Probably the most ecological form of "disposing" of bodies is the one I saw in India where bodies are placed on a very high platform for the vultures to eat . Provides food for a threatened creature and is very hygenic in a hot country. No vultures in the UK though so we have had a "green burial " scheme in Brighton for about ten years - where you can be buried under a tree in a cardboard coffin - (with wooden screws and no lining). Cremation uses energy and produces carbon emissions - burial adds nutrient to the soil, and planting a tree will safeguard open spaces for birds and wildlife , so we are leaving something positive behind.

Mimic nature; millions of years of life have prepared the perfect recycling method. With a bit of planning, the vultures, ravens, coyotes, worms, insects, etcetera can be coaxed into doing the job correctly in quite short order.

I think whole body donation is a good cause. Any usable organs go to those who need them immediately, if the circumstances permit. Then the rest of the body goes to any number of medical research projects. Any parts not used are cremated.

I don't mean to be crass, but pooping and being composted after death are two of the few ways that humans can really give back to nature. Everything else just amounts to trying to keep ourselves in check.

So, in an age where we worry about too much carbon in the atmosphere, and depleted soil, it seems clear to me that cremation is not the green choice.

I know, it seems cleaner, and somehow less scary than being eaten by worms, but I think we just need to get over it!

Calcium oxide (quicklime) is an incredible (magical, actually) material that can detoxify air, water, and soil. It absorbs carbon dioxide (the apparent main culprit of "global warming"), is used to treat sewerage, to remopve phoshates, in paper making to disolve lignates, is used to improve acidity in soil, to desulferize waste gases, and for treating many toxic effluents. In the past, it was used in the burial of bodies to prevent the smell (gases) of decomposing bodies from fouling the air and to hasten the decomposing of the bodies by absorbing the seepage from the bodies. In this way, it has contributed greatly to preventing plagues and epidemics. It is relatively inexpensive.

I think burial is great since it makes cemeteries a necessity therefore preserving land from further development. If only we could loose all the chemicals pumped into our bodies and the airtight coffins that don't allow our bodies to decompose that way nature intended.

i think burial without the case

because the body will destroy by the bacteria in the ground if the body inside the case it will be hard to destroy the body by the bacteria instead cremation because it produce CO2 by burning the body, and u know that CO2 is bad because trap more heat than usual

I am all for being green and up until now I was always for burial. After reading the comments I am pretty sure I will give my body to science once all my organs are used up and like someone comments that I read tonight "THAT IS THE ULTIMATE RECYCLING"

Organ donor. Then cremation. I prefer to not leave the air polluted in any way by burial.

I think, how about, organ donation then burial without coffin, then digging up what's left of me after some number of years and scatter it in the woods?

Organ donation is the way to go. It helps everyone, especially those who need and want to live on.

What will it matter soon. If Bush has his way , we will all be gone from the Last War. People, please SEE what is happening. READ Revalations and how It Will All End. these wackos believe in this crap. I QUOTE: "WHO WILL LAY THE FLORAL WREATHS WHEN SILENCE DROWNS THE SCREAMS". written by a 1970 rock band: KING CRIMSON. Also QUOTE: I FEEL THE FATE OF ALL MANKIND IS IN THE HANDS OF FOOLS, CONFUSION WILL BE MY EPITAPH.
Creamation by Radiation coming Soon to a theatre near you.

'Non-cremated remains. BURIAL AT SEA of human remains that are not cremated shall take place at least 3 nautical miles from land and in water at least 600 feet deep. All necessary measures shall be taken to ensure that the remains sink to the bottom rapidly and permanently.' http://www.epa.gov/region2/water/oceans/burials.htm THUS NO CREMATION NEEDED.

Greenest solution is to throw me to the sharks..., but only if well & truly dead first. Organ donations would make sure I was "as dead as a doornail" as Dickens put it, but the 'green-ness' of organ donation may also require some consideration!

After organ donation...green burial, un-embalmed, naked or in natural-fiber night clothes...under a tree, or plant one, maybe carve the name in the trunk...create a nice area that won't get paved over...more open space, more trees, less global warming!

Bury me in an apple orchard, that I may touch your lips again...The Fugs

Please run for President, Al!!!

I think a burial is greener because in a burial you can decompose and furtilize the soil where in cremation, all the gases from the fire could out in the air and create pollution.

Will your body to your nearest teaching hospital or med. school. My wife and I both did so. Then ask it not to waste energy on cremation but dump what was left in a a hole (to serve as fertilizer. When she died, the med. school (without charge) took over the corpse. Incidentally, Soc. Security paid $255 (I believe it was) toward funeral expenses. My wife and companion of nearly 50 years would have been amused by that.

