Cremation Bad For The Planet

[Geof]

From Agence France-Presse (Whatever happened to Reuters?)

An Australian scientist called Wednesday for an end to the age-old tradition of cremation, saying the practice contributed to global warming. Incinerating one body can produce more than 50 kilograms of carbon dioxide.
...people could help the environment by being buried in a cardboard box under a tree. The decomposing bodies would provide the tree with nutrients and the tree would convert carbon dioxide into life-giving oxygen for decades.....what a shame to be cremated when you go up in a big bubble of carbon dioxide...Why waste all that carbon dioxide on your death?....it would not be a bad idea to bequeath one's body as food for a forest....You can actually do, after your death, an enormous amount of good for the planet....

The guy is a Reproductive Biologist which maybe explains why he doesn't seem to realise that it does not matter whether some is burnt or just decomposes naturally the same amount of CO2 is produced. But he got his name in newspapers worldwide.

[ImanCarrot]

Undoubtedly he ended his report with something along the lines of "however, much more research needs to be done into the subject.. and I'm the person to do it... give me lots of money".

The carbon from the tree would eventualy be given up.. unless we buried the tree too... in fact, perhaps we could get all the old trees and dead people, then use a high pressure industrial press to create oil.. I may sell that idea to Shell Oil hehe. We could power the press by tethering miles long wires attached to satelites- the wire would pass through the earth's magnetic field generating free electricity according to some physicists left hand rule of something.. but I need to research it more- can I have some money please?

[Geof]

Originally Posted by ImanCarrot ......We could power the press by tethering miles long wires attached to satelites- the wire would pass through the earth's magnetic field generating free electricity according to some physicists left hand rule of something.. but I need to research it more- can I have some money please?

This does need more research:

The satellite would have to be geostationary or the wire would wrap around the earth and reel the satellite in.

Therefore the satellite, wire and earth rotate as a single unit.

Therefore the wire is not moving relative to the magnetic field of the earth.

Therefore no free electricity?

[fizzissist]

Originally Posted by Geof .... Incinerating one body can produce more than 50 kilograms of carbon dioxide. .........The decomposing bodies would provide the tree with nutrients and the tree would convert carbon dioxide into life-giving oxygen for decades.........[/I][/B]

Decomposition results in CO2 AND....????? Decomposition is a net benefit?? The next logical step in this direction is that we grind up the bodies and use them for fertilizer.

"Hey Mom! These home-growed tomatoes are YUMMY!! I never dreamed gramma would be so tasty!"

[martinw]

Originally Posted by Geof This does need more research: The satellite would have to be geostationary or the wire would wrap around the earth and reel the satellite in. Therefore the satellite, wire and earth rotate as a single unit. Therefore the wire is not moving relative to the magnetic field of the earth. Therefore no free electricity?

Dear Geof,

I think that the answer is to repeatedly re-deploy the satellite in a non-geostationary orbit. This would have two benefits..

1) electricity would be generated because the wire would be moving relative to the earth's magnet field

2) the huge amount of force available when the satellite collides with the earth's surface could be used directly to power the ...er....oil press.


Best wishes


Martin

[sdantonio]

Originally Posted by fizzissist Decomposition results in CO2 AND....????? Decomposition is a net benefit?? The next logical step in this direction is that we grind up the bodies and use them for fertilizer. "Hey Mom! These home-growed tomatoes are YUMMY!! I never dreamed gramma would be so tasty!"

Watch the old science fiction film Soylent Green, tasefully done. One step beyond fertilizer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soylent_Green

[fizzissist]

Perfect Tommy: Emilio Lizardo. Wasn't he on TV once?
Buckaroo Banzai: You're thinking of Mr. Wizard.
Reno: Emilio Lizardo is a top scientist, dummkopf.
Perfect Tommy: So was Mr. Wizard.

RIP Mr. Wizard. The good news is you've been replaced by Bill Nye.

[sdantonio]

Originally Posted by fizzissist Perfect Tommy: [I]Emilio Lizardo. ...

Great movie. One of the best

[ImanCarrot]

The satellite would have to be geostationary or the wire would wrap around the earth and reel the satellite in.

Damn, I was hoping no-one would notice that... ok, my preliminary research (which needs more funding) has revealed that two satellites in non- geostationary orbits, one say 1 km above the other and linked by several wires would produce electricity. [edit] or even 3 or 4 linked horizontaly like a bolas[/edit]

The "dead press" could be situated on the lower satelite [edit] or the centre of the "bolas"[/edit] and the oil dispensed directly as "oil rain", or passed to a geostationary satelite and...

Getting the dead stuff up into orbit could be problematic, however I beleive our crack team (of one) have devised a unique solution in using a geostationary satelite with 1 tonne of collected oil from the "dead press" (TM) attached to a steel cable loop and pulley down to the ground... attach 1 tonne of dead stuff to the other end of the loop and reel it in. Because the weights in both sides of the loop are equal it should cost not a lot of energy...

You could also replace some of the "dead" weight by live tourists and charge them a fortune.

My head hurts...

[fizzissist]

Don't let the Met Office Hadley Centre see your idea...they'll steal it fer sure!!

[sdantonio]

Originally Posted by ImanCarrot Damn, I was hoping no-one would notice that... ok, my preliminary research (which needs more funding)

Sounds like a good ten years of government funding available there

[Geof]

Originally Posted by ImanCarrot Damn, I was hoping no-one would notice that... ok, my preliminary research (which needs more funding) has revealed that two satellites in non- geostationary orbits....

What I find scary is that this idea has about the same level of practicality as some proposals that seem to have been seriously touted; millions of little discs and things like that.