I was thinking the same thing. Its not called “ice” without a reason 
Which brings up another point.
The fact it conducts heat so well probably means its rather hard to get burning to start with. Its going to conduct aways/absorb a “large” amount of heat before part of it gets hot enough to combust.
Of course, once its gets started, its going to act like a pile of dense coal. Not that wood and fabrics and plastic materials are much better once a fire gets going.
Bear in mind that all of the above characteristics (clarity, thermal conductivity) only apply to “pure” diamonds. Since we’ll be making these diamond bricks essentially from scratch, we can add whatever we want to the mix, creating a variety of diamond-based composite materials.
The whole thing seems very dubious as far as producing large diamond structures economically. From this link.
(A couple of illustrations of both carbon isotopes).
As far as forming diamonds is concerned, it seems that most of the effort and expense comes from having to separate out the tiny percentage of carbon suitable for making diamonds from the much higher proportion of graphite carbon.
Large trees have mastered the art of making high rise structures using mostly graphite carbon. Perhaps we could use some of stuff that trees are made of to make structures of some kind.
If you want to capture carbon in large amounts, I’d suggest looking at biological processes. Among them - ‘seeding’ algae blooms, creating peat, maintaining large areas of ‘new growth’ forests, or genetic engineering programs to increase the efficiency of an organism’s ability to sequester carbon.
A large algae bloom can contain as much carbon as emitted by a small country in an entire year. There are a lot of research areas available here - iron seeding to stimulate blooms, for example. Another might be a way to increase the amount of carbon that stays locked up - currently most of the carbon in a bloom gets recycled into the atmosphere by various processes. If the percentage of carbon that remains sequestered were raised, you’d have a large natural carbon sink.
There are currently problems with algae bloom sequestration that have to be addressed, but there’s still lots of room for more research.
What about food and fuel production? Sequestering carbon is nice, but if algae can made into food or farmed to feed fish for food maybe we could take a stab at hunger, and making biodeisel for car fuel.
The simple reason.
Breathing, farts and spewing automobiles will just re release the CO2 back into the atmosphere.
No, but I guess if your plan is to store CO2 in the actual mass that is a gazillion human bodies that might work.
I think you read that as I intended it for carbon sequestering, which I was kind of vague on.
Think of it as damage control. Diesel engines would be limited to carbon that’s already out, not adding freshly released carbon. Heck once it grew into a thriving industry you could legally mandate 1/4 gallon of algae biodiesel be buried for every gallon sold.
The food would be food just for food. Not everyone goes to bed with a full belly you know. Anything that could lesson poverty and feed a growing population without destroying more habitat for farm land would be good.
Is your link stating that diamond carbon has more neutrons than graphite carbon?
Graphite carbon is diamond carbon is Fullerene carbon. Carbon is carbon. You might be able to tell the difference between the various carbon isotopes with an extremely precise spectroscope, but you’re not going to be able to detect any differences in their chemical properties.
I wouldn’t trust a link that can’t tell the difference between an isotope and an allotrope, myself.
Your link seems to be saying that diamond is made of C[sub]13[/sub] while graphite is made of C[sub]12[/sub]. That is bullshit. There’s no difference between the carbon in diamond and that in wood.