You may already be trying to save the world in your daily activities. However, you might not have thought about the environmental impact of your demise. Moreover, that your demise is just one of over 600,000 deaths each year on this tiny island.
This subject arose when I recently talked to an environmental group about my working career in cemeteries and crematoria. This began in 1961 as a horticultural trainee at Shrewsbury Cemetery. As a 15-year-old, I loved the scythers cutting grass in the old section. However, they were sacked, being replaced by a horticultural spraying team, into which I was seconded. We sprayed grass growth retarder on all the grass and mixed in a powerful weedkiller. The entire old cemetery was covered in chemical spray.
Few really noticed what happened next. The weeds, of course, were wildflowers. Without these, all the butterflies, clouds of which had surrounded the scythers, disappeared. Then the voles followed as they could not survive in the poisoned grass. The owls were the final casualty, at the top of the food chain, both tawny and barn owls. This was countrywide and the owls are yet to recover.
While the cemeteries were poisoned, cremation was seen as the way forward. Even I felt that it was modern and hygienic. So much so that I accepted a post as a cremator operator and abandoned horticulture. The cremators then were very poor and the chimney often smoked.
It was 25 years later that the US would state that ‘incineration per se is harmful to the environment’. The Environmental Protection Act 1990 recognised this and forced crematoria to buy new and more efficient cremators that, at the very least, reduced the smoke. A smokeless chimney stack looked good but only because the more harmful gasses were transparent. They remain the unseen air pollutant, containing the 18% of our body formed of carbon.
To raise temperatures in the new cremators, we had to use four times more gas than previously. However, it was not a matter of sitting back and doing nothing. I created a scheme to reduce gas usage by pre-heating a cremator and using it for a minimum 8 cremations over a 12-hour shift. I also encouraged the use of eco-coffins and wrote the Charter for the Bereaved. These initiatives had some impact but were not universally adopted. Worse, we began to realise that even the cremated remains were toxic. Land, like the Gardens of Remembrance, full of cremated remains, are now considered to be contaminated.
Old cemeteries meanwhile, were neglected and became wildlife sanctuaries. However, new cemeteries opened after WW2 were laid out as lawn graves, heavily mown, and with serried rows of small headstones imported from China and India. Consequently, most modern cemeteries have a huge carbon footprint and offer little value to wildlife.
Ever conscious of the damage I caused as an ignorant youngster, I moved on to a new post as Bereavement Services Manager in Carlisle in 1984. I soon created 20 acres of conservation in the old cemetery. The wildflowers burgeoned, voles returned and then the owls. The reduced mowing saved four times my annual salary. The surprise was how many people asked me if they could be buried in these wildflower plots, but we had no legal powers to re-use graves.
The council responded by opening the world’s first Natural Burial site in 1993. We had three objectives, to reduce the carbon footprint, increase wildlife diversity and minimise the waste of resources. It was the first new funeral option in over 100 years and a direct challenge to cremation. However, those choosing natural burial had to reject carcinogenic embalming, use biodegradable (eco) coffins and avoid all use of plastic. That meant that we, and the bereaved, were often in confrontation with the established funeral industry.
Today, much of that is past. Eco-coffins are routine and natural burial is established but without a great impact on cremation. A natural burial ground creates new life from death and is a sustainable cemetery. Nowadays, they offer the only option to reduce the global warming impact of our death. However, some challenging new options will soon arise.
The first is composting the body, already available in some US states. This idea appears to be low energy and a low polluter. Where to place the bulky, nutrient rich compost will be an important consideration, which has yet to be resolved.
The second new option will be water cremation, called Resomation or alkaline hydrolysis. This is also a low energy process but the waste fluid is to be discharged, untreated, into the public sewer. This was accepted a few years ago but will that now be the case after all the recent concern about water quality?
The third new option is to re-use graves, those initially used between 75 – 100 years ago, in old cemeteries. This will require new legislation but would, potentially, offer millions of graves and allow us to move away from cremation. However, the problem would be to re-use the old cemeteries without destroying their existing wildlife value. As mentioned earlier, we could not allow all the old cemeteries to be turned into lawn graves. Some sort of nature friendly burial, or even natural burial, would be essential. And what about all those imported granite and marble memorials?
The Law Commission is currently reviewing burial and cremation legislation and will consider these new options. A consultation paper is expected by Autumn 2024. If the law allows us to re-use graves, then the challenge will be to avoid the high maintenance cemeteries of the past. Whatever, I still see burial as the only process that locks up the carbon in our body and in the coffin. Composting also looks very viable. For certain, our funerals could have a very new look in the future. That said, funeral options will be more complex and require far more understanding than in the past. Will we turn away from harmful cremation, or not?
Article by Ken West – Stonehenge Pensioner
Published in farewells Edition 18
