After getting a Bachelors of Science in Geology from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Trevor Nace went on to do his PhD in Geology from Duke University.
He worked for Shell Oil Company in Houston for 5 years exploring for oil in West Texas and the Gulf of Mexico.
Recently, Trevor quit his job at Shell and founded ScienceTrends.com --- a platform to enable scientists to tell the world about their research.
A geologist himself with a broad set of experiences including exploration prospect generation, play-based exploration, commercial A&D, field development planning, well execution, and sedimentology and geochemistry, Trevor is also a Forbes science contributor, writing about geology, natural disasters, and climate change.
In an interview with Rough&Polished, Trevor Nace explains the research paper he reported in the Forbes but also gives an insight on the new findings that might affect the global diamond industry.
Some excerpts:
First thing first, was this study by Dr. Janne Koornneef of the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and her team sponsored by any organisation? You reported the findings only as an academic or involved in the research in any way as a geologist yourself?
The only sponsorship is that the diamonds were donated to the research group by the Diamond Trading Company (a member of the De Beers Group). I’m not involved in the research in any way, only reporting based on a research paper.
As our readers come from across industries, can you please elaborate on the what 'young diamond' are; and what according to you will be the impact of these diamonds on the global diamond industry and mining sector included.
Young diamonds are diamonds that formed roughly a billion years later than most diamonds are thought to have formed. The impact will be a change in mindset of where to look for diamonds. Knowing that diamonds were formed under very different conditions and environments will allow geologists to think more broadly on where to look for diamonds.
Again, for the readers benefit, can you give us an insight into the origin of the diamonds that were used in the study by the scientists and what were the findings?
They are harzburgitic diamonds from Venetia, South Africa. Harzburgitic diamonds contain garnets, which were used to age date these specific diamonds. The young diamonds are Proterozoic in age and their origin is associated with the Umkondo Large Igneous Province.
So, what's your opinion on the findings? Are there more diamonds available areas to be explored and mined? Where does this eventually leave the diamond industry, which was deemed to be running out of rough diamond in a few years from now?
These are interesting findings, that open up a lot of new questions about how and when diamonds were formed. This research can and should be duplicated in diamond fields around the world to get a more holistic picture of the variety and ages of diamonds. This could open up new exploration for diamonds in areas previously overlooked based on dogmas about how and when diamonds form.
I understand that the diamonds used in the study at Vrije Universiteit had 'garnet' inclusions. What is the conclusion arrived at the findings?
The conclusion is that there are two suites of diamond ages, one at 2.95 billion years old and another at 1.15 billion years old. Previously, it was thought the diamonds were on the order of 2.95 billion years old.
So, these 'young diamonds' availability anywhere in the earth can be determined by geologists with ease? How do you think these young diamonds will change the present diamond markets eventually, given that the rough diamonds are said to be scarce currently?
The time frame from this discovery to changing the diamond market is likely on the order of several years to a decade. Geologists will require a lot more research to get a full grasp of the changing views of how and when diamonds form. That changing view will have to be implemented in diamond exploration, then in diamond extraction and processing.
If the existing miners involve themselves actively in this endeavour to mining 'young diamonds' as a novel product to supplement their existing products, how will this change the scene at the supply level to the manufacturing sector?
This could likely increase the diamond supply, but it’s too early to tell how much it will impact supply. Also, the impact as noted before would likely not be for years to a decade to fully play out.
Do you see the discovery of 'young diamonds' bring about a major change in the entire workings of the diamond industry globally? The mining companies may alter their pricing and supply pattern, etc., that might bring about drastic changes down the diamond pipeline and up to the retailers. Your comments?
I can see young diamonds changing the way diamond companies search for diamonds. Regarding retailers, it would be hard to identify whether each individual diamond is young or old because that would require sampling the diamond and potentially destroying it. However, companies could make more generalized statements such as this kimberlite pipe primarily hosts young diamonds and thus diamonds coming from this location are unique.
So, if 'young diamonds' are jackpots for miners, how does this translate to the end consumer? Should they look forward to wearing a 'rare, billion-year-old diamond' at a reasonable cost? Or is that wishful thinking? Your views?
It won’t likely affect diamond consumers greatly, especially in the short term. Diamond miners may potentially find more diamonds with this new mindset but diamond prices are managed through supply and demand. It is unlikely that a sudden influx of diamonds would reduce their retail cost as diamond companies would hold them back from the market as to not cause a price drop.
