An article on the potential risks of cremation raised concerns on the effects of the particles and gases produced during incineration. Having contacted a company in Leeds that supplies crematoria throughout Europe and further afield, I feel that the worries expressed by the parliamentary Social Affairs Committee can safely be put to rest.
I have been informed that since Malta does not have a crematorium, it is likely to adopt or model the legislation on that of another country.
The shift in the cremation industry is emissions reduction in comparison to older unabated cremators. In Europe, most countries already have or plan to have in the near future laws requiring cremators to be fitted with flue gas cleaning systems to reduce emissions of particles and acid gases, mainly mercury and dioxins.
In terms of air quality, stress is laid on the design of the chimney height to ensure ground level pollutant concentrations are below admissible levels by insisting on flue discharge heights.
For an abated cremator, the flue discharge height is approximately one metre above the building ridge. This gives an indication the flue gases are clean, because the dirtier the flue gases the higher the chimney must be to ensure adequate dispersion.
The key component in the flue gas treatment system is the filter. The filters used by the Leeds company cut particle emissions to below 20 per cent the legislation limit (20mg/m3). This basic filter design has been used for 20 years, as evidenced by the hundreds of installations around Europe and beyond.
Consequently, the Maltese people can be assured that the technology does exist to ensure that particle emissions from an abated cremator will have an insignificant effect on the island and its ecology.
A decision on whether to go for cremation or bio-cremation must be made
There is also an environment-friendly method for the disposal of the dead called bio-cremation, something I thought might generate some interest in Malta, as the need is for management to reduce all aspects affecting climate change.
The method is provided by what is known as a resomator, which dissolves bodies using a water-based alkaline hydrolysis system at a temperature where the body tissues are rapidly broken down.
This is the process that occurs when a body is buried, but in the case of burial it can take a generation. The green brown liquid containing amino acids, peptides and salts can be discharged via the sanitary drainage system.
It must be pointed out that the end result is the same as with cremation: the bones are what remain. These are then broken down using a cremator, and the ashes are given to the funeral director. These can, in turn, then be passed on to relatives, who may wish to scatter them at a place where memories mean so much to their loved ones. This practice too ensures dignity and respect with regard to the dear departed.
There is also what is known in the UK as a green, environmental burial for people who are keen advocates of the protection of the environment.
In this case, burial is generally done in the grounds of the crematorium.
When planning a crematorium, whether using the burning process or the bio-cremation method, it is necessary to conduct an impact assessment of the area. In the area where I live in Scotland, for example, we have a lake with swans, which is surrounded by trees.
For relatives, it is exceptionally peaceful, and the crematorium cannot be seen from the main road. Thus, the environment must be given considerable thought.
Malta has a problem that must by faced without further delay. Plans are in hand to provide 2,800 new graves, work on which has yet to start, but the real problem is the waiting list that has 4,000 names. Obviously, there is a need to decide for the future, and a decision on whether to go for cremation or bio-cremation must therefore be made.
The above should allay the fears of the Social Affairs Committee. However, action must be taken to solve a problem that can only continue to get worse.
John White is a retired hospital business manager.