Slashdot Mirror


Washington Could Become the First State To Compost the Dead (nbcnews.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: Washington could become the first state to embrace another funerary practice by making it legal to compost the dead. The method is called "recomposing" and claims to be cheaper and more environmentally friendly than traditional burial or cremation. It involves rapidly decomposing a body and converting the remains into soil. That nutrient-rich material can then be used to grow trees, flowers, and other new life. The alternative practice hinges on a bill that state senator Jamie Pedersen plans to introduce next month, according to NBC. It would legalize recomposing in Washington where burial and cremation are currently the only acceptable ways to dispose of human remains. A public-benefit corporation, Recompose, is responsible for the actual composting. "The transformation of human to soil happens inside our reusable, hexagonal recomposition vessels," Recompose states in an FAQ. "When the process has finished, families will be able to take home some of the soil created, while gardens on-site will remind us that all of life is interconnected."

"The process utilizes a 5-foot-by-10-foot pod full of organic 'tinder' such as straw and wood chips," reports Motherboard. "Thermophilic or heat-loving microbes then metabolize the remains, maintaining an internal temperature of 131 degrees Fahrenheit within the vessel. The entire ritual takes one month, and produces a cubic yard of compost, according to Recompose." Non-organic materials such as artificial hips will be screened for and recycled, and people will certain illnesses may be ineligible since some pathogens may be resistant to the composting process.

27 of 219 comments (clear)

  1. Disgusting by 110010001000 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Could you imagine what soil that contains dead mammals would smell like? This needs to be stopped.

    1. Re:Disgusting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm trying to imagine what kind of sicko would go to a human composting site just to sniff the compost... Those people need to be stopped!

    2. Re:Disgusting by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      It would smell like soil.
      Other then a few microorganisms most life is build on the death of other.
      Even plants needs soil to grow in that is from decayed plant and animal matter. Some plants such as the Venus fly trap need to catch insects because they don't have enough nutrients in its natural soil.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re: Disgusting by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Soil-ent Green is people!"

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    4. Re:Disgusting by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 2, Informative

      It smells like compost. I composted a few dead chickens on my compost heap. Off course, you have to cover the cadavers to avoid flies and other insect manifestation. Sawdust works fine, and the straw and wood chips would do the same. In fact, "balanced" compost works best, so the straw and wood chips are needed for a good composting process. Halfway the composting process the meat falls from the bones and looks cooked (white-ish for chicken) and after the full process you will only find the bones and normal compost.

      --
      Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
    5. Re:Disgusting by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      From reading the comments here, it looks like most people failed to get your reference. Good job.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    6. Re:Disgusting by hey! · · Score: 2

      There's a kind of research institution called a "body farm", where scientific investigations take place on what happens to human bodies when they're disposed of in various ways (e.g. left in a locked car trunk, dismembered and left in plastic bags, piled in mass graves, or simply left out on the forest floor). The primary purpose of these laboratories is to make forensic evaluations of remains more accurate.

      There are a half dozen such institutions in the US alone; apparently they're quite horrible to the uninitiated. That doesn't mean they should be *stopped*. People donate their bodies to these places to bring future murderers and war criminals to justice.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  2. Easier way to handle this... by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...we've already got landfills. Just toss the body into a landfill, and done!

    That said, I'm not actually opposed to the idea. But I expect the lawsuits wrapped around the first case where the family can't agree on method of disposal will make this a very unpopular option....

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    1. Re:Easier way to handle this... by jwhyche · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I fail to see a problem with this. My daughter keeps saying when I go she is going put my remains in a large garbage bag and leave me by the curb.

      Joking aside, I've never understood the desire to pump dead people full of chemicals so the don't decay, then dump them in a hole in a air tight box. What is the point. An all that space taken up by graveyards. I've made it clear that I'm to be cremated and my ashes used to line the cat box. Might as well get one more use out of my dead ass.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    2. Re:Easier way to handle this... by JackieBrown · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's a way of respecting the dead. Not that the dead care, since they are dead, but it is one of the few things we as the living can do to feel like we are helping them.

      I still want to upgrade the headstone on my wife's grave to something that stands out to honor her. That said, she doesn't care and the money would be better spent doing a donation in her name or something similar to that.

    3. Re:Easier way to handle this... by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      I understand. I'm looking at it from my point of view, that of being dead. Not the point of view from losing a loved one. I should have thought of that.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    4. Re:Easier way to handle this... by rahvin112 · · Score: 2

      Embalming is a HORRIFIC process that was created before the advent of refrigeration and began to be widely used in the USA after the civil war due to the army's use of the process to send war dead home. It's continued use today is an abomination. Getting your corpse embalmed and put in an airtight casket pretty much guarantees that in a thousand years someone is going to dig up your remains and put them in a museum.

      Like other posters in this thread, I've made my demand that I be cremated to dust known to my relatives and spouse.

    5. Re:Easier way to handle this... by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      Was there anything special about your fucking wife? I do know that there was something special about fucking your wife.