Cremation adds too much CO2 to the atmosphere. How about burial within 48 hours, in a shroud, STANDING UP? Make the existing cemeteries start doing this or stacking inhabitants to save space. The problem is that we think somebody is going to want to come to see us even in 100 yrs. I don't think so. A better idea might be tilling our cemeteries after a certain period of time has passed, I bet they'd grow some great crops. Really, why should a single person OWN a piece of real estate long after their death and even the death of their kindred? Let's get over the ownership of our graves and dispose of remains both respectfully, expeditiously and ecologically. Let the earth break down the dead body and then re-use the land.

I recall an insight from the book by H. Harrison entitled "Make Room, Make Room" (Film: Soylent Green)... make use of the living tissues and organs and the essence of the human body (unspent energy/ nutrient/ fuel) for those that live on! OR W.F. Nolan & G.C. Johnson's "Logan's Run" (Film of same name)... disintegration - waste no other resource or energy - pronouncement of usefulness and be done with it - move on!
If we can't come up with an idea to utilize tissues from the entire body - sans spirit (life) then expose of it either as food to useful organisms or fuel to support our successors... just a thought!
We shouldn't waste energies to consume by fire (cremation) nor add to landfill! Feed the fish or the worms (unfettered burial-biodegradable coffin) or maybe the future of the 'big mac'? Given the North American hunger of late - forced diet! In other words, don't take it too seriously (religiosity) and Do Take It More Seriously. Accept death when it shows up at your door, surrender to a full life, move on and keep giving...

Here, here! on organ donation!
However, if you cannot deal with gifting body parts you will never use again, or your empty shell being bruned to dust, then you gotta give the Jews the thumbs up: no embalming, and a simple pine box straight in the ground.
Al Gore rocks!

I've recently heard about a movie star in California who owns a cemetary and allows people to bury their loved ones in (I think they said) a pine box.

Burning is never better, green burial best, but when digging you might find someone else's bones. :) What about being tossed off a ship? To all those sailers that was their method.

Let start a campaign to allow green burials once again!

BTW: There was a great PBS aired program called "Family Undertaking". Check it out.

Cremation would contribute to global warming because we are carbon-based life-forms. Yes there's problems with burial and overpopulation but cremation is just as bad as burning trees or other living things - puts CO2 right out there. Have yourself buried in a forest and contribute to carbon storage.

I say chop the bodies up and feed to sharks or make into dog food? what could be greener?

There is no correct answer to this question, since there are green options with both. Cemetaries, such as Fernwood in Marin County, CA, offer green burial that makes use of pine boxes and goes sans vaults so that bodies decompose into the earth, the way nature intended. Other cemetaries that offer this option include Ramsey Creek Preserve in Westminster, SC. In addition to donating organs and cadavers, one can opt to go the "Body Farm" route. Body Farm is a research plantation of sorts devoted to forensic science. Not the traditional "donating your body to science," but still provides an important service in helping to solve crime. Embalming and vaults are the real enemy as are elaborate crematory urns. If one goes the cremation route, look into having your ashes used to rebuild the Great Barrier Reefs. I learned of this option from one of my students whose family owns a funeral parlor. Of course, all talk about last wishes is futile if you do not make them known, so express what you desire to be done with your corpse in a legal document.

As for the other great ceremony, the one most of us will participate in and be alive for, there are now truly green options for wedding bands! I was so thrilled to find this out, I had to share it. Visit http://www.greenkarat.com/ to find out more.

I had always planned on cremation after organ donation, but I recently found out that cremation releases too much CO2 into the atmosphere,I read online about "woodland burials" which are quite common in England where I am originally from where you are buried without embalming in a biodegradable box and allowed to decompose and fertilize the ground naturally. This really appeals to me but it is not allowed here in many states.There is no law that a body has to be embalmed for hygienic purposes only if you want a regular wake. The funeral industry is not too keen on this of course as they will not make as much money without being able to charge people for embalming, caskets, grave liners etc.

Burial. Naked bodies burials without coffins. It has worked that way for millions of years!

The huge metal coffins that go into the ground right now are NOT GREEN. I would like to be buried in the ground and then have a tree planted over me. Cremation doesn't seem that bad, but I'd prefer to decompose into the Earth as I am supposed to.

Burial........developing and organic method of encasing the body and being respectful of all life...........burial ashes to ashes dust to dust.........that way other forms of life could be benefitted and a balance could occur.

I plan on taking cremation a step further by giving myself back to helping the earth with an eternal reef. They mix your ashes with a concrete blend to create a structure & place it in the ocean to help replenish the world's quickly disappearing coral reefs. Go to eternalreefs.com for more info

Cremation after organ donation. Dont spread ashes on land either oceans. Just put them in a little box and take it to the church you belong. Its what we (my family and me) are going to do.

