X-Message-Number: 9836 From: "den Otter" <> Subject: Liquid nitrogen plants & some other ideas Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 16:56:03 +0200 As far as I know all cryonics orgs (that do long-term storage) buy their liquid nitrogen from a provider, instead of having their own LN2 plant(s). Is this because LN2 plants are too expensive, or are their other reasons involved? One would think that even if you normally buy LN2 from some company, it would be very useful to have a small plant (see also http://www.cryomech.com/lnp.html) handy in case of an emergency (preferably in combination with a diesel/wind/solar powered generator) Does any of the orgs have such a backup? Obviously, a cryonics organization that makes its own LN2, and has its own power source(s) can have a lot more freedom when it comes to choosing its location for the long-term storage of patients. This is even increased when the whole setup is automated (so that the dewars no longer need to be filled, or checked, manually). Some relatively straightforward safety measures can virtually guarantee that even if the (all of the) plants break down, and/or the dewar(s) rupture the bodies stay immersed in LN2 for days or even weeks (or longer, if you make the reservoirs bigger and the insulation better). Some further refinements, like using (old) bunkers for storage, camera surveillance of the facility (esp. the dewars) & emergency installations with a sat ("beeper") link to off-site personnel make the setup even better. For extra safety, there could be a permanently occupied private quarters (or whole house) in or near the facility for quick interventions and general maintainance. A facility like this could easily be made so that it's safe from natural disasters (underground bunker in an elevated, geologically stable region), fire (you could let the storage crypts slowly fill with evaporated LN2, which incidentally makes break-ins a potentially lethal undertaking (curse of the Pharaoh-style), lowers the LN2 boiloff rate and kills any bugs and rodents that might sneak in). Just some thoughts (there's more where this came from ;) I do wonder why most of these things have ever been implemented (because the present methods have worked ok so far?) Though somewhat more expensive [than traditional methods] in the short term, the suggested improvements would ultimately make storage cheaper, imo, not to mention a lot safer. Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9836