Sf we most often avoid thinking about our death, we nevertheless know that our life will end sooner or later… From then on, it will be up to our loved ones to do what is necessary – if possible respecting our wishes, but within a legal framework. restricted.
In France, only two funeral arrangements are possible: burial or cremation. However, it is now established that the health and environmental results of these practices are poor: soil pollution, saturation of cemeteries and long-term immobilization of urban spaces, high energy consumption or even greenhouse gas emissions are so many things to worry about…
READ ALSOOld age, law and ethics
In this context, “alternative” funeral practices are increasingly popular. In France, many would like their bodies to be (literally) recycled: this is the principle of humusation, a form of composting applied to the deceased. This involves surrounding the body with plant fragments to allow it to be decomposed by micro-organisms.
Although directly inspired by biological processes, this biodegradation raises many questions.
Humusation and the law
The evocation of humusation often provokes disgust and irony, but this practice is far from incongruous: in the United States, the composting of human bodies was legalized in the state of Washington in 2019, followed by the states of Colorado, Oregon, Vermont and California (2022).
In France, the legislative obstacle is significant. It is thus clearly stated in the General Code of Local Authorities that “the mayor or, failing that, the representative of the State in the department, provides urgently that any deceased person be buried or buried […] “. However, although the exact environmental balance of a cremation or a burial varies according to the practices, their impact is undeniable (in particular because of the making of coffins, funerary monuments, etc.)
In the wake of current environmental developments, the idea of humusation has gradually made its way among civil society, the media and even the National Assembly. In an amendment proposal (no. 3179) aiming to allow humusation on an experimental basis, MP Élodie Jacquier-Laforge argued that humusation was a practice that respects the environment.
A gentle practice?
Humusation is based on the principle of natural degradation of the flesh. The remains of the deceased are placed on a bed of shredded plant material, then covered with this same material. This creates a mound of a few cubic meters in the center of which is the body. This arrangement protects it from external fluctuations, scavenger animals and promotes the action of micro-organisms responsible for its decomposition.
After about three months, it is necessary to turn the mound over, that is to say to mix the crushed plant material in order to renew the particles in contact with the body and to aerate the whole. This operation must be repeated two to three times, until a homogeneous substrate is obtained. The objective is to obtain total degradation of the soft tissues: after about a year, only the bones should remain. These can also be crushed and reintegrated into the mixture so that all the organic matter is degraded and transformed into humus.
If this protocol seems quite simple, even rustic, its implementation is no less delicate. First of all because the operation requires space, time and handling (when turning). From this point of view, rapid and large-scale implementation currently seems delicate. But similar practices are regularly deployed in the United States and Canada for the management of tens of tons of animal carcasses, with recognized effectiveness.
READ ALSOThe terrible daily life of funeral workers
Secondly, because the success of humusation is largely based on the know-how of the master composter: particle size of the shredded material, carbon/nitrogen ratio, humidity, frequency of turning, etc., are all determining parameters for the smooth running of the process. ‘operation.
Alongside these technical aspects, there are major health constraints: not only must the process be efficient and odourless, but it must also lead to the inactivation of pathogens. Because funeral practices have developed in particular within human societies in order to prevent the risk of disease transmission…
Three billion tons of corpses in 50,000 years
Since the arrival of Sapiens in Europe around 50,000 years ago, it is estimated that more than three billion tons of human corpses have decomposed, effectively permeating our environment, from the soil we walk on to our food and even to the air we breathe.
If this idea rarely crosses our minds, it is nevertheless one of the first objections that surfaces when the subject of humusation is approached. It seems indeed a priori risky to let the bodies degrade naturally, what is more near the living. However, this legitimate fear should be compared with the traditional practice of burial. Because repeatedly burying bodies in the same place (cemetery) and only a few tens of centimeters deep involves health and environmental risks.
