A somewhat macabre topic, but anywho.
I was watching a tv series The Last Ship and they were killing off diseased people
(1) To prevent the spread of the disease, as they unworthy shouldn’t be allowed to potentially infect the worthy.
(2) To burn in coal fire power plant.

Would a human body if burnt actually generate power, I’d have thought the opposite you’d use power to incinerate the person.

Saw a doco the other day where they said a particularly fat and juicy species of penguin was used by whalers as “firewood” to render whale fat…

Cymek said:

A somewhat macabre topic, but anywho.
I was watching a tv series The Last Ship and they were killing off diseased people
(1) To prevent the spread of the disease, as they unworthy shouldn’t be allowed to potentially infect the worthy.
(2) To burn in coal fire power plant.

Would a human body if burnt actually generate power, I’d have thought the opposite you’d use power to incinerate the person.

you could, but I suspect you would get less energy out, than you put in…

Whales, seals and penguins all have layers of sub-cuticular fat to protect them from the cold, and this fat was melted down by the whalers in huge metal pots, for shipment home in barrels. Because of their high fat content, penguins burn well, and were often used to fuel the fires beneath these pots. The penguins were just thrown into the burning fire, often whilst still alive.

No

diddly-squat said:

Cymek said:

A somewhat macabre topic, but anywho.
I was watching a tv series The Last Ship and they were killing off diseased people
(1) To prevent the spread of the disease, as they unworthy shouldn’t be allowed to potentially infect the worthy.
(2) To burn in coal fire power plant.

Would a human body if burnt actually generate power, I’d have thought the opposite you’d use power to incinerate the person.

you could, but I suspect you would get less energy out, than you put in…

Bodies are a bit soggy, but at a guess I reckon you’d get positive nett energy. Of course, the fire needs to be hot enough before you start throwing bodies in.

According to this thread, What is the calorific content of the average human body? , a 70kg human contains around 750 MJ of energy in the form of fats and proteins. But I’m too lazy to check those calculations. :)

Probably burn quite well if dehydrated first.

PM 2Ring said:

diddly-squat said:

Cymek said:

A somewhat macabre topic, but anywho.
I was watching a tv series The Last Ship and they were killing off diseased people
(1) To prevent the spread of the disease, as they unworthy shouldn’t be allowed to potentially infect the worthy.
(2) To burn in coal fire power plant.

Would a human body if burnt actually generate power, I’d have thought the opposite you’d use power to incinerate the person.

you could, but I suspect you would get less energy out, than you put in…

Bodies are a bit soggy, but at a guess I reckon you’d get positive nett energy. Of course, the fire needs to be hot enough before you start throwing bodies in.

According to this thread, What is the calorific content of the average human body? , a 70kg human contains around 750 MJ of energy in the form of fats and proteins. But I’m too lazy to check those calculations. :)

I’d have thought you’d be better off burning any wood/paper you could get your hands on.

PermeateFree said:

Probably burn quite well if dehydrated first.

Even wood needs to be dried out to burn well.

Well, you could tear them up into smaller bits, soak them in an accelerant and remould them into brickettes…. That’d burn pretty well Still no electricity though.

PermeateFree said:

PermeateFree said:

Probably burn quite well if dehydrated first.

Even wood needs to be dried out to burn well.

It looked like they were shipping them newly dead in tipper trucks straight to the coal plant

Aborted babies incinerated to heat UK hospitals

24 Mar 2014

The bodies of thousands of aborted and miscarried babies were incinerated as clinical waste, with some even used to heat hospitals, an investigation has found.

Ten NHS trusts have admitted burning foetal remains alongside other rubbish while two others used the bodies in ‘waste-to-energy’ plants which generate power for heat.

Last night the Department of Health issued an instant ban on the practice which health minister Dr Dan Poulter branded ‘totally unacceptable.’

At least 15,500 foetal remains were incinerated by 27 NHS trusts over the last two years alone, Channel 4’s Dispatches discovered.

Cymek said:

PermeateFree said:

PermeateFree said:

Probably burn quite well if dehydrated first.

Even wood needs to be dried out to burn well.

It looked like they were shipping them newly dead in tipper trucks straight to the coal plant

Would have been better if they were stacked in a desert of a few weeks. Suppose its what turns your wheels.

Last night the Department of Health issued an instant ban on the practice which health minister Dr Dan Poulter branded ‘totally unacceptable.’

There goes that great plan. Get some rest people, tomorrow we plan to take over the world

• Last night the Department of Health issued an instant ban on the practice which health minister Dr Dan Poulter branded ‘totally unacceptable.’

