Water cremation: Yea or Nah?
Aqua cremation, also known as water cremation or alkaline hydrolysis, is a supposedly eco-friendly alternative to traditional flame-based cremation. The process uses water, heat, and alkali (usually potassium hydroxide or sodium hydroxide) to break down the body in a process that mimics natural decomposition but in a much faster and more controlled manner.
Here’s how it works:
The Body is Placed in a Chamber: The body is placed in a special chamber filled with a mixture of water and an alkaline solution.
Heat and Pressure: The chamber is then heated and pressurized, which accelerates the natural decomposition process. This typically takes several hours.
What’s Left: After the process, the soft tissue is broken down into its basic elements, leaving behind only bones. The bones are then processed into a fine powder, much like the ash that remains after traditional cremation.
Environmental Impact: Aqua cremation is considered much more environmentally friendly than traditional cremation. It uses significantly less energy, produces no harmful emissions (like carbon or mercury), and doesn't generate a need for the burning of fossil fuels.
It’s a relatively new method, and its legality and availability vary by location, but it’s gaining traction as a greener, less polluting alternative to traditional cremation.
This process usually takes longer than traditional fire based cremations and costs more. The specialised equipment and chemical costs add up significantly and may not be suitable for continuous operation.
There is also the matter of how and where does the run off go, to be processed before returning back to our water source. Will the cost of processing the run off back into safe potable water be another aggravating factor in adopting this new method? If no proper management of the run off and spent chemical “soup” is enforced, it does not sound ideal to turn on the tap and imagine someone’s loved one is in there, right before our shower or as many do here, drink it straight down.
Even though there are no fossil fuels directly involved in the process, a lot of electricity is needed to pressurize, heat and constantly move the chemical stew. Power is also needed to process the stew afterwards, in addition to more chemicals being involved. Would a chemically based solution be more welcoming than basic fire?
The optics of having someone “melted” down is also one of the concerns with this new technology. In our asian context, we are in the midst of moving on from traditional burials. We still have a small percentage, and not for religious reasons, who disagree with cremations in general. They are of course, the older generations who have been brought up way before cremations became mainstream.
Now that cremations are pretty much mainstream and acceptable by the masses, is this new method pushing it a little too far too soon?