Unshelved by Bill Barnes and Gene Ambaum
comic strip overdue media

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

I'm fascinated by stuff like this

When you're dying for a lower carbon footprint: Body-disposal process offers more eco-friendly alternative to cremation
From dust we are, and to dust we shall return — by burial, cremation or emulsification.

As some Americans push ever harder to leave a smaller carbon footprint on the environment, the funeral industry is taking a new step to help us go even more gently into that good night. Instead of a traditional burial, which takes up space six feet underground, or cremation, which uses a surprising amount of energy, the dead can now be dissolved.
It takes lower heat and chemicals, the latter of which make me a bit suspicious when it comes to calling something environmentally-friendly. They claim that after the wastewater is treated it has fewer toxins in it than industrial wastewater that's been treated. But then there's this:
Here’s the morbid math: Cremating one corpse requires two to three hours and more than 1,800 degrees of heat — enough energy to release 573 pounds of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, environmental analysts have calculated. In many cases, dental compounds, such as fillings, also go up in smoke, spewing harmful mercury vapors into the air unless the crematorium has a chimney filter.

In resomation, a body is placed in a steel chamber along with a mixture of water and potassium hydroxide. Air pressure inside the vessel is increased to about 145 pounds per square inch, and the temperature is raised to about 356 degrees Fahrenheit. After two to three hours, the corpse is reduced to bones that are then crushed into a fine, white powder. That dust can be scattered by families or placed in an urn. Dental fillings are separated out for safe disposal.
One woman said if there wasn't a local resomator then she'd like to be shipped to St Petersburg, which will soon have such a facility. One of the comment writers pointed out that a 650 mile trip blows the whole desire to leave a low carbon footprint out of the water. I have to agree. It sounds like a fad. I'd prefer to be digested by flesh-eating beetles. Now that's environmentally friendly. :)

No comments: