Morning:
8°c
A rioter who terrorised diners with an axe at McDonald's has been jailed for five years and three months - one of the toughest sentences for last summer's disturbances
More...
Cremation to be replaced by eco-friendly freeze-drying of corpses
Last updated at 00:07am on 10.10.06
Freeze drying corpses is an eco-friendly way of disposing with dead bodies
It brings a new meaning to the phrase "dust to dust".
Funerals in Britain could soon end with the body of a loved-one being frozen to -196C in liquid nitrogen and then shaken until it disintegrates into powder.
The process - known as "promession" - could be the answer to the dwindling amount of space in Britain's cemeteries as well as being more environmentally friendly than cremation, say campaigners.
It has already been given the go-ahead in Sweden, and now councils are lobbying the Government to change the law to allow it to happen here - currently bodies can only be buried or cremated.
A survey of 100 local authorities found that more than a quarter were already actively considering freeze-drying bodies, the latest being Preston in Lancashire.
Many cemeteries will run out of space within ten years, forcing councils to consider unpopular solutions such as "double-decker" graves, with coffins buried on top of one another, or even vertically - effectively standing up.
Around seven out of ten people currently opt for the cheaper option of cremation, but that also has its problems.
Burning dental fillings creates mercury emissions, and Government targets mean filters must be fitted to crematoria, some of which may have to be completely rebuilt as a result at a cost of millions.
Supporters also say it boosts the environment further as it is better at recycling nutrients than burial where the body is embalmed and buried at greater depth.
So as bizarre as it sounds, growing numbers of councils are signing up to the idea of freeze-drying bodies.
The process involves dipping the body in -196C liquid nitrogen until it is brittle, and then placing it on a vibrating mat so it disintegrates into powder.
Remains
A magnetic field then removes metal objects like fillings and artificial limbs from the remains.
The town of Jönköping in Sweden - where the process was invented by an ecologist - is set to become the first to begin disposing of bodies in this way later this year, and it is being watched eagerly by authorities in Britain.
Here, Crewe and Nantwich council in Cheshire is leading the way thanks to the enthusiasm of its cemetery and crematoria manager, Mary Slinn.
"Everything points to it dealing with many of the problems we face in disposing of bodies, and a growing number of councils are interested in finding out more," she said.
"But until the law is amended, we cannot take it any further.
"It's not legal or illegal, but the law only permits burial or cremation at the moment, and we hope the growing interest in alternative methods like this will see that changed."
Among at least 27 councils which have expressed an interest are Leicester, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Carlisle and Fareham in Hampshire.
Anthony Gornall, who chairs Preston City Council's working group on the future of disposal of bodies, said: "Mercury abatement on crematoria is going to cost us a fortune, well over a-quarter-of-a-million pounds per unit, and this has got to be worth looking at."
A key consideration will be cost - authorities would need to build what have been dubbed "promatoria" in which bodies could be freeze-dried - although ceremonies would probably carry a similar price to cremation.
The Church of England and other churches say they have no objection to freeze-drying of bodies in principle, provided it is done with dignity and reverence.
The Department of Constitutional Affairs said it would consult on changing the law if the idea won widespread support.
Reader views (14)
I think that this is the best thing that can happen to a body when thinking of being cremated. Burning releases mercury as mentioned and other pollutants, where as freezing traps gases and other airborne substances. If the locations using this technology use solar or other kinds of eco technology to power their locations, that would help with power cost. In the Finished process though, I don't think anything should be taken away from the bodies, just put it in the erne and be done with it. They paid for the items, let them go with it, unless they say take it out. But, in the end, those items should be shattered with it too; iron can shatter when exposed to enough nitrogen, right? In the end, I will look forward to my end on earth being whole end like this. This is going to happen if you are in a casket anyways, right, why not make it faster and eco-friendly and placed where u want it…? I had more to say, but, I will leave at this point... 
GO ECO-FRIENDLY!!!
- Clint Young, Los Angeles, California, United States of America, 09/09/2010 00:48
Report abuse
this is my preferred method and hope (albeit environment friendly and not mega expensive) that it will be used sooner rather than later its time for change and if its no eco friendly to be buried then it should be banned NOW !!!!!!
