After seeing several news stories – including one that was the most viewed article on BBC News, now with over 18 thousand “shares” – about an alternative cremation process to be offered at Anderson-McQueen Funeral Home in St. Petersburg, FL, I knew it was time for a site visit! After arriving, I spoke with its President and CEO, John McQueen, as well as Sandy Sullivan, who founded and serves as Managing Director of Resomation, Ltd., the Glasgow-based company that builds the machines. They proved to be an excellent source of information and explained why it’s a green funeral option. I’ll get to the details of what resomation actually entails in a minute, but first here’s some background information.

During our talk, McQueen mentioned that burial rates have dropped and traditional cremation rates have risen, the latter now accounting for roughly 75 percent of funerals at their facility. Since the resomator will not be operational until mid October, the number of people going this route remains to be seen. However, it appears to be in high demand already as Anderson-McQueen has been contacted by people all over the country wanting to pursue this more eco-friendly option. McQueen also said that while he faced many legislative hurdles in the beginning – including changing Florida law to permit resomation as a legal funeral technique – it will be a much easier process for subsequent funeral homes that want to offer this alternative.

Put simply, resomation is a patented process that heats and pressurizes water and potassium hydroxide to 350 degrees Fahrenheit and 150 PSI to remove body tissue (rather than direct flames). Water accounts for approximately 95 percent of the total solution.

Bolstering its “green” credentials, the conclusion found by the 2011 study, “Environmental Impact of Different Funeral Technologies” by TNO, was that the overall environmental impact, from least to greatest, was: resomation, cryomation, cremation, burial. Specifically, resomation and cryomation had the lowest impact in nearly all categories, while burial had the highest impact in nearly every category (specifically, land use, human toxicity, and global warming). Of the four funeral options, resomation scored the best in the categories for human toxicity and global warming, and worst in the eutrophication category, due to the high quantity of discharged fluid (about 80 gallons of water and 4 gallons of potassium hydroxide, depending on the size of the occupant). Nevertheless, even when altering the input data with sensitivity analyses (for things like the amount of water and potassium hydroxide used), resomation was still found to likely have the lowest environmental impact.

The study also pointed out that, unlike cremation, resomation does not release any substances, including mercury from amalgam fillings, to the atmosphere. However, the amount of mercury released to the atmosphere is disputed. While the TNO study states that mercury from amalgam fillings is very low, another study cited by Resomation, Ltd. estimates it represented 16 percent of mercury emissions in the United Kingdom. Another benefit resomation has over cremation is that greenhouse gas emissions are reduced by 35 percent, and consumption of electricity and gas is reduced to less than an eighth (Sustain). While this probably isn’t important to the vast majority of people, enough have showed an interest, for one reason or another, to make resomation a viable business.

For those who want to know a little more about how resomation works, read on. However, if you don’t want to read about a cremation process, you probably should stop reading now since there’s not a good way to sugarcoat it. Admittedly, when I first arrived at Anderson-McQueen, it took a little while for me to get used to my surroundings. Now, here’s the nitty-gritty.

As defined in the aforementioned 2011 TNO Life Cycle Analysis, “resomation, or in technical terms alkali hydrolysis, is a patented way to dissolve the weak parts of a body in a basic solution.” After being placed in the resomator, body weight is calculated automatically and the machine determines how much water and potassium hydroxide (KOH) to add. It is then heated to 350 degrees Fahrenheit (180 Celsius) and pressurized to about 150 PSI (negating boiling water). The process finishes in two to three hours, about the same time it takes for a traditional cremation. After the “weak parts,” or flesh, are dissolved and the fluid is discharged, all that remains is brittle bone ash and any metal objects from jewelry, fillings, surgery, etc. The bones are then dried and placed in a “cremulator,” where they are converted to the recognizable dusty ash that is placed in an urn. At this point, McQueen and Sullivan were quick to mention that this process differs from traditional cremation only in how the flesh is removed, and that the bones are dried. That is, with flame cremation, what goes in the urn is actually bone ash, and it undergoes exactly the same “cremulation” process.

If you’re still with me, one thing you might be wondering is where all the fluid is discharged. According to several water samples taken by the city, the LCA study mentioned above, and Resomation, Ltd., the effluent from the chemical process is technically sterile, not hazardous, and contains no DNA. The water is thus safe to be discharged normally to the sewage system without any prior special treatment. If you think that’s gross or unacceptable, remember, this doesn’t mean dead people are going into the water supply! As traditional flame cremation emits incinerated flesh into the atmosphere as basic elements including carbon, resomation breaks down flesh into salts, sugars, and small peptides and amino acids (which is probably cleaner than the vast majority of what goes down our drains and toilets every day).

Despite some negative feedback on the internet and unfavorable news coverage – especially concerning how the water is treated – McQueen and Sullivan said that market research shows people generally have a positive impression of resomation. For other funeral homes, it may prove to be an attractive option due to having lower operating costs in the long run compared to a crematorium. They also indicated that while resomation currently is marketed as being eco-friendly, they believe it still has broad appeal and will become a mainstream alternative in the future.

Thumbnail
Text Picture 1
Text Picture 2
Video