A recent study thus suggests a possible route of virus transmission through the percolation of water from cemeteries (even if this case is unlikely, especially in the case of Sars-CoV-2, which is very sensitive to environmental degradation). In the absence of a real impact study, article R. 2223-2 of the General Code of Territorial Communities provides only for the establishment of new cemeteries that “the highest land and exposed to the north are preferably chosen. These must be chosen on the basis of a report drawn up by the hydrogeologist”. The risk of the highest water level of the superficial unconfined aquifer being less than one meter from the bottom of the graves is also monitored.
Temperature to destroy viruses
The constraints related to the installation of cemeteries are therefore surprisingly low, not to mention the old sites, gradually incorporated into the heart of cities and whose location has never been the subject of a real risk analysis…
In the case of humusation, the guiding principle for ensuring health safety is that of a combination of heat and duration. Indeed, the presence around the body of plant materials and oxygen allows micro-organisms to increase the local temperature to high levels (60 to 70°C approximately). The objective is to achieve a temperature/duration pair that guarantees sterilization, or at least a drastic reduction in the number of viruses, bacteria and other pathogens.
However, the increase in temperature is not sufficient to ensure total sterilization: no burial or composting condition can neutralize the prions or the endospores produced by the spore-forming bacteria (of the genera Bacillus Where Clostridium for example).
Cremation does not pose this problem, the extremely high temperatures used ensuring the destruction of pathogens.
Ethical questions
Questioned in 2016 by Senator Élisabeth Lamure, the Minister of the Interior Bernard Cazeneuve argued for an ethical objective by indicating that humusation was debated with regard to “the lack of legal status of the particles resulting from this technique” and “its compatibility with article 16-1-1 of the Civil Code”. This article provides that “the respect due to the human body does not cease with death. The remains of deceased persons, including the ashes of those whose bodies have been cremated, should be treated with respect, dignity and decency.” The ethical dimension of humusation could however be integrated into the pre-existing legal framework.
At the end of the process, the humus obtained could be sieved in order to recover the mineralized tissues, the degradation of which may require several centuries. These remains would then be placed in an urn or a suitable coffin, according to the same provisions as during administrative exhumations (that is to say during the recovery of abandoned concessions in cemeteries).
There would remain the substrate created by the joint decomposition of flesh and plant inputs. The simplest solution would be its incineration… but such a practice would be in total contradiction with the philosophy of humusation, which is intended as a natural and ecological approach allowing the bodies to return to the cycle of life.
Dispersal in natural space or in dedicated areas of cemeteries would therefore be the best option. It could easily comply with legislation on the dispersion of ashes from cremation. Article L. 2223-18-2 determines in a restrictive way the destination of the ashes, which can in particular be dispersed in the middle of nature or in a space arranged for this purpose (garden of remembrance provided for by articles L. 2223-1 and 2 ). Law no. 2008-1350 of December 19, 2008 conferred on ashes from cremation a status and protection comparable to those granted to a buried body.
Towards a social debate?
In 2016, the Minister of the Interior had mentioned the need to reflect on this subject in depth with the National Council for Funeral Operations, again mentioned during the 2021 amendment. But the work on humusation seems for the limited time, with some MEPs going so far as to mention potential conflicts of interest.
The main obstacle seems rather to be the lack of scientific, technical and sociological data to objectively understand the risks and expectations related to this practice. The opening of a broader debate is therefore expected because, whatever the obstacles, such a development cannot take place without integrating the major environmental and public health issues, etc. But also the will of the main stakeholders.
The first two converge within the framework of the One Health global health approach, which aims to improve the health of populations by promoting their harmonious integration into the environment. Candidates for humusation also argue for their right to a death that appeases and reassures them, and invoke their right to freely dispose of their bodies and to respect for their private life, provided for by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights. man and fundamental freedoms.
The debate on the consequences of death is therefore only beginning.
*Damien Charabidze is a doctor in biology, researcher, legal expert at the University of Lille. Élise Charrier, graduate of a master’s degree in environmental law, University of Nantes, participated in the writing of this article.