I'm not sure about this one...corpses take up MUCH less space from cremation, but cremation takes LOTS of energy, releases LOTS of carbon...on the other hand, burial, unless specified or unless you're an Orthodox Jew, involves embalming, non-degradable coffins and takes up LOTS of real estate. Also, sadly, our bodies, even if we are buried in pine boxes with no enbalming fluids, carry quite a bit of toxic materials, including formaldehyde, which is used in the enbalming process... I'd rather be cremated, but maybe burial is more "green", if proper practises are followed.

The human body accumulates quite a few chemicals from just living and breathing in today's environment. Burning is just a chemcial conversion process; we're either going to put 180 lbs of mass in the ground, or we're going to put 180 lbs of mass into the atmosphere. I'd say that burial is greener, because it keeps the chemical contamination from our bodies relatively contained vs. the dispersion of our chemcial contamination through cremation. You can use the imperfect analagoy, that burial is to carbon sequestration as cremation is to an open smoke stack.

I agree with Joan. I am an organ donor and would like to be cremated. I don't know what the cremation process entitles.
I hope it's environmentally safe

Just found out about & am looking into an org. that will use my ashes to create foundations for coral reefs on the Atlantic coast of USA. Kate Russell

Check here for more information on Ecoburials in the Bay Area of California.

http://www.foreverfernwood.com/pdf/30minBayArea_09182005.pdf

No offense to anyone, but I'd say the most environmental way to go would be a burial without a casket or embalming, just natural decomposition.

My sisters and I cremated our dad two years ago. My sister has his ash urn at her house. We're 'closer' to him and he's not miles away at a cemetary. It was less expensive, too. Also, an urn takes up a lot less space than a grave AND it's mobile!

My family all has been/will be cremated and our ashes scattered in various bodies of water.(We were outraged when, in 1954, my father's body was embalmed before cremation!)
My mother willed her body to a FL teaching hospital, after organ donation, and then it was cremated. I believe that's the most environmentally responsible way to go.

I am not sure what would be greener just considering these two options. However if we used usefully the heat created from human cremation (electricity generation or thermal exploitation) then I am positive the cremation would be less damaging to the environment.

Cremation takes less much needed space than burial. they're probably both clean/unclean to the same degree.

The burial uses up huge resources of cement and metals..takes us space that could be a garden...also the embalming fluids is contaminating to our water supply so that eventually we all get to drink it. Cremation has a energy consumption of btu's. I would like to see legalized natural burials...I don't my going back to dust...being food for animals as I have eaten them!

"Ashes to Ashes" Everybody needs to be remembered for their gift to earth while here though. There is a place in town called "Budget coffins" I plan to give them some business, they're local and appeal to my practical side. Once cremated then to be forever remembered one could give organs but it's best if your healthy and somewhat young. You could consider yourself a good doner if you have a significantly odd or interesting condition that needs to be studied. For myself, I'll take my savings achieved by a thrifty buriel and a good life insurance policy and donate in my name to a homeless shelter, animals or people welcome!

It seems to me that some people are missing the point of the question. Talking about finding bones in the future or running out of space or families feeling funny about their beloved being turned into worm food etc. The question asks what is greener- i.e. better for the environment and not for the psychological wellbeing of the people. All natural living things die and slowly decompose thus releasing their nutrients back into the soil for the use of other living organisms. That is the most natural and best way to dispose ofa body. Burrial in a forest, with a tree planted on top and in a natural wrap/shroud/coffin and NO embalming chemicals id the way to go. Burning just creates CO2, and a lot of other toxic gases thus releasing them into atmosphere. It takes a while for them to get recirculated back into another living thing and poisons the atmosphere in the mean time.

burial is better every molecule goes back where it is needed the most
bury in light paper bags or so they decompose faster

Burial most of the time, especially here by the coast, required a cement box, even for ashes. So if there's a big flood, all the embalming chemicals are still around.
Cremation also takes care of disease possibilities.

First, I would certainly donate organs/body to pursuit of scientific research or medical education, followed by simplest and least polluting method of ground (or sea) burial to minimize trauma/ sentimentality. A memorial service can be uplifting to friends and relatives.

I think Cremation is the way to go.

You use up much less space as you can be put in small outdoor box with a very small foot print as well if you go with a plot you are allowed 3 bodies per plot. I don't know the cost of the process or what is sent into the air.

But those are my thought's

Cremation. Just a guess.

Space/land is at such a premium, and there is no-way that we have enough room to bury the people on our planet. I've already dedicated myself to the idea of cremation. I am a gardner, I understand composting, but todays burial practices aren't composting; they amount to chemical preservation inside non-dregradable containers. No where near Reduce,ReUse & Recycle. I plan on giving what ever is usable to organ donation, and having my ashes put into my garden. My cat went there last year, and I've got to say, my Peonies were better than ever this year.