any of the researchers you encountered tried making diamond simply by squeezing lumps of coal? Thanks yes. Its hard and expensive. thats why you grow them. its easy and cheap. and to elmore, thats what cutting IS. see those teeth on the saw? They ABRADE off this or that material. Jesus... moral: talk radio does NOT mean you know everything.
Posted by not ulrich on June 17,2008 | 07:48PM
@Elmore: You are only considering diamond grinding wheels, which do abrade materials, in your comment. There are several companies that make diamond tipped metal cutting tools such as boring bars, end mills, form tools, etc., that cut in the same way that carbide inserts do. This is one such company: http://www.diamondtool.com/
Posted by Inventor2010 on June 17,2008 | 07:56PM
whahahahaha, this article is brilliant. i see now my 6 foot diamond sword will soon be a reality!
Posted by Miles Weston Clark on June 17,2008 | 08:40PM
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.09/diamond.html
Posted by rogue on June 17,2008 | 09:00PM
The British didn't 'get' the Kohinoor, they stole it.
Posted by Guy on June 17,2008 | 10:15PM
"There was a copper age and a steel age," Bryant says. "Next will be diamond." --There's actually a fascinating sci-fi novel by Neal Stephenson called "The Diamond Age", based on the idea that diamond-based technology will become plentiful and all kinds of fantastic new applications for it will be invented.
Posted by Maximus on June 17,2008 | 10:59PM
this is a great article on the diamond creation process :)
Posted by fooxie on June 17,2008 | 11:23PM
Nice closing lines. For those intrigued by the possible scientific implications of diamonds / the social ramifications of diamond manufacture, the novel Diamond Age by Neal Stephenson is a great book.
Posted by Amy on June 18,2008 | 03:03AM
Good article, but a couple caveats. Diamond is only the hardest *naturally* occurring substance. There are harder synthetics, such as aggregated carbon nanorods. Also, to whoever is trying to convince people to read The Diamond Age, while I love the book a lot, it has zip to do with diamonds; it's a sci-fi book about nanotechnology.
Posted by Matthew on June 18,2008 | 10:26AM
Instead of "cultured" or "synthetic", call these new diamonds "ethical".
Posted by MuhammadSchwarz on June 18,2008 | 10:49AM
For industrial and scientific applications diamonds are enormously valuable and would be used far more if DeBeers wasn't sitting on several billion carats to keep the world market artificially high. The sad fact is that diamonds have little or no investment value and the price is controlled by a mafia-like cartel that hordes all the diamonds in the world. Go buy the best diamond ring that you can find, then walk it down the street to a large jeweler and see what they offer you for it. http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200612u/diamond-flashback
Posted by Diamonel on June 18,2008 | 11:59AM
The problem with DeBeers argument, is it is based on the fallacy of scarcity. Diamonds are NOT rare at all. Just overly controlled.
Posted by Brian on June 18,2008 | 12:08PM
Not a bad article but slightly misleading when you say that diamonds are not rare.Diamonds of cuttable quality are exceedingly rare, of the 750,000 pounds (according to your figures which by the way is also rubbish as this would equal 1.7 Billion carats and the real figure is much less than 50 Million worldwide) only around twenty percent are made into polished diamonds of any significant size.Secondly DeBeers has around 40% of the world production and not the 67% (Two thirds) that you quote.
Posted by John Marko on June 18,2008 | 12:22PM
It's really only an educated guess that allows scientists to speculate that diamonds come from the inside of the planet. It is possible to create high temperatures and high pressures on the surface and just beneath the surface of the planet with what is called a plasma pinch (z- or theta-, whatever). The astrophysicists have convinced the geologists that space is essentially charge-neutral. But we know that space is in fact filled with charged particles, and charged particles can in fact conduct electricity. Furthermore, the Earth itself is claimed to have an iron core (iron of course can carry and conduct charge). When you see a volcanic eruption, and lightning coming off of that eruption of magma, one way to explain that is that the magma is a conductor, and that charged particles are traveling into and/or out of the planet's surface. The idea that our planet cannot acquire or trade charge with its surroundings is an assumption that's never been properly validated. Diamonds can also be the result of massive interplanetary discharges, which could offer an alternative explanation for the tube-like formations within which they are observed since plasmas tend to form filaments, and lightning is nothing more than twisting plasma filaments. Go figure ... See http://www.thunderbolts.info/
Posted by Chris Reeve on June 18,2008 | 01:53PM
I second MuhammadSchwarz - perhaps this heralds a new era of ethical diamonds free from the taint of economic colonialism, civil war, brutality, and bloodshed.
Posted by hopeful on June 18,2008 | 07:38PM
If diamonds could be used as semi-conductors then they could probably even produce solar panels that are more efficient than the ones currently made from silicon. Any thoughts on that?
