The article gives only the most passing nod towards cremation: is cremation a more environmentally sound option? How are cadavers donated to science disposed of?
There a more environmentally sound form of disposing of bodies called alkaline hydrolysis [1]
The environmental benefits of alkaline hydrolysis are significant. Its carbon footprint is about a tenth of that caused by burning bodies. Mr. Wilson said liquefaction uses a fraction of the energy of a standard cremator and releases no fumes.
> How are cadavers donated to science disposed of?
In Leuven in Belgium the Vesalius Institute administers this. The remains are normally buried in a part of the municipal cemetery called the 'Anatomy Field'. There's small gravestones with the names. I think it's kind of nice.
You can, however, arrange cremation or burial wherever you please.
That would be hard to measure, but I'm sure if we all started cremating our dead the environmental cost would go up significantly. I found a list [1] of cremation rate by country. For quite a few countries, the majority of people cremate their dead (religious reasons, usually), but there's still a minority elsewhere.
I think the freezing and shaking method sounds pretty good in terms of environmental cost.
> freezing and shaking method sounds pretty good in terms of environmental cost.
Freeze dried? I'd be glad to have an instant version of myself- two teaspoons in hot water, stir, and you can chat with your dead uncle for an hour or so. That is, until the jar is empty.
One of the cooler things to do with your corpse I ran across over the years is to end up at a body farm [1]. Helps the CSI types learn new forensics science!