- Karen Naylor, wigan uk, 07/01/2010 21:23
Report abuse
I am against the removal of any body part on death, be it gold fillings, amalgam fillings, prosthesis or organs as there is no way of ensuring that no one profits later from these and the process is done with dignity. This local authority gave consideration to heating the crematorium chapel by emissions from the cremators so nothing would surprise me if they thought they could 'weigh in' removed products and reduce their costs. It needs full open consideration and public debate.
- Julie Miles, Stockport, England, 07/01/2010 10:14
Report abuse
Although I am not aware of the technicalities of this process I am assuming that the impact to the environment would be significantly less than with a cremation. I would also have thought that the shaking motion would also reduce what is left of the cremated remains after the cremation process, and make the need for powering further refinery processes unnecessary - although I am not sure. It would certainly negate the need for a cooling period, assuming that the powder does not take as long to warm up as traditionally cremated remains would take to cool down.
On a personal level, I'd far prefer this method for myself, rather than cremation. I think it is perhaps a more dignified and more convenient method of creating a very similar end result. I think this alternative should be seriously considered by this government, and I believe there would be a market for it.
- Paul Burnett, London, UK, 25/07/2009 00:06
Report abuse
I think it is a great idea. I hate the thought of burial or cremation, so I would give a thumbs up to this idea.
- Jenn Ie, Somerset, Street, Somerset, 15/01/2009 14:20
Report abuse
We are opening a natural burial ground on our farm next spring. The 12acre field is a natural long established hay meadow, with wonderful views over the Dorset & Somerset countryside.
We hope this will give families another choice when faced with the loss of a family member. Personally I find it quite alarming the amount of polution which comes from cremation and I am in favour of freezing for those who can't face burial.
- Joanna Vassie, Corscombe Dorset, 06/11/2008 08:49
Report abuse
Humans are too egotistcal. The cheapest, most environmentally efficient method should be used. With 6 billion and exponentially growing population man needs to think fast and downsize all wastage on the planet for future generation- if this generation does not terminate life possibilities.
- Lee, BC Canada, 12/06/2008 17:37
Report abuse
What's wrong with a simple green burial? I mean, logic tells me that it doesn't matter but I hate the idea of a loved one being shattered like that. Maybe I'm just too traditional though.
- Jason, UK, 22/04/2008 14:13
Report abuse
I will be contacting my local council to show support for this method.
It will be my choice if available, when the time comes.
If mercury fillings are a problem, couldn't mercury filled teeth simply be removed before freezing takes place?
- Linda Wright, Leicester UK, 09/04/2008 13:51
Report abuse
I would like to think that soon the government will allow this to became a legal practice, soon. I have expressed my wishes to my family and this is the only way I want to go. I hope that the wishes I have for my funeral are able to come to pass. It sounds crazy but the thought of being buried or cremated fills me with dread. Yes I know I will be dead, but I m alive now and expressing how I want to go and therefore still have feelings.
- P. Wilkes, Cannock, England, 12/03/2008 22:07
Report abuse
Four things:
1. What is the ammout of energy used in the process?
2. What is the dollar cost?
3. Does the process destroy any diseases or pathogens that may be present?
4. Around here, embalming is not required unless you stay around for more than three days post mortum.
- Paul Dennison, USA, 11/10/2006 14:51
Report abuse
There is no mention of the energy consumption required to keep the volume of Nitrogen in its liquid state.
The comments about needing to embalm bodies before burial are quite wrong and misleading - there should be no need for embalming, a process which uses toxic chemicals to preserve the body, for normal burial.
Natural burial is still by far the most environmentally friendly and only truly sustainable way to dispose of human remains. Simple, natural materials, dignified traditional ceremonies and preservation of the land for future generations.
- James Leedam, Monmouth, Wales, 10/10/2006 17:31
Report abuse
I read about this a few years ago and I'm glad to see the idea is taking off.
We have no option but to adopt this as it will surely have a dramtic impact on our carbon emissions.
I have absolutely no problem with the method and whilst I understand people are entitled to a dignified exit, I find this no more traumatising than cremation.
- Janine, London, England, 10/10/2006 14:30
Report abuse
Seems a cold hearted way of burial if you ask me!
- Jack Frost, Iceland, 10/10/2006 12:05
Report abuse
