If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post) Spiffy UK crematorium to use excess energy to warm nearby chapel. Community debate ends in a dead heat   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 33
More: Spiffy  
•       •       •

933 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Nov 2011 at 10:46 AM   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»   |    Get this fabulous T-Shirt and impress the methane out of your friends! shirt it!



33 Comments   (+0 »)
   
 
BurnShrike
2011-11-29 08:29:10 AM
They'll stay warm when they're burning in hellfire for disrespecting Jesus.
 
AverageAmericanGuy
2011-11-29 10:49:09 AM
That's cool. There's a garbage incineration plant a stone's throw from here that pumps heat across the street to the spa.

No sense in wasting energy.
 
LavenderWolf
2011-11-29 10:55:38 AM
That's good and all, but do we really need articles every few months about a different building/structure/pool being heated by crematoria fire? Yes, we get it, fire hot and useful.
 
cgraves67
2011-11-29 10:56:52 AM
"Gee, it seems warm in here today, Reverend."
"yeah, they're burning old lady Marshall."

And it really adds to the Fire-and-Brimstone sermons to know that you're sweating because someone is burning.
 
MBooda
2011-11-29 10:57:12 AM
A glowing tribute.
www.empireonline.com
 
dontpointthatthingatme
2011-11-29 10:57:29 AM
This seems like something that should be approved by the family and the family member first.
 
oldass31
2011-11-29 11:01:19 AM
AverageAmericanGuy: That's cool. There's a garbage incineration plant a stone's throw from here that pumps heat across the street to the spa.

No sense in wasting energy.

From a purely utilitarian standpoint, you're right. But beyond that, I feel there is a slight nuance of difference between selling electricity from garbage incineration and selling electricity from human cremation.

Call me sentimental.
 
AverageAmericanGuy
2011-11-29 11:04:19 AM
oldass31: AverageAmericanGuy: That's cool. There's a garbage incineration plant a stone's throw from here that pumps heat across the street to the spa.

No sense in wasting energy.

From a purely utilitarian standpoint, you're right. But beyond that, I feel there is a slight nuance of difference between selling electricity from garbage incineration and selling electricity from human cremation.

Call me sentimental.

Actually the plant here runs cooling pipes through the incineration chambers and pumps that out to the spa. The spa uses the heated pipes to warm their mineral water (I guess. I've never gone), which in turn cools the pipes for return to the plant.

I suppose they could also generate electricity. I wonder if they do. They didn't mention it on the tour.
 
ElPresidente
2011-11-29 11:09:09 AM
I'm sure the dead won't give a toss. For some of the dead, it'll be the most productive thing they've done in their bloody useless lives.
 
LavenderWolf
2011-11-29 11:09:21 AM
oldass31: AverageAmericanGuy: That's cool. There's a garbage incineration plant a stone's throw from here that pumps heat across the street to the spa.

No sense in wasting energy.

From a purely utilitarian standpoint, you're right. But beyond that, I feel there is a slight nuance of difference between selling electricity from garbage incineration and selling electricity from human cremation.

Call me sentimental.

Your sentiment helps nothing.
 
Sir_Farkalot
2011-11-29 11:10:54 AM
oldass31: AverageAmericanGuy: That's cool. There's a garbage incineration plant a stone's throw from here that pumps heat across the street to the spa.

No sense in wasting energy.

From a purely utilitarian standpoint, you're right. But beyond that, I feel there is a slight nuance of difference between selling electricity from garbage incineration and selling electricity from human cremation.

Call me sentimental.

You're sentimental. When I die, I'd love to provide energy to warm my fellow man.
 
Egoy3k
2011-11-29 11:11:49 AM
dontpointthatthingatme: This seems like something that should be approved by the family and the family member first.

Why? They would probably say no in a knee jerk reaction. Better off to just do it. Regardless of your beliefs that body is just meat, the dead won't miss it.
 
sleep lack
2011-11-29 11:15:49 AM
Kill-A-Watt - you're doing it wrong.
/got nuthin'
 
Burr
2011-11-29 11:15:59 AM
Sir_Farkalot: You're sentimental. When I die, I'd love to provide energy to warm my fellow man.

"It is every citizen's final duty to go into the tanks and become one with all the people."
-Chairman Sheng-ji Yang, "Ethics for Tomorrow"
 
thisone
2011-11-29 11:21:20 AM
Egoy3k: dontpointthatthingatme: This seems like something that should be approved by the family and the family member first.

Why? They would probably say no in a knee jerk reaction. Better off to just do it. Regardless of your beliefs that body is just meat, the dead won't miss it.

if the funeral I'm attending tomorrow is anything to go by, the family wouldn't have a say anyway. The lovely old lady will already have handled everything and given detailed directions to all parties involved, right down to who's allowed to attend.

I doubt said lovely old lady would have had any issues with the heat going to good use.

