this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2024
108 points (88.6% liked)

World News

54116 readers
3072 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

World GDP: $105.4 trillion USD

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] tiefling@lemmy.blahaj.zone 82 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Does it have to be diamonds? Could we maybe use the ashes of billionaires instead?

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 34 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Human ashes are mostly carbon, so yes, of course. We'll run out of billionaires pretty quickly, though.

[–] vikingr@lemmy.world 43 points 1 year ago

Sounds like a win-win tbh

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 18 points 1 year ago

Let's give it a trial run with a few thousand then we can measure the impact and reevaluate.

[–] ieatpwns@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

That’s a problem that solves it self

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BeatTakeshi@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Isn't diamond manufactured in labs in 15 minutes now? I think the price is assuming natural diamonds value

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 59 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Of all the aerosols they could think about!

No chance at all of a basically indestructible material not being destructed if absorbed by lungs (or gills) and leading to some disease. You don't need to check. There's no way this could go wrong.

Or, rather... I believe lead is cheaper... Given how much people like to use it, maybe it's a better option.

[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 19 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I was thinking asbestos...

[–] SacralPlexus@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Whatever you do, don’t look up silicosis. Not a problem at all. Not relevant.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] pedro@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

We're carbon based lifeforms and diamonds, yep, made of carbon. What could possibly go wrong!? /s

[–] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Diamond Lung.

Sounds posh.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 year ago

They got a headline. Mission achieved.

[–] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 57 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yes, let's just have everyone on Earth breathe in diamond dust all day every day. There's no way that could be bad for our health.

[–] PlantJam@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There's never been a case of something having different behavior or health effects just because of a tiny chemical difference (trans fat) or size difference (micro plastics), what's the worst that could happen?

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 24 points 1 year ago

There have never been lung issues caused by inhaling very small dust particles, right?

[–] desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 1 year ago

just wear masks for a few decades, potentially respirators, and probably add whole house air filtration if you want to take it off at night.

[–] febra@lemmy.world 38 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Amazing. Instead of just.. fighting climate change by not polluting the planet let's just fill our entire atmosphere with diamond dust, because that's the logical decision of course.

[–] Eximius@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It's not really any different than usual dust, other than it is even more likely to scratch your phone (oh no!). The surprising thing is the bullshit price number, I'm sure it's some brain-dead economist looking at the point-price for diamond and with great effort making a single multiplication.

Edit: The study does note industrial diamond manufacturing, but doesn't go into detail on why it's so expensive for diamond powder, other than saying "it would require much more industrial diamond than is currently produced".... Which is just.... Empty? Considering industry would change to account for such a drastic rise in demand.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

That amount sounds like total bullshit. Diamonds can be manufactured and once that is done at scale, it won't be all that expensive. Even at $10000 a ton, five million tonnes would cost just 50 billion.

[–] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

These are not good ideas. Remember that global warming is just an overarching effect of pollution which we will still have. What diamond dust pollution effects will be, no one knows, but I doubt we want to find out.

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

The fossil fuel oligarchy would prefer to give all mammals on Earth emphysema than stop burning fossils, and do it for 10x the price.

[–] Skua@kbin.earth 12 points 1 year ago

That number is for doing it anually for 65 years. It lists roughly 18 billion per year for the cost.

But besides that, I think you are greatly underestimating the cost of the diamonds. Synthetic ones are way cheaper than natural ones, yes, but there's a lot of room between "natural diamond expensive" and "actually cheap". Going by these prices https://www.diamondtech.com/products/categories/diamond_powder_price_list.html

It's $2.5 million per tonne. I assume you could get a cheaper price per weight if you're buying five million tonnes of anything, but it's still two orders of magnitude more expensive than you are guessing

[–] jalkasieni@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 year ago

Firstly, it’s 5 million tonnes per year. For 65 years. Secondly, the cost is for a 65 year SAI program, including developing the tech and running the missions. Thirdly, this is all explained in TFA or the links therein.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] john89@lemmy.ca 27 points 1 year ago

The artificially-inflated price of the diamonds should be irrelevant in this calculation.

[–] blackn1ght@feddit.uk 24 points 1 year ago (2 children)

How effective would it be to sprinkle CEO dust into the sky?

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

I'm not saying we should try it and find out, but I've heard worse ideas.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] pageflight@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

So what would it cost to replace all fossil fuel energy with renewable?

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You are missing the point, because we need to do that anyway.
The idea is to prevent things from getting worse in the meantime.
Replacing fossil fuels take time no matter how much we invest.

[–] ComicalMayhem@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

ok but you just know corporations are going to use this as an excuse to keep using fossil fuels. like to them this is basically carte blanche to keep the status quo and block green energy from happening even harder. "oh hurdur har har we found a solution to climate change and it's dumping diamonds in the atmosphere, no need to pay for green energy anymore haha" type shit

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sweet! Four more years of Trump presidency, and Elon Musk can just pay for it out of pocket.

[–] john89@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Elon musk's kids should be made an example of when reclamation comes around.

They're being brought up thinking they can live like gods. How unfortunate would it be if they actually had to live like the rest of us...

[–] deegeese@sopuli.xyz 18 points 1 year ago

Nice try, DeBeers.

[–] PortoPeople@lemm.ee 17 points 1 year ago

It's not cost effective to save humanity. Stock prices would crash.

[–] sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Isn't this kind of thing the premise for all those "snowball Earth" sci Fi stories where global cooling went too far

[–] Ydna@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

No don't worry about that!

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

Break into the diamond company vaults and just take it. Bam, free diamonds.

[–] Akasazh@feddit.nl 13 points 1 year ago

The silicosis will run rampant

[–] HikingVet@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 year ago

Just force debeers to open their vault. The cost would drop.

[–] TurboHarbinger@feddit.cl 10 points 1 year ago

Let's throw more carbon to the air, what could go wrong. Is not like it will get to our lungs and destroy everything from the inside.

[–] Fedegenerate@lemmynsfw.com 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Does this feel like swallowing a spider to catch a fly to anyone else?

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Perhaps we'll die.

[–] MyOpinion@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

This is garbage.

[–] rusticus@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Can we use zirconium for $1 trillion?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] GhiLA@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

I'm still set on "we're fucked" until I see some more hopeful news.

When we are fucked and who is first fucked, and making sure I'm not that guy is what I'm trying to determine.

[–] marcolo@poliverso.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@FlyingSquid
"Scientists say..."
All of them, are you sure?
Geoengineering schemes are not agreed upon by many scientists. There are several types of geoengineering "solutions" and no agreement on any, just suggestions.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I can't help what the article is titled. 🤷‍♂️

load more comments
view more: next ›