Posted by lensman on June 19,2008 | 04:27AM
My wedding ring was made by C5 company (www.C5company.com) and contains five lab-created, CVD diamonds. Several jewellers have said that the stones are flawless and have been surprised to learn that the stones are man-made. When you can have the beauty, sparkle and allure without the environmental or social disruptions, why wouldn't you opt for a lab diamond? Also, an excellent resource for people wanting to learn more about the rise of the mined diamond industry is The Last Empire by Stefan Kanfer.
Posted by Meghan Connolly Haupt on June 19,2008 | 08:30AM
As a reasearcher I am wondering what one of the disks costs?
Posted by isadore on June 19,2008 | 12:57PM
As a professional writer, I really enjoy reading good, crunchy, well-organized articles. Kudos! As a woman who loves sparkly stuff, I am delighted with lab-grown diamonds or CZs. Apart from items made of unusual stones (Tsavorite, Larimar etc.), my loveliest pieces are either CZ or high-grade crystal - and yes, I know they are very different substances! Thanks again for a fun and fine article. Maggie Negodaeff Ottawa, Canada
Posted by margaret negodaeff on June 19,2008 | 03:15PM
Where can you purchase top-quality lab-created diamonds. Is there a brand name to look for?
Posted by C Sundberg on June 19,2008 | 07:10PM
I really enjoyed the article and was surprised to learn the World's largest manmade diamond is owned by DeBeers.....
Posted by Jack C. Templeton Jr. on June 20,2008 | 04:44AM
It's interesting that you write, "Great Britain got the stone in 1849 when Lahore and Punjab became part of the British Empire." Great Britain didn't 'get' the stone: they stole it, or worse, plundered it, like they plundered a whole lot of other treasures from India. I find it fascinating that dastardly acts performed by Western nations are so lightly glossed over, so as to not upset the delicate constitutions of readers, but those performed by non-Western nations are typically described in graphic detail and with words of condemnation. At the end of the 18th century, India's share of the world's GDP was 25%. Within a century, it had plunged to less than 2%. This was during the height of the British Raj.
Posted by Murli N on June 20,2008 | 08:59AM
More interesting than the mineral manufacturing is the evil capitalist supply monopoly originally invented and controlled by DeBeers. This monumental historical rip-off of the public has no right to exist and should be crushed. The truth of the rarity of diamonds should be widely published, jewelers should be boycotted, and the monopoly destroyed. Some capitalists are sick to the core and evil, this is a prime example.
Posted by Johm Johnson on June 21,2008 | 06:23AM
No, diamonds are not chemically inert, and that's a good thing; otherwise it would be more difficult to make electronic or other devices from the material. In fact, diamonds will burn fairly easily. I remember one researcher who burned gem-grade stones in pure oxygen to get really pure CO2! How's that for deconstructionism?
Posted by Richard S on June 21,2008 | 11:34AM
As has been pointed out, this subject was originally broached to the popular press in a WIRED magazine article, which mentioned several companies experimenting with plasma diamond crystal growth. One is Gemesis (http://www.gemesis.com/). Another company Web site, which I did not bookmark, indicated shortly thereafter that it had been purchased by Chinese interests. Cheap Chinese diamonds?!
Posted by Steve Browne on June 21,2008 | 04:16PM
It has always been true that "There's no such thing as a free lunch." This story seems to IGNORE the 'carbon footprint' of the creation of a man-made diamond. How much electricity is involved? (The article describes the Apollo warehouse that "will soon be filled with 30 diamond-making machines" saying, "It's empty, except for large electrical cables snaking along the floor." How much of the electricity that will be used in the manufacture of man-made diamonds will be from oil, gas or coal? How much carbon dioxide will be released into the earth's atmosphere in the creation of these man-made diamonds? Doesn't this add to the increased greenhouse effect and the already serious global warming problem?
Posted by Daniel J Stark on June 22,2008 | 10:39AM
To Chris Reeve, it's not speculation that high pressures and temperature such as that that exists inside the earth are needed to convert carbon graphite into carbon diamond, another carbon allotropic form. In fact, the first synthetic process for making diamonds at GE and other companies use high temperature, high pressure presses which converted grahite to diamond. Under such condition, diamond is the more stable form. To lensman who had questions about diamond solar cells, a solar cell has to absorb visible light that is then converted into electricity via a semiconductor junction. As we all know by looking at a diamond ring, diamonds are transparent in the visible region so so a diamond solar cell would only absorb in the deep UV and produce very little electricity. To those who speculated about diamond batteries, batteries are electrochemical cell devices where electrododes undergo electrochemical reaction or exchange. Diamond is inert to most chemical reactions particularly redox reactions and is a good insulator. So the prospects for a worthwhile diamond battery are dim. For high energy density batteries you need electodes with high electromotive force potential (emf). Jerry Ceasar, A Physical Chemist
Posted by gerald ceasar on June 23,2008 | 07:16AM
This is great news. A very interesting read!
Posted by Susan on June 23,2008 | 04:10PM
@Stark - Quit being such a stereotypical hippie. Does not the potential of greater technology than could reduce other carbon footprints merit technical advancement? The article doesn't go into details, but it would seem that it is more efficient than the Gemesis method and that cost them $100 a diamond (which is probably a general collective of the overhead). Big technology doesn't always equate to big consumption. This was a great article though. Very interesting.