Why is it unacceptable?

PM 2Ring said:

diddly-squat said:

Cymek said:

A somewhat macabre topic, but anywho.
I was watching a tv series The Last Ship and they were killing off diseased people
(1) To prevent the spread of the disease, as they unworthy shouldn’t be allowed to potentially infect the worthy.
(2) To burn in coal fire power plant.

Would a human body if burnt actually generate power, I’d have thought the opposite you’d use power to incinerate the person.

you could, but I suspect you would get less energy out, than you put in…

Bodies are a bit soggy, but at a guess I reckon you’d get positive nett energy. Of course, the fire needs to be hot enough before you start throwing bodies in.

According to this thread, What is the calorific content of the average human body? , a 70kg human contains around 750 MJ of energy in the form of fats and proteins. But I’m too lazy to check those calculations. :)

sure on an air dried moisture basis probably… what about on an as received moisture basis??

furious said:

• Last night the Department of Health issued an instant ban on the practice which health minister Dr Dan Poulter branded ‘totally unacceptable.’

Why is it unacceptable?

I’d have thought it the more practical and hygenic method to dispose of them

It’s fair smelly when they’re somewhat fresh…

diddly-squat said:

PM 2Ring said:

diddly-squat said:

you could, but I suspect you would get less energy out, than you put in…

Bodies are a bit soggy, but at a guess I reckon you’d get positive nett energy. Of course, the fire needs to be hot enough before you start throwing bodies in.

According to this thread, What is the calorific content of the average human body? , a 70kg human contains around 750 MJ of energy in the form of fats and proteins. But I’m too lazy to check those calculations. :)

sure on an air dried moisture basis probably… what about on an as received moisture basis??

Why not build a hot air chamber where fresh ones could be stored until ready, they would dry those following.

I wonder what the environmental damage is from burning a human.

Arts said:

I wonder what the environmental damage is from burning a human.

Sounds like a good way to get rid of people who die in an apocalypse to heat the homes of those preppers without underground bunkers.

Arts said:

I wonder what the environmental damage is from burning a human.

Probably produce co2 when burnt, but when a mouldering in the grave, they would release methane that is worse.

diddly-squat said:

PM 2Ring said:

diddly-squat said:

you could, but I suspect you would get less energy out, than you put in…

Bodies are a bit soggy, but at a guess I reckon you’d get positive nett energy. Of course, the fire needs to be hot enough before you start throwing bodies in.

According to this thread, What is the calorific content of the average human body? , a 70kg human contains around 750 MJ of energy in the form of fats and proteins. But I’m too lazy to check those calculations. :)

sure on an air dried moisture basis probably… what about on an as received moisture basis??

It only takes around 180 MJ to boil 70kg of water (starting at body temperature), so if that 750 MJ figure is correct there’d be plenty of energy to spare.

Oh apparently it’s against the law to DIY cremation.

Arts said:

I wonder what the environmental damage is from burning a human.

worst than burning brown coal I suspect… but without the sulphur

Bodies are better off providing energy via nutrients, like a body under a vegetable patch for instance.

diddly-squat said:

Arts said:

I wonder what the environmental damage is from burning a human.

worst than burning brown coal I suspect… but without the sulphur

The greens really could cry out “Oh the humanity”

What if you don’t get time to dig them in properly?

PermeateFree said:

Arts said:

I wonder what the environmental damage is from burning a human.

Probably produce co2 when burnt, but when a mouldering in the grave, they would release methane that is worse.

But all that CO₂ and CH₄ is not coming from fossil carbon, so they’re carbon-neutral.

Sky burials are very efficient if you’re worried about using up fossil fuels,.

PM 2Ring said:

It only takes around 180 MJ to boil 70kg of water (starting at body temperature), so if that 750 MJ figure is correct there’d be plenty of energy to spare.

What about the energy used in vaporisation?

Peak Warming Man said:

Bodies are better off providing energy via nutrients, like a body under a vegetable patch for instance.

There must be a reason why we don’t do that (as a rule – no judgement)

PM 2Ring said:

PermeateFree said:

Arts said:

I wonder what the environmental damage is from burning a human.

Probably produce co2 when burnt, but when a mouldering in the grave, they would release methane that is worse.

But all that CO₂ and CH₄ is not coming from fossil carbon, so they’re carbon-neutral.

So is a tree until you dispose of it, just a matter of timing.

Peak Warming Man said:

Bodies are better off providing energy via nutrients, like a body under a vegetable patch for instance.

True, burning blood & bone is a waste. And all the nitrogen-rich protein’s good for the garden, too. But I reckon the fat’s certainly worth burning as an energy source.