/yes not all funerals are for geriatrics. Most are though.
 
entropic_existence
2011-11-29 11:22:29 AM
oldass31: AverageAmericanGuy: That's cool. There's a garbage incineration plant a stone's throw from here that pumps heat across the street to the spa.

No sense in wasting energy.

From a purely utilitarian standpoint, you're right. But beyond that, I feel there is a slight nuance of difference between selling electricity from garbage incineration and selling electricity from human cremation.

Call me sentimental.

Really it is just capturing the excess heat generated by the blast furnace. Yeah there is going to be some extra heat from combustion of the body but it is actually kind of minimal. It's all of that waste heat from the gas flames that they are capturing. It isn't the same situation as say burning logs... same goes with the incinerator even.
 
oldass31
2011-11-29 11:23:38 AM
AverageAmericanGuy: oldass31: AverageAmericanGuy: That's cool. There's a garbage incineration plant a stone's throw from here that pumps heat across the street to the spa.

No sense in wasting energy.

From a purely utilitarian standpoint, you're right. But beyond that, I feel there is a slight nuance of difference between selling electricity from garbage incineration and selling electricity from human cremation.

Call me sentimental.

Actually the plant here runs cooling pipes through the incineration chambers and pumps that out to the spa. The spa uses the heated pipes to warm their mineral water (I guess. I've never gone), which in turn cools the pipes for return to the plant.

I suppose they could also generate electricity. I wonder if they do. They didn't mention it on the tour.

Interesting. I originally missed the part about the heat being directly piped to the spa. From a utilitarian standpoint again, depending on the distance between the incinerator and the spa, duty cycle, as well as other sporadic factors, it may be the least energy-wasteful arrangement since there's no loss converting heat into electricity. I suppose there's a tidy profit for both companies as well if they start negotiating price rates relative to what the equivalent heat generation would cost from the local gas/electric company and it's electricity reimbursement rates.
 
Arkanaut
2011-11-29 11:24:55 AM
dontpointthatthingatme: This seems like something that should be approved by the family and the family member first.

They already get to decide whether to cremate in the first place and what to do with the ashes -- why is the waste heat any concern of the deceased's family?
 
watson.t.hamster
2011-11-29 11:25:52 AM
oldass31: AverageAmericanGuy: That's cool. There's a garbage incineration plant a stone's throw from here that pumps heat across the street to the spa.

No sense in wasting energy.

From a purely utilitarian standpoint, you're right. But beyond that, I feel there is a slight nuance of difference between selling electricity from garbage incineration and selling electricity from human cremation.

Call me sentimental.

Sentiment won't keep you warm. Only burning corpses will do that.

Or bunnies. (new window)
 
oldass31
2011-11-29 11:26:58 AM
LavenderWolf: oldass31: AverageAmericanGuy: That's cool. There's a garbage incineration plant a stone's throw from here that pumps heat across the street to the spa.

No sense in wasting energy.

From a purely utilitarian standpoint, you're right. But beyond that, I feel there is a slight nuance of difference between selling electricity from garbage incineration and selling electricity from human cremation.

Call me sentimental.

Your sentiment helps nothing.

It doesn't have to.
 
oldass31
2011-11-29 11:41:05 AM
entropic_existence: oldass31: AverageAmericanGuy: That's cool. There's a garbage incineration plant a stone's throw from here that pumps heat across the street to the spa.

No sense in wasting energy.

From a purely utilitarian standpoint, you're right. But beyond that, I feel there is a slight nuance of difference between selling electricity from garbage incineration and selling electricity from human cremation. No?

Call me sentimental.

Really it is just capturing the excess heat generated by the blast furnace. Yeah there is going to be some extra heat from combustion of the body but it is actually kind of minimal. It's all of that waste heat from the gas flames that they are capturing. It isn't the same situation as say burning logs... same goes with the incinerator even.

I understand, but if we're that concerned about wasted heat energy from the cremation furnace, then we can skip the whole cremation process altogether. It'll save a lot more energy that can instead be used to "keep our fellow man warm".
 
loonatic112358
2011-11-29 11:41:47 AM
They're just trying to keep every body warm
 
entropic_existence
2011-11-29 11:52:04 AM
oldass31: I understand, but if we're that concerned about wasted heat energy from the cremation furnace, then we can skip the whole cremation process altogether. It'll save a lot more energy that can instead be used to "keep our fellow man warm".

That was a total non sequiter
 
UtileDysfunktion
2011-11-29 12:14:56 PM
Cool. So not only is the fuel free and in nearly unlimited supply, but they pay you to use it.

/shopping for a body-sized furnace for the basement this winter
 
squirrel_spam
2011-11-29 12:38:26 PM
watson.t.hamster: Or bunnies. (new window)

Oh my god...I hadn't seen that one before. That is hilarious. Just don't tell my daughter....can't deal with the tears.
 
Resident Muslim
2011-11-29 01:21:15 PM
Could've been worse.
Could have been a retirement home.
 
