“Recomposition”: Composting Meets the Death Industry

February 5, 2019

February 5, 2019


Here in NERC’s hometown of Brattleboro, Vermont, the local waste hauler collects household food scraps once a week, and delivers them for rendering into compost at our solid waste management district. It’s a trend that’s catching on in many places, and for many reasons; not the least of which are the benefits to soil health that compost brings.


Meanwhile, on farms and ranches, composting on a much larger scale occurs as a station in the cycle of life. When done properly, the composting of animal mortalities is an effective way of dealing with animal carcasses while providing beneficial soil amendments.

For a number of reasons, little thought has traditionally been given to the composting of human remains. But in the State of Washington, that may soon change. State Senator Jamie Pederson has introduced a bill that would “expand the options for disposing of human remains,” NBC reported in December. The Staff Summary of the bill describes recomposition, or the composting of human remains, as a “process … similar to those used for animals. This process is safe and effective for human disposition. It is natural, gentle, and sustainable, reducing carbon emissions. It uses one-eighth of the energy of cremation.”


Leading the call for the legalization of recomposition is Katrina Spade, who invented a system for composting human remains. The recomposition “process involves placing unembalmed human remains wrapped in a shroud in a 5-foot-by-10-foot cylindrical vessel with a bed of organic material such as wood chips, alfalfa and straw,” NBC reports. “Air is then periodically pulled into the vessel, providing oxygen to accelerate microbial activity. Within approximately one month, the remains are reduced to a cubic yard of compost.”

“It was like a lightbulb went off and I started to envision a system that uses the same principles as mortality composting,” Spade says, “that would be meaningful and appropriate for human beings.”


In 2017, Spade founded Recompose, a Benefit Corporation whose goal is to bring the recomposition process to the public. “This natural process gently converts human remains into soil, so that we can nourish new life after we die,” the company states. “Our modular system uses nature's principles to return our bodies to the earth, sequestering carbon and improving soil health. In fact, we've calculated carbon savings over a metric ton per person.”


“Recompose takes guidance from nature,” the company continued. “At the heart of our model is a system that will gently return us to the earth after we die.”


The legislative staff summary further states, “For a world that has been remade by technology, making many things better, cheaper and environmentally friendly, it is pretty astonishing that in 2019 we are left with two legal ways to dispose of human remains; both of which that have been around for thousands of years.”


The two legal ways referred to are traditional burial and cremation, both of which present environmental problems. Casket burial involves the use of formaldehyde and other toxic chemicals which leach into the soil, and cremation introduces greenhouse gases and other chemicals into the atmosphere.


In recent years, concerns over the environmental impacts of traditional methods have led to alternatives such as green burial, “a way of allowing bodies to decompose naturally—without chemical preservatives or disinfectants (aka embalming fluid). Bodies are recycled naturally into the soil.” Unlike recomposition, green burials are legal in all fifty states.


“We really only have two easily accessible options in the U.S. — cremation and burial,” Spade said. “And the question is: Why do we only have two options, and what would it look like if we had a dozen?”


By Robert Kropp

Share Post

May 28, 2025
Waste Advantage NERC’s Material Recovery Facilities (MRF) Commodity Values Survey Report for the period January – March 2025 showed a slight jump in the average commodity prices for Q1. The average value of all commodities increased by 9% without residuals to $102.34 and 8% with residuals to $89.62, as compared to last quarter. Single stream increased by 12% without residuals and 11% with residuals, while dual stream/source separated increased by 10% without residuals and 9% with residuals compared to last quarter. The average percentage for outbound tons marketed per commodity in calendar year 2024 showed decreases for all commodities as compared to 2022, except for polypropylene and bulky rigids, which increased by 40% and 29%, respectively. We also see an increase in mixed glass and residue, as compared to 2022, by 31% and 8%, respectively, further offsetting the decreases in marketed commodity percentages across the board. Notably, green, brown, and clear glass had the largest fall with clear glass decreasing by 77%. Changes in calculation methodology may affect these trends. Percentages are derived from tonnages reported for calendar year 2024 as opposed to percentage breakdowns in previous years. This is the 24th quarterly report in NERC’s series of reports on the market value of commodities from MRFs in the Northeast. This report includes information from 19 MRFs representing twelve (12) states: Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Virginia. These survey results reflect the differing laws and collection options in the participating states. Five of the states included in this report have beverage container deposit laws. As a result, fewer glass bottles, PET bottles and aluminum cans are processed in MRFs in those states. Those MRFs are also likely to have less revenue from those recyclables. In addition, the report reflects a mix of single stream, dual stream, and source separation to collect recyclables with single stream being the most common approach. The type of collection used will have an impact on MRF design and operation. Thus, the data from this report reflects the unique blend of facilities and statewide laws in the reporting states. Residual refers to the incoming material that cannot be marketed and goes to disposal. The value without residuals reflects the value of a perfect ton of marketed material, while the value with residuals reflects the value of each ton processed with the costs associated of disposing unmarketable material. Note: In many cases, recovered glass goes to market but at a negative value. This data is not intended to be used as a price guide for MRF contracts. NERC’s database represents single and dual stream MRFs, states with and without beverage container deposits, a wide variety in markets and geographic access to markets, and variety of materials collected for processing at the participating facilities. As a result, it represents the diversity of operating conditions in these locations and should not be used as a price guideline for a specific program. For more information, contact Megan Schulz-Fontes, Executive Director, at megan@nerc.org or visit www.nerc.org .
By Megan Fontes May 22, 2025
2024 Average Percentage of Outbound Tons Marketed per Commodity Published; New Format: Report Includes Q1 2025 Individual Commodity Average Prices
By Antoinette Smith April 1, 2025
In recent years, the recycling industry has seen negative media coverage that has not only perpetuated myths but also contributed to public mistrust of collection and recycling – and ultimately could be contributing to lower collection rates. To help counteract the misinformation, the Maryland Recycling Network presented a March 27 webinar featuring Gretchen Carey, president at MassRecycle, and Chaz Miller of Miller Recycling Associates. Misinformation about recycling was merely “background noise” to Carey until October 2022, when Greenpeace published a scathing report about the failings of plastic recycling. Soon NPR and The Boston Globe picked up the story and compounded the issue with statements like “not even plastic water bottles are recyclable,” Carey said, calling this “a patent lie.” Carey and her colleagues were “crushed,” but after overcoming her initial anger, she reached out to NPR and the Globe to rebut the story. She also tried to get other local publications to publish her written response to the negative coverage but was rebuffed. Seeing that these efforts weren’t going far, MassRecycle invited members of the media and the general public on MRF tours at several sites in Massachusetts and Connecticut. Providing real-time evidence of recycling infrastructure helped industry outsiders step out of the echo chamber and hear a contrasting perspective, Carey said in the webinar. “You can talk the game, but them seeing for themselves is the important part,” she explained. During the tours, the public attendees learned that throwing away recyclables deprives the community of valuable commodities, she said, and that state guidelines restrict what can be put in the landfill. Carey added that the tours brought home the message by explaining that recycled materials need a consistent end market to justify collection and processing. For example, Ardagh closed its glass bottling facility in Massachusetts in 2018. The closure eliminated a key end market for recycled glass and caused collector Strategic Materials to stop taking local recovered glass. Local MRFs subsequently lost that revenue stream. When residents don’t trust recycling infrastructure, they put fewer items in their curbside bins, and ultimately paper, metals and glass wind up as collateral damage, Miller said. So it’s vital to make sure the public knows where their recyclables and that end markets exist to use these materials. Read the full article.
More Posts