Arts said:

Peak Warming Man said:

Bodies are better off providing energy via nutrients, like a body under a vegetable patch for instance.

There must be a reason why we don’t do that (as a rule – no judgement)

They do it in parts of Tasmania.

It’s better to burn up than to fade away

Investigations into explaining spontaneous human combustion usually say that the human body combusts very very slowly, a bit like a wick

Dropbear said:

Investigations into explaining spontaneous human combustion usually say that the human body combusts very very slowly, a bit like a wick

Yes I saw a documentary staying the above, they recreated it with a pig body

Many societies seemed to favour burial grounds as opposed to fertiliser.

The last ship hasn’t got much of a record on plausibility anyway

sibeen said:

PM 2Ring said:

It only takes around 180 MJ to boil 70kg of water (starting at body temperature), so if that 750 MJ figure is correct there’d be plenty of energy to spare.

What about the energy used in vaporisation?

I took that into account. I did the calculation in kilocalories, since I memorized the latent heat of boiling (and freezing) of water in the old units when I was a young kid. :)

Google Calculator says
((100 – 37) + 540.15) * 70 kcal in MJ =
176.650572 megajoules

Dropbear said:

The last ship hasn’t got much of a record on plausibility anyway

No, it’s OK to watch to see the workings of the Arleigh Burke class destroyers

Cymek said:

Dropbear said:

The last ship hasn’t got much of a record on plausibility anyway

No, it’s OK to watch to see the workings of the Arleigh Burke class destroyers

Yeh I’ve been watching it but I laugh a lot. The show is fairly ridiculous

PM 2Ring said:

sibeen said:

PM 2Ring said:

It only takes around 180 MJ to boil 70kg of water (starting at body temperature), so if that 750 MJ figure is correct there’d be plenty of energy to spare.

What about the energy used in vaporisation?

I took that into account. I did the calculation in kilocalories, since I memorized the latent heat of boiling (and freezing) of water in the old units when I was a young kid. :)

Google Calculator says
((100 – 37) + 540.15) * 70 kcal in MJ =
176.650572 megajoules

Good lad :)

Arts said:

Oh apparently it’s against the law to DIY cremation.

Especially if they aren’t dead.

Cymek said:

A somewhat macabre topic, but anywho.
I was watching a tv series The Last Ship and they were killing off diseased people
(1) To prevent the spread of the disease, as they unworthy shouldn’t be allowed to potentially infect the worthy.
(2) To burn in coal fire power plant.

Would a human body if burnt actually generate power, I’d have thought the opposite you’d use power to incinerate the person.

human bodies aren’t particularly energy efficient to burn. the Nazis were using huge amounts of wood to try and destroy the evidence. from anecdotal evidence I doubt if people are very good energy providers despite what ‘the matrix” might suggest.

its more friendly to the environment to bury people

one of my brilliant ideas was to plant a tree over the body of the deceased, forests would appear back across the world, deserts would recede ,

>Would a human body if burnt actually generate power, I’d have thought the opposite you’d use power to incinerate the person.

Pulls Cymek file, scribbles notes

;)

you’d have more luck with fat people

you could have a flying squad to whisk away the deceased as quickly as possible

hang on , idea

you dry the bodies out in the sun before burning

transition said:

>Would a human body if burnt actually generate power, I’d have thought the opposite you’d use power to incinerate the person.

Pulls Cymek file, scribbles notes

;)

Early in the day while they were still refining industrial destruction of humans the nazis built a steel grid raised off the ground and stacked bodies onto it, the fat rendering down making it self sustaining after an initial petrol soaking.

watch yourself awesome or i’ll have you ‘swatted”

wookiemeister said:

watch yourself awesome or i’ll have you ‘swatted”

Eh?

if you dry the bodies in a sun dryer it would be more effective

I was yanking the ring off a hand in a grave and found it came off very easily , the finger was very dry and crumbly.

I then had a brilliant idea

dry the bodies , turn them into pellets and separate the bones out

>I was yanking ……………………………..was very dry and crumbly”

nasty.

transition said:

>I was yanking ……………………………..was very dry and crumbly”

nasty.

you had to be there

PermeateFree said:

Arts said:

I wonder what the environmental damage is from burning a human.

Probably produce co2 when burnt, but when a mouldering in the grave, they would release methane that is worse.

Yes there would be some short term CO2 released from the burning, but a long term reduction from them no longer living. So environmentally it would be beneficial to burn people,especially if you burn them when young…

Stealth said:

PermeateFree said:

Arts said:

I wonder what the environmental damage is from burning a human.