      Ricky, is that you? Quite frankly she was special to him and that is good enough for you. Fucking asshole.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    6. Re:Easier way to handle this... by eaglesrule · · Score: 2

      But cremation does not adequately celebrate the eternal dignity of the body, which is not a mere disposable hunk of matter.

      Leave it to the religiously indoctrinated to insist that your remains be locked in an overly expensive box, dumped into a pit, and then left as sustenance for the lowest order of microorganisms and bacteria, on the basis of that being considered a preservation of human dignity.

      Of course one could spend hours trying to parse the sanctimonious word salad that's foisted as a excuse, or one could simply realize that the Church runs the graveyard and can extract tolls on the dead. Profiteering is what this dogma ultimately boils down to, as usual.

  3. Doesn't go far enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    We need to be able to vote on the living that need to be added to the mix!

  4. Really? Composting reactors? by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why not just find a hill, dig a hole, throw the person in upside down and plant a tree in their arsehole? We need more trees anyway.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  5. That's a better use of land by pr0t0 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think it would be great if we could replace cemeteries with forests. For each body, a small hole is dug, the recomposed soil is placed in it, along with a tree. Then a simple stone indicator is placed in the ground instead of a giant ego-tombstone. Instead of a family mausoleum, you have a family grove.

    Maybe the family can choose the type of tree, or if that doesn't work for forest planning, you have a pine cemetery and an oak cemetery, etc. These could also be functional parks and rec sites instead of giant repositories of the dead that people rarely visit.

    --
    I'm sorry, but your opinion seems to be wrong.
    1. Re:That's a better use of land by Nidi62 · · Score: 2

      I like that idea a lot actually.

      The reason its probably not done thought is because people have to place narratives on everything that happens. The first time someones tree dies prematurely from disease, gets struck by lightning, etc people will imagine it was some judgement on the deceased.

      Interesting things or coincidences do happen in cemeteries. I have one of my own. A year or so ago I went for the first time to visit the grave of my great aunt who had recently passed. We had a rough idea of where it was but didn't know for sure. As my wife and I were in the car talking and trying to look for it, we see a flower display on a grave fall over (all of the graves had fake flower displays on them in holders, stuck in that green foam). So we go over and sure enough, her grave was next to the one that had the flowers fall over. This was several weeks after her burial so the flowers probably didn't just fall over after being knocked during her burial.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  6. Obligitory by Pikoro · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Bring out yer deaaaaaaad!"

    --
    "Freedom in the USA is not the ability to do what you want. It is the ability to stop others from doing what THEY want"
  7. Re:parasites etc by reboot246 · · Score: 2

    Exactly. I'm sure that 131 degrees Fahrenheit is not hot enough to kill the wee beasties found in a human body. We don't use human feces as fertilizer for much the same reasons. I guess it would be okay for non-edible plants to grow in.

    When we compost plant material, one of our goals is killing whatever viable seeds there may be in it. That's fairly easy when the internal temperature of the compost is about 130 degrees or more. But bacteria would find those temps a virtual heaven for multiplying. Remember too, the highest temperature is only at the center of the compost pile. That's why we turn the pile regularly.

  8. Classic old joke. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2
    Reminds me of the classic old joke.

    High society lady to the pianist, "That piece was excellent, very nice. Wondering who composed it"

    Pianist, "Vivaldi madame, Four Seasons".

    Lady: "Good, is he still composing?"

    Pianist: "No madame, he is decomposing."

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  9. Composting is not cooking by sjbe · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm sure that 131 degrees Fahrenheit is not hot enough to kill the wee beasties found in a human body.

    Doesn't have to. That's not how composting works. You are thinking in terms of cooking which is not what is going on. Composting relies on various thermophilic organisms to consume the decaying matter and they generate heat as a by-product. In fact it doesn't work if it gets too hot and kills the microorganisms. That heat is what is generated by them doing their work. When they have digested the matter the compost cools down again.

    We don't use human feces as fertilizer for much the same reasons

    No the reason we don't use human feces as fertilizer is something quite different. Compost is quite safe to use and carries no meaningful risk of transmission of harmful pathogens. It's a completely different process with completely different risk profiles.

    1. Re:Composting is not cooking by BringsApples · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well said, sir! I'd just like to add that compost CAN BE harmful, if it contains animal waste, and isn't broken down all the way. This is why there's all the scare with organic lettuce having E. Coli. Damn hippies rushing their compost.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
  10. Re:Clueless by 110010001000 · · Score: 2

    Another wooooosh. Thanks for the tip. I thought all mammals went to Mammal Heaven and didn't decay in the soil.

  11. Finally by Tarlus · · Score: 4, Funny

    After I die I might finally be useful at gardening.

    --
    /* No Comment */
  12. Re:Score! by jbmartin6 · · Score: 3, Funny

    They can pry my nutrients out of my cold dead hands.

    --
    This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
  13. Re:Clueless by serviscope_minor · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Another wooooosh.

    Say something stupid. Get a massive smackdown delivered. Claim it's a "whoosh".

    Sure thing buddy. We do all believe you.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.