The cemeteries here are getting full. We cannot continue to bury the deceased in nonbiodegradable coffins in the centre of the city, occupying area that could otherwise be left open for animals or turned into cheap housing
Two fantastic choices are in front of us. Green burial at conservation cemeteries is one option. The second option is aquamation, which is obviously preferable than [conventional] cremation because it doesn't involve burning the body and emitting greenhouse gases.
The same result is achieved by both water and flame cremation. They eliminate the soft tissue so that only calcium phosphate-containing bone is left. An urn can be used to deliver bone dust back to the family.
Flame cremation burns soft tissue at temperatures of 1,700 degrees. Carcinogenic gases, such as nitrous oxide, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide, are released in this way.
They believe the method is easier for the body. More bone fragments are returned, and none are lost down the chimney. So the technique is more delicate. Of course, there are also advantages for the environment.
What are the environmental benefits of aquamation?.
We avoid releasing all of these harmful chemicals and greenhouse gases into the atmosphere by not burning the corpse. Only one-tenth as much energy as flame cremation is used in the process.
However, the front-of-house work, dealing with the neighbourhood... Working with somebody receiving end-of-life care, interacting with someone as they prepare for death or are grieving the loss of a loved one, is such a profoundly important experience.