Posted by Tito on June 24,2008 | 11:02AM
This article is both exciting and frightening. While I appreciate the romanticism of natural diamonds, I abhor the atrocities that have gone into the procurement. I try to ignore these facts whenever I think about the engagement ring given to my wife. Diamonds are perhaps the most amazing and enchanting objects I have ever laid eyes upon. I am excited by the possibilities for the semiconductor industry. I am frightened because we have all seen knockoffs of every designer label and the semiconductor industry is pounded by counterfeits. Most of these products originate in China where organized crime against intellectual property runs rampant. Can you imagine what will happen if some of these mobsters are able to get their hands on one of these CVD machines?
Posted by Doug Merriott on June 26,2008 | 05:27PM
Reading all this is facinating, and I have read a great deal on this lately. I would like to know, when it is said there are un-mined stones, that cannot be determined as real or not, where do you purchase these?
Posted by my three twins on June 27,2008 | 01:06AM
a lot of people asked where they can find quality synthetic, unmined, cultured, ethical diamonds (whatever you want to call them). Apollo and Gemesis have websites, but both simply offer the amber colored gemstones. for those who want a more traditional look of white diamonds, Diamond Nexus Labs is a good place. www.diamondnexuslabs.com. My engagement ring and wedding bands came from them and all their diamonds are AIG certified. plus they have a wide selection of really nice looking jewelry.
Posted by Mary Walker on July 7,2008 | 10:13AM
where can you purchase one of these diamonds .
Posted by debbie dauser on July 14,2008 | 12:13PM
Several people asked where to purchase quality ethical diamonds and gem stones. Check out the website:C5company.com
Posted by Karyn on July 15,2008 | 01:56PM
I bought a pink cultured diamond at diamondscultured.com and i love it!
Posted by Deborah on August 5,2008 | 04:56PM
Maybe this will put an end to the blood-diamond trade. One can hope.
Posted by FastMovingCloud on August 6,2008 | 05:25PM
To Gerald Ceasar: You said that the first synthethic process of making diamond from graphite used high temp and high pressure, such that diamond was the most stable form. How come diamond? Isn't it thermodynamically unstable? It has been thought that, eventually, a diamond will return to its most stable form, which is graphite. Just would like to know.
Posted by kris on September 8,2008 | 08:59PM
FYI The only company that sells colorless synthetic diamonds (not CZ's) is Apollo Diamond. The other's are "enhanced CZ's." However Apollo doesnt sell their diamonds larger than 1 carat (and i think its .68 carats for a ring. Gemesis is one of the few that produces colored diamonds. My fiance and I are still waiting on Apollo to sell larger stone rings, however for now we've bought white sapphires since we love sapphires as well.
Posted by Paula on September 18,2008 | 12:02PM
Great article; very informative! Would the Asha simulant be considered a quality stone? What do you think about moissanite? I'm looking at getting a 2 carat stone for an engagement ring. Any suggestions as to where I can buy a quality stone? Thanks!
Posted by Luisa on October 13,2008 | 08:53AM
To: kris, I did not say that diamond was the most stable form at ordinary temperature and pressures. It is only at high temperatures and pressures that diamond becomes the more allotrope so that graphite can then be converted into diamond
Posted by Gerald Ceasar on October 31,2008 | 02:33PM
Matthew, you said the Diamond age is about nanotechnology. This article is about using diamonds as a replacement for silicon, as a smaller, faster, more efficient semiconductor that's much more stable. If we were to use diamonds in our computers, we would be able to eventually create nanotechnology. Don't you see how 1+1 equals 2? And as for the diamond in Great Britain, the country "got" the stone how it got it, whether it stole, plundered, or whatever. The article isn't trying to stir up trouble. Its a science magazine! Smithsonian just wants to inform. And as for the comment about these diamonds creating green house gases, that may be true, but we could possibly benefit from further research, even find a way to reduce green house gasses by converting to this diamond technology.
Posted by Rachel on November 11,2008 | 02:30PM
I though I read someplace that you could grow diamonds at about 650 degrees or so. Perhaps they use 1800 for quality control purposes.
Posted by Ed on January 4,2009 | 09:31AM
awsome article but if we start mass producing diamonds in labs diamond price will go down
Posted by viktor on January 14,2009 | 05:47PM
That's is pretty enlighting article I wish the writer take more in depth research in this subject
Posted by Rushdie Ahmad on January 15,2009 | 12:50AM
To the person who asked about the carbon footprint of synthetic diamonds, have you ever considered what the carbon footprint of mined diamonds is? Underground mines are not too bad but when you consider the size holes made at some of the Southern African open-pit diamond mines and the diesel required to remove that rock (not only the kimberlite but the waste as well) the carbon footprint is horrendous. Ask De Beers for an estimate and watch them squirm!
Posted by Richard on March 6,2009 | 12:05PM