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