1469 replies to this topic

[Ion Cannon!]

Alias, on 8 Feb 2011, 13:43, said:

Quote

A British town council says it has approved plans to use the heat from a crematorium to warm up the swimming pool next door.

The local authority in Redditch, a town outside Birmingham in central England, says the move will cut energy waste.

Work on a link between the town's crematorium and its new leisure centre will begin later this year following the council decision.

A senior official from Unison, Britain's second biggest trade union, has called the plan "sick, insulting and insensitive".

However, Redditch Borough Council leader Carole Gandy says correspondence showed that up to nine in 10 locals were in favour of the idea.

"Many respondents have in fact praised the council for being so innovative and for being willing to discuss the idea openly," she said.

"We have been careful to explain how the technology would work, that it is tried and trusted, and that the practice is quite common in parts of Europe and especially in Sweden."

The heating scheme will be the first of its kind in Britain.

The council says the plan will save more than $22,500 a year.

http://www.abc.net.a.../08/3133615.htm

How is that sick, insulting and offensive. Not like the heat will be used to heat the pool instead of cremating people. It will just kill two birds with the same stone. Sounds like a great money saving idea to me without cutting jobs.

[Alias]

Yeah, my thoughts exactly. Although it does leave you wondering why there's a pool next to a crematorium in the first place.

[Wizard]

Alias, on 8 Feb 2011, 14:57, said:

Yeah, my thoughts exactly. Although it does leave you wondering why there's a pool next to a crematorium in the first place.

We don't have sixteen billion acres of real estate sitting dormant in the UK. You'd be surprised what sits next to something else.

[Destiny]

I'd like to say 'have some respect for the dead'...

[SquigPie]

No
Just no.

[Slightly Wonky Robob]

Wizard, on 8 Feb 2011, 15:02, said:

Alias, on 8 Feb 2011, 14:57, said:

Yeah, my thoughts exactly. Although it does leave you wondering why there's a pool next to a crematorium in the first place.

We don't have sixteen billion acres of real estate sitting dormant in the UK. You'd be surprised what sits next to something else.

Indeed, for example Guernsey has the closest pub to a church (a meter or so away).

Destiny, on 8 Feb 2011, 15:04, said:

I'd like to say 'have some respect for the dead'...

How is that disrespectful in anyway? |:

Edited by Bob, 08 February 2011 - 17:25.

[Destiny]

I'm pretty much assuming they're using the heat from cremation to heat up the pool. I don't have any source of information on how that particular piece of technology works, or if they're heating up the pool when there aren't any cremations by using the crematorium, but does one not recognize somewhere that can be named a 'sacred' place, and defile it's purity of purpose? Of course these kinds of views don't matter in such a world like this, but heh...everyone's entitled to their own opinions.

[SquigPie]

Bob, on 8 Feb 2011, 18:25, said:

Destiny, on 8 Feb 2011, 15:04, said:

I'd like to say 'have some respect for the dead'...

How is that disrespectful in anyway? |:

Uuhm, because dead people have been burned with that theat?

Edited by SquigPie, 08 February 2011 - 21:18.

[Wizard]

SquigPie, on 8 Feb 2011, 18:16, said:

Bob, on 8 Feb 2011, 18:25, said:

Destiny, on 8 Feb 2011, 15:04, said:

I'd like to say 'have some respect for the dead'...

How is that disrespectful in anyway? |:

Uuhm, because dead people have been burned with tha theat?

It's heat..... wasted energy. Why not use it for something else?

[Slightly Wonky Robob]

As Wiz said, it's just heat, that would otherwise just be wasted. There is no sense in wasting heat, especially when we are ultimately limited by fossil fuels.

This isn't new technology, a similar thing is being used in public places, such as train stations. All the body heat generated from a train station is being used to heat an office across the street.

If this technology is being used on the living, and presumably no-one has a problem with this, why is it suddenly disrespectful when it's used on the dead?

Not to mention, I'm sure the families who choose that particular crematorium would be well aware of what the excess heat is used for. If they disapprove of the practice, then they can use another.

[SquigPie]

Bob, on 9 Feb 2011, 1:31, said:

If this technology is being used on the living, and presumably no-one has a problem with this, why is it suddenly disrespectful when it's used on the dead?

It's the same as cracking a joke about a dead guy, or insulting someone recently dead, you just don't do it. You can do it with living people, but with dead people, it's just wrong.

Edited by SquigPie, 09 February 2011 - 06:53.

[Encrypted]

If the heat can be used for something else, why let it go to waste? The heat was there before, and the only real difference now is that its heating something other that the surrounding air.

[Wizard]

SquigPie, on 9 Feb 2011, 6:50, said:

Bob, on 9 Feb 2011, 1:31, said:

If this technology is being used on the living, and presumably no-one has a problem with this, why is it suddenly disrespectful when it's used on the dead?

It's the same as cracking a joke about a dead guy, or insulting someone recently dead, you just don't do it. You can do it with living people, but with dead people, it's just wrong.

How can you possibly equate sharing the heat used to cremate someone with insulting a dead person, they are so different it's actually quite laughable that you make the comparison. This is simply a case of effeciency and in today's world why should creamations be any different from anything else?

[Destiny]

You won't find anyone going to Arlington and breaking the tombstones for 'efficiency' to build something else.

[Wizard]

Destiny, on 9 Feb 2011, 10:44, said:

You won't find anyone going to Arlington and breaking the tombstones for 'efficiency' to build something else.

Again, that is such a laughable comparison I am surprised you've even made it....

[SquigPie]

Wizard, on 9 Feb 2011, 10:03, said:

SquigPie, on 9 Feb 2011, 6:50, said:

Bob, on 9 Feb 2011, 1:31, said:

If this technology is being used on the living, and presumably no-one has a problem with this, why is it suddenly disrespectful when it's used on the dead?

