Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Promession, new method of organic burial for environmental atheists

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    NecroSteve
    Registered Users Posts: 165 ✭✭NecroSteve


    I don't see this process as eco-friendly at all, it's very energy intensive. Best thing to do with a dead body, in my opinion, is to use it for organ transplants and/or medical research. After that, petfood. Or whatever, ego dies with the body anyway! :)


  • Options
    #33
    Just Like Heaven
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,132 ✭✭✭Just Like Heaven


    NecroSteve wrote: »
    I don't see this process as eco-friendly at all, it's very energy intensive. Best thing to do with a dead body, in my opinion, is to use it for organ transplants and/or medical research. After that, petfood. Or whatever, ego dies with the body anyway! :)

    It isn't that simple. Most people who die are old and 70/80 year old kidneys aren't of much use in a transplant. Not all organs are transferable anyway, and if everybody was having their organs removed after they die, we'd run out of people to transfer them to as most people go through life not needing an organ transplant. Transferable organs make up a small percentage of the body mass.

    If people have an objection to their body being obliterated in this sense absolutely best of luck with trying to convince them to donate themselves to a catnip factory. Doing "whatever" after that is exactly the problem.


  • Options
    #34
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,167 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    I agree that I don't see that this has any special relevance to atheists. I'm pretty sure the mainstream religions in Ireland have no problem with cremation, and would have no problem with this.

    The main concern, I suspect, would be the carbon/energy cost of producing, transporting and storing the volume of liquid nitrogen required to deep-freeze a human body prior to reducing it by vibration. (Plus, I supose, the carbon/energy cost of producing the vibrations.) I'd be interested to see the figures on whether this is greater or lesser than the environmental cost of reducing the body by cremation.


  • Options
    #35
    kiffer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,097 ✭✭✭kiffer


    Cork boy 55 wrote: »

    Who is going to take the fillings out?
    Mortican? Doctor conducting the autopsy/postmortem? The embalmers? I don't want to be filled with sawdust and formaldehyde so all they need to do is pop my fillings out and be done with it. I'm in the process of getting my mercury bassed fillings swapped out anyway so by the time I die it might not be needed...
    People aren't just dumped into coffins and thrown in a hole.
    Cork boy 55 wrote: »
    What about all the other metal bits and bobs that are increasing finding there way into Humanoid bodies?

    Most of that metal is non toxic surely? Why not leave it in?

    Cork boy 55 wrote: »


    Promession takes them all out with a magnet machine at the promatoria.

    A few people have said that you can't separate the fillings and implants with a magnetic field but that's not accurate, you can* but again its a waste of energy. So why would you?


    *yes, you can. google "eddy current separator".
    Cork boy 55 wrote: »

    Promession is far more environmental friendly than a traditional funeral
    and a big improvement on the current natural burial
    that you describe, Promession is the greenest of green disposition options.
    It doesn't seem greener at all... making the liquid nitrogen will take a lot of power, running the smasher and separator will take some as well.
    Having an embalmer pop the fillings out takes less energy than actually embalmin the body.
    Cork boy 55 wrote: »


    Removing the water content reduces volume of body by 50-70%
    Makes it easier to remove all the metals.
    Compared to standard burial, Promession does not release CH4 as the decomposition is aerobic, whereas in a deep grave, conditions are lacking in oxygen and aerobic decomposers would not survive. Traditional burial may contaminate the soil and groundwater with the liquids that are released from decomposition. Promessed remains are effectively recycled into soil.
    Rotting is a slow, ugly, smelly process. Nature intended that we go back to the same system that we originated from and now we can become a gift to the soil instead of a being problem.
    There is much more detail on the difference between decomposition and rotting, If you click on the first link in OP and read it.

    Who cares that rotting is slow and ugly?
    I'll be dead, I still have to rot even if we fragment and dry my body. Sorry(!) "decompose".
    Nature intended for us to be frozen, shattered and then dried... Really?


    Edit: damn you autocorrect!


Advertisement