[RD] Daily Graphs and Charts

Status
Not open for further replies.
If we assume a 3.5 g/cm^3 and take for good the 1,085 million carats Bain & Company says were mined 2007-2014 that gives us 62 m^3 of diamond carbon extracted in seven years. I admit I dunnow how large is a double decker bus, but bearing in mind this is just seven years and the forecast was stable the total amount of diamond mined is substantially larger than the one calculated above

EDIT: I originally multiplied where I had to divide which gave a ridiculously bloated volume.
 
Last edited:
As adendum regarding synthetic diamonds:
There are two main production methods for synthetic diamonds. For highest purity and quality they can be made from gas phase via cvd but their size is very limited (e.g. for coatings). The other method is via hpht/ high preasure high temperature which will result in much larger but lower purity and more structur defects in the crystals. (E.g. for special optical applications)
As a real monopolist on natural diamonds De Beer is also a mayor player in synthetics with their company elementsix.
 
You are right, but making them also high will be really time/cost intensive.
 
De Beers is no longer a monopoly. It accounts for ~30% of the global production of diamonds. Alrosa, a Russian state-owned company, produces more diamonds than De Beers, and has a much larger stockpile of rough diamonds.

If we assume a 3.5 g/cm^3 and take for good the 1,085 million carats Bain & Company says were mined 2007-2014 that gives us 62 m^3 of diamond carbon extracted in seven years. I admit I dunnow how large is a double decker bus, but bearing in mind this is just seven years and the forecast was stable the total amount of diamond mined is substantially larger than the one calculated above

EDIT: I originally multiplied where I had to divide which gave a ridiculously bloated volume.
Tbf it's an old statistic. The past 7 years' worth of global production represents about 20% of the total quantity of diamonds ever mined. Maybe you'd have to say a double decker bus and an uber now.

However, the Bain report refers to ROUGH diamonds, mined straight out of the ground. These diamonds look like bits of dirty glass or clear quartz. You need to polish them first, to make something suitable for jewellery. When you do that, you lose on average 75-80% of the rough diamond material. The quantity of polished diamonds in existence is therefore a fraction of the number above.

I personally estimate it would fit quite easily into a double decker bus, going off this guy's estimate of the bus he drives. It would fill about 2/3rds of the total external volume; this should be sufficiently small to fit into the bus's internal volume.
 
Last edited:
All in all, if that is 20% and the, shall we say, attrition rate is 75-80% before retail, then 62-72 m^3 seems accurate and for the given size of a double decker bus, well, it seems you are right after all. Apologies.
 
Geographic distribution of the common rat. One rather interesting exception.
800px-Brown_rat_distribution.png
 
Alberta introduced a crazy-intense pest control program in the 1950s which succeeded in reducing the wild rat population of the province to virtually nil. There are still isolated colonies, because when the rest of the world is covered in a writhing carpet of rats, you can only keep so many of them out for so long, but somehow they come close.

I'm not sure the map is really accurate, though. Are there really brown rats in the Sahara Desert? The Alberta-shaped hole suggests that the creator just took every country or large subdivision, asked "are there rats in this area", and block-filled anything that returned a "yes", and then made an exception for Alberta because it's a good story.
 
I'm not sure the map is really accurate, though. Are there really brown rats in the Sahara Desert? The Alberta-shaped hole suggests that the creator just took every country or large subdivision, asked "are there rats in this area", and block-filled anything that returned a "yes", and then made an exception for Alberta because it's a good story.

Just checked wiki, because I was interested in the source. Wiki says the rat lives everywhere where humans life (no citation), with exceptions of X,Y and Z.
I guess that's how the map was made. While this sounds likely, a quantification would be more interesting, but I doubt such data exists.
 
Why are Tc or At made in Supernovae but everything beyond Pu is man-made? That seems inconsequential.
 
Elements with atomic numbers of 93 or more are the transuranic elements and were thought not to appear in nature. Recently, it seems, Neptunium and Plutonium have been located "in the wild", but all the other super-heavy elements need to be synthesised, as they have half-lives of mere fractions of a second each.
 
Because those elements have never been found in nature. Only by the creation of high energy physics experiments.
 
I know, but Astat and Technetium are also either artificial or the result of a radioactive decay. Their half-life is too short for natural occurence. It's the same as with the higher mass elements: They are created at some rate in stars, but they decay quickly and therefore are not found anymore on Earth.
 
:dunno: Radioactive decay happens in nature as well. Tag @uppi. He knows physics better than anyone else posting here, I think.
 
I know, but Astat and Technetium are also either artificial or the result of a radioactive decay. Their half-life is too short for natural occurence. It's the same as with the higher mass elements: They are created at some rate in stars, but they decay quickly and therefore are not found anymore on Earth.
I thought it was Tecnetium and Promethium

anyway, they are created in stars and therefore exist and can be observed for a fraction of a second. That's not true for the transuranic ones

is what I reckon
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom