What are the negative effects of different types of burials?

Question

Traditional, cremation, etc. On the environment, people, etc.

Answer 1

I would think *traditional* burial in the ground (in a wooden box without embalming) and cremation would both be fairly safe environmentally.

Answer 2

Traditions vary so much that we can not use that word.

If we look at Cuban burial practice, where the deceased body  lies on top of the ground, surrounded by a marble barrier on all sides and above, rots away and is eaten by worms, so that within 2 years the bones are clean and dry, then they are stored in a dry crypt with a lot of other bones, we have

No poison added to preserve the body.

Minimum space used for long term storage.

No energy used for cremation.

Worms  of course provide food for the birds, which is of no great interest.

Bodies remain available for 2 years for investigation without disinterment.

Public authorities still have control to see that new arrivals do not appear to have been murders, better control than for private cremation. Yet some bodies do show up in those marble barriers that are not recorded.

Our American natives in some nations placed the deceased on a raised platform to feed the birds. This has all the benefits, and most of the features of  the Cuban tradition.

But having this in a centralized place where people do not go (the tradition of most nations) is also needed to contain infection.

Poison used to embalm vs a risk of infection is a legitimate question. If we do not use a poison, and do not use cremation, we have to design our process to contain infection.