Probably produce co2 when burnt, but when a mouldering in the grave, they would release methane that is worse.

Yes there would be some short term CO2 released from the burning, but a long term reduction from them no longer living. So environmentally it would be beneficial to burn people,especially if you burn them when young…

better to char them. In a solar char furnace.

Confirming what has been said above. I once calculated the equations for spontaneous human combustion. I found that a human body generated energy when burnt if and only if it was very heavy in fat or had a very high alcohol content.

I heard that the Egyptians burnt ancient mummies for steam locomotive engine fuel at the end of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. They would have been dry, though, and the preservative chemicals might have helped sustain combustion.

btm said:

I heard that the Egyptians burnt ancient mummies for steam locomotive engine fuel at the end of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. They would have been dry, though, and the preservative chemicals might have helped sustain combustion.

Full of resins and pitch.

Arts said:

Peak Warming Man said:

Bodies are better off providing energy via nutrients, like a body under a vegetable patch for instance.

There must be a reason why we don’t do that (as a rule – no judgement)

Disease

wookiemeister said:

Arts said:

Peak Warming Man said:

Bodies are better off providing energy via nutrients, like a body under a vegetable patch for instance.

There must be a reason why we don’t do that (as a rule – no judgement)

Disease

When a body is buried underground?

>Disease

they gas (smell) and get dug up by animals, couple feet deep thereabouts is the requirement maybe.

And you have to be careful the decomposed goo doesn’t end up in anyone’s water.

Arts said:

I wonder what the environmental damage is from burning a human.

Mercury pollution from dental fillings has been a problem around crematoria.

Just going off at a tangent for a moment, if you had a giant food blender and you turned the dead bodies into a liquid. and pumped them down depleted oil wells, how long before the liquid turns into oil?

bob(from black rock) said:

Just going off at a tangent for a moment, if you had a giant food blender and you turned the dead bodies into a liquid. and pumped them down depleted oil wells, how long before the liquid turns into oil?

multiple life sentences……….

bob(from black rock) said:

Just going off at a tangent for a moment, if you had a giant food blender and you turned the dead bodies into a liquid. and pumped them down depleted oil wells, how long before the liquid turns into oil?

But isn’t it plants and dead trees that break down into oil?

CrazyNeutrino said:

bob(from black rock) said:

Just going off at a tangent for a moment, if you had a giant food blender and you turned the dead bodies into a liquid. and pumped them down depleted oil wells, how long before the liquid turns into oil?

But isn’t it plants and dead trees that break down into oil?

I fort they turned into coal?

bob(from black rock) said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

bob(from black rock) said:

Just going off at a tangent for a moment, if you had a giant food blender and you turned the dead bodies into a liquid. and pumped them down depleted oil wells, how long before the liquid turns into oil?

But isn’t it plants and dead trees that break down into oil?

I fort they turned into coal?

from here

Mineral oils

Crude oil, or petroleum, and its refined components, collectively termed petrochemicals, are crucial resources in the modern economy. Crude oil originates from ancient fossilized organic materials, such as zooplankton and algae, which geochemical processes convert into oil. The name “mineral oil” is a misnomer, in that minerals are not the source of the oil—ancient plants and animals are. Mineral oil is organic. However, it is classified as “mineral oil” instead of as “organic oil” because its organic origin is remote (and was unknown at the time of its discovery), and because it is obtained in the vicinity of rocks, underground traps, and sands. Mineral oil also refers to several specific distillates of crude oil.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil

zooplankton and algae

ok

Feed them to enzymes and bacteria that produce flammable gas – Collect the heat (assuming the process is exothermic) and use the gas to drive turbines that produce electricity. Use the bones as bulk for concretes.

“Great idea for a movie, terrible idea for a proctologist”

For Alex

CrazyNeutrino said:

wookiemeister said:

Arts said:

There must be a reason why we don’t do that (as a rule – no judgement)

Disease

When a body is buried underground?

Yes

To my knowledge some of manly quarantine station has only just been off the do not disturb list

The Black Death can hang around for 100 years, water or anything disturbing the soul can bring the infection to the surface and this the cycle starts again

The Black Death hit Sydney in around 1901 I believe

Now and then they hit plague puts around the world, when the doctor arrives he twigs and the whole area is normally limed and sealed and an order put on the area not to disturb

buffy said:

“Great idea for a movie, terrible idea for a proctologist”

For Alex

…we call it “SOYLANT GOO”? /-:

Some parts of the human bodies would be more favourable than others for this purpose. It is hard to imagine that bone would be a good fuel.