LavenderWolf
2011-11-29 01:22:00 PM
oldass31: entropic_existence: oldass31: AverageAmericanGuy: That's cool. There's a garbage incineration plant a stone's throw from here that pumps heat across the street to the spa.

No sense in wasting energy.

From a purely utilitarian standpoint, you're right. But beyond that, I feel there is a slight nuance of difference between selling electricity from garbage incineration and selling electricity from human cremation. No?

Call me sentimental.

Really it is just capturing the excess heat generated by the blast furnace. Yeah there is going to be some extra heat from combustion of the body but it is actually kind of minimal. It's all of that waste heat from the gas flames that they are capturing. It isn't the same situation as say burning logs... same goes with the incinerator even.

I understand, but if we're that concerned about wasted heat energy from the cremation furnace, then we can skip the whole cremation process altogether. It'll save a lot more energy that can instead be used to "keep our fellow man warm".

I suspect cremation is more energy efficient than the burial process. A lot of work goes into dead people who don't get cremated.
 
destrip
2011-11-29 03:51:23 PM
Engineers estimate that each turbine can generate 250 kilowatt-hours, enough electricity to power 1,500 televisions,

Typical dumbass reporter. A kilowatt-hour is usage over time, not an instantaneous value.

250 kWh could be used in the form of 1 kW over 250 hours; 1 kW could not power 1500 TVs. On the other hand, it could be in the form of 250 kW for 1 hour, which might be feasible.

He probably meant to say 250 kW, but doesn't have a clue.
 
raygundan
2011-11-29 04:27:40 PM
oldass31: AverageAmericanGuy: That's cool. There's a garbage incineration plant a stone's throw from here that pumps heat across the street to the spa.

No sense in wasting energy.

From a purely utilitarian standpoint, you're right. But beyond that, I feel there is a slight nuance of difference between selling electricity from garbage incineration and selling electricity from human cremation.

Call me sentimental.

You're sentimental. I hope like hell nobody tries to do anything stupid with my corpse when I'm dead... I don't need a mini-shrine taking up valuable park space, to be enbalmed so people can ogle the corpse in a rented room for a few hours, or for some poor relative to be saddled with an overpriced chinese-made vase full of (mostly) my ashes. Recycle what you can into medical bits or for anatomy classes, and dispose of the rest in the least expensive way possible.
 
raygundan
2011-11-29 04:29:23 PM
destrip: Engineers estimate that each turbine can generate 250 kilowatt-hours, enough electricity to power 1,500 televisions,

Typical dumbass reporter. A kilowatt-hour is usage over time, not an instantaneous value.

250 kWh could be used in the form of 1 kW over 250 hours; 1 kW could not power 1500 TVs. On the other hand, it could be in the form of 250 kW for 1 hour, which might be feasible.

He probably meant to say 250 kW, but doesn't have a clue.

It's also possible they meant "250kWh per corpse," but he's still clueless. Either way, he's screwed it up.
 
cptjeff [TotalFark]
2011-11-29 10:17:34 PM
LavenderWolf: I suspect cremation is more energy efficient than the burial process. A lot of work goes into dead people who don't get cremated

It doesn't have to. I particularly love the concrete walled crypts and chemicals that preserve you for a thousand years. I mean really, are you that farking vain?

I'm thinking two options: dump me naked in a dirt hole, or put me in a simple pine box inside a really pretty mausoleum in a well traveled enough place that it can be appreciated as artwork, thinking along the lines of those old European cemeteries. You know, a place where you can go just to wander and think, even if you have no relation whatsoever to anybody there. Lots of unique tombstones and mausoleums to look at and contemplate life and death- old American cities have 'em too.

What I don't want is an utterly generic massive field with a concrete vault and a headstone set into the ground so they can just use a giant riding mower. Ugly and an utter waste of land. I would like to be planted in a place people would actually want to visit.
 
LavenderWolf
2011-11-30 03:53:40 AM
cptjeff: LavenderWolf: I suspect cremation is more energy efficient than the burial process. A lot of work goes into dead people who don't get cremated

It doesn't have to. I particularly love the concrete walled crypts and chemicals that preserve you for a thousand years. I mean really, are you that farking vain?

I'm thinking two options: dump me naked in a dirt hole, or put me in a simple pine box inside a really pretty mausoleum in a well traveled enough place that it can be appreciated as artwork, thinking along the lines of those old European cemeteries. You know, a place where you can go just to wander and think, even if you have no relation whatsoever to anybody there. Lots of unique tombstones and mausoleums to look at and contemplate life and death- old American cities have 'em too.

What I don't want is an utterly generic massive field with a concrete vault and a headstone set into the ground so they can just use a giant riding mower. Ugly and an utter waste of land. I would like to be planted in a place people would actually want to visit.

I would prefer to be burned on a pyre in the open air out in the woods. But that probably won't happen.
 
qarloclobrigny
2011-11-30 09:12:09 AM
Warm Of The Dead
 
Displayed 33 of 33 comments

Redisplay/refresh comments

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
From the Fark Shop:
More from the Fark Shop »