It's the same as cracking a joke about a dead guy, or insulting someone recently dead, you just don't do it. You can do it with living people, but with dead people, it's just wrong.

How can you possibly equate sharing the heat used to cremate someone with insulting a dead person, they are so different it's actually quite laughable that you make the comparison. This is simply a case of effeciency and in today's world why should creamations be any different from anything else?

By that logic, we could start eating dead people too, the meat won't be used anyway. And it would fix world hunger.

And Wiz, stop calling other people's opinions laughable. Please.

Edited by SquigPie, 09 February 2011 - 10:54.

[Wizard]

I am calling them laughable because you are making no sense. We are not talking about the wood to make the coffin, nor the recycling of a dead person or the use of their memorial in an inappropriate way. This is something universally utilised, it's very hot air ffs. Hot air that, once used to cremate someone, is wasted in the atmosphere. How can you associate the use of heat with desecration??

[Slightly Wonky Robob]

I completely agree with Wiz here.

They aren't using any part of a person, they aren't even using anything that that person has generated.

It's just a furnace that generates heat, the excess heat, which would otherwise be wasted in the atmosphere is simply used for another purpose.

If you want to argue that using dead people for other purposes is wrong (which this process doesn't do at all), then do you have a problem with say, donating bodies to medical sciences?

EDIT: And regarding making jokes... Making a joke about a dead person isn't wrong, as long as you are laughing with them. Which, tbh, applies to the living as well. I would hardly think school bullies "making jokes" about other people is acceptable, would you?

Edited by Bob, 09 February 2011 - 14:32.

[Destiny]

I don't think that you'd want your own cremation to be used to heat up someone else's pool for recreation when a cremation is a solemn thing. I'm sure that one or more FS members have been to one.

To use a fictional example, it's like using JFK's eternal flame to roast your marshmellows. "Hey, that fire is burning and there's so much unused heat! Why don't we use it to roast our marshmellows!". I'm sure any typical American would be enraged and punch the dudes in the face.

Donating dead bodies are decided with their own free will before they died. I don't think you can choose whether not to donate that heat to the pool if you use that crematorium. This is not a matter of science or convenience or to save money, it lies with morality, conscience, some other words I cannot think up at the moment.

Of course, different cultures have different taboos and such. In this case it's literally 'oh hey someone died and we burnt him and here's some extra heat for you to heat up your pool!'. It might not seem wrong to many of you, but it is wrong on so many levels to other cultures it's downright despicable. I'm not going to add anymore, it's going to put this thread off it's rails.

[Alias]

Uh, Destiny, a cremation usually isn't a public thing. It is usually done by the crematorium on your behalf, you keep the ashes of course, but you don't actually watch the process.

[Destiny]

I personally watched the coffin of my aunt on the conveyer belt, into...that.

[Slightly Wonky Robob]

Destiny, on 9 Feb 2011, 14:58, said:

I don't think that you'd want your own cremation to be used to heat up someone else's pool for recreation when a cremation is a solemn thing. I'm sure that one or more FS members have been to one.

Actually, if and when I go, I would like to be cremated and I couldn't care less whether they use the heat to heat a swimming pool or any other building for that matter.

Destiny, on 9 Feb 2011, 14:58, said:

Donating dead bodies are decided with their own free will before they died. I don't think you can choose whether not to donate that heat to the pool if you use that crematorium. This is not a matter of science or convenience or to save money, it lies with morality, conscience, some other words I cannot think up at the moment.

For a start, it's not the person's heat that is being used, it's the crematorium's. The dead body doesn't generate the heat, a furnace does (or some other method), so how is it his/hers to donate? However, I'm sure the person could say to his/her family, or maybe leave it in their will that they don't want to be cremated in a place that reuses the heat. It's not that much of a stretch, now is it?

Destiny, on 9 Feb 2011, 14:58, said:

Of course, different cultures have different taboos and such. In this case it's literally 'oh hey someone died and we burnt him and here's some extra heat for you to heat up your pool!'. It might not seem wrong to many of you, but it is wrong on so many levels to other cultures it's downright despicable. I'm not going to add anymore, it's going to put this thread off it's rails.

Of course each culture and/or religion will view this differently. I certainly don't mean to disrespect anyone's beliefs, but I just don't understand how anyone can have a problem with this.

Edited by Bob, 09 February 2011 - 15:14.

[Wizard]

Destiny, on 9 Feb 2011, 14:58, said:

I don't think that you'd want your own cremation to be used to heat up someone else's pool for recreation when a cremation is a solemn thing.

Destiny, on 9 Feb 2011, 15:05, said:

I personally watched the coffin of my aunt on the conveyer belt, into...that.

The ceremony is solemn, yes. But suffice to say that most crematoriums do not cremate the deceased when you witness them disappear. In the UK for example they are done at the end of the day to conserve energy.

Destiny, on 9 Feb 2011, 14:58, said:

To use a fictional example, it's like using JFK's eternal flame to roast your marshmellows. "Hey, that fire is burning and there's so much unused heat! Why don't we use it to roast our marshmellows!". I'm sure any typical American would be enraged and punch the dudes in the face.

The two things are once again very different. The ceremony of the eternal flame represents something about someone, the flames in a cremation don't. They are functional.

Destiny, on 9 Feb 2011, 14:58, said:

This is not a matter of science or convenience or to save money, it lies with morality, conscience, some other words I cannot think up at the moment.

Morality..... perhaps you are over thinking this.

[Major Fuckup]

I think its a good idea and if your pissy about think of a better way to heat pools and save money!

[Camille]

in fact, i'd even be thrilled to have my body be of some use after my death, be it for convenience or science.

however, this isn't even the case as it's actually the crematorium's heat that's used (as stated above).