Death in the clouds: The problem of bodies on Everest (2015)

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20151008-the-graveyard-in-the-clouds-everests-200-dead-bodies

by abhi3 • 9 years ago

51 61 9 years ago

The ITBP, however, says that Paljor’s body is hopelessly stuck, and that anyway, they can’t guarantee that it actually belongs to Paljor – or even to an Indian for that matter

Looking at the pictures it appears that someone has rolled Paljor over as you can see him resting on both sides with his jacket less faded on the most recently exposed side. Clearly not that stuck.

everly• 9 years ago

The article goes on to say that he's since been removed altogether so, yeah, not that stuck at all.

navidvulo• 9 years ago

I do find it ridiculous that hikers are allowed to attempt the climb, and that if they die on the climb their bodies are allowed to litter the landscape forever.

When you attempt a climb, it should be required that you pay a deposit that will pay for 1) removal of all trash left by you assuming that everything you carry becomes trash and 2) recovery and removal of your body in case you die on the climb.

Since mostly wealthy people do these climbs it shouldn't be a problem at all.

mcguire• 9 years ago

The trash certainly, but I think there is something appropriate about having to step over bodies on the way.

jessaustin6• 9 years ago

Your proposal is basically that on the event of a rich person's death, several poor people should risk their own lives to commemorate the way that he died. Is anyone surprised that isn't how it works?

obstinate3• 9 years ago

I don't think the grandparent poster is suggesting that the sherpas be forced to recover the body. If you read the article, it makes it clear that in practice, several poor people already are cleaning up after the rich people who have climbed the mountain.

It is already possible to buy repatriation insurance, according to the article. I don't think gp's suggestion that climbers be required to buy that insurance is unreasonable.

mikeash• 9 years ago

Poor people are already "required" (i.e. paid enough money to do it willingly) to risk their lives helping rich people get up and down the mountain. This doesn't seem substantially different.

malandrew• 9 years ago

He's proposing that they put up the money for there to be an offer that is sufficiently attractive that the market will solve the problem. No one needs to be forced. They can take the offer to remove the body if they think offer is attractive.

aorloff• 9 years ago

This seems like such an obvious use for robots, and given the explosion of robots in delivery and other fields now, I'm curious if anyone has tried it ? Why can't battery powered robots, with sleds, controlled from base camp, clean up the mountain - picking up the dead and perhaps some trash too ?

nradov3• 9 years ago

Have you ever actually been on a mountain? The robotics industry is decades away from having anything that can operate reliability and do heavy work in that environment. If anyone tried it now we would end up with a mountain littered with broken robots.

duskwuff• 9 years ago

1) You are underestimating how difficult the terrain is. The only types of robot that'd have a chance would be some of the legged ones from Boston Dynamics, and even they probably wouldn't be up to the challenge.

2) Lithium-ion batteries perform poorly at low temperatures. And there's very little electricity available on the mountain at all, let alone near the summit where a lot of the bodies are.

rdl2• 9 years ago

We can make robots that work in space. We can surely make things which work in this environment. Either heat them, or use thermal batteries for power when needed. Also might be an interesting application for compressed air.

rdl2• 9 years ago

It would be a great "x-prize" type thing, indeed. Beyond current capabilities, but not that far beyond them, and thus interesting. Being able to take oxygen bottles, cameras, etc. around would make climbing a lot easier, too.

swayvil• 9 years ago

I must admit that my first thought was corpse-looting. Also a lifetime supply of free food.

gyrgtyn• 9 years ago

Does it really matter if there is trash and dead bodies up there? Who's bothered or poisoned by this? Other rich people? Is there an ecosystem up there?

nstj2• 9 years ago

'rich' people?

bartread• 9 years ago

I tend to agree. A lot of the people who climb Everest, or at least spend a lot of time on the mountain, are Sherpas, who most definitely aren't rich, but I think he's sniping at the others, who cough up for the license to do it, turn up with thousands of pounds worth of kit, etc.

has2k13• 9 years ago

Here is an excerpt from "The Tragedy of the Commons" paper [1]

"""

The pollution problem is a consequence of population. It did not much matter how a lonely American frontiersman disposed of his waste. "Flowing water purifies itself every 10 miles," my grandfather used to say, and the myth was near enough to the truth when he was a boy, for there were not too many people. But as population became denser, the natural chemical and biological recycling processes became overloaded, calling for a redefinition of property rights.

"""

The excerpt seems to convey the same opinion, but if read the paper you get to see it from many more view points.

1. http://science.sciencemag.org/content/162/3859/1243.full

wodenokoto2• 9 years ago

That doesn't answer the question, except if you are implying that populations are going to move to Everest in the future.

calvano9152• 9 years ago

If you have respect for others who wish to experience the environment as close to "natural" as possible, then you clean up after yourself or pay for someone else to.

herewulf• 9 years ago

When I climb a mountain (and I've climbed plenty), I don't want to see people, living or dead. It detracts from the experience. Everest? No thanks.

elcapitan3• 9 years ago

I don't like how the first graphic splits into "climbers" and "Sherpas". If anything, the Sherpas are the true climbers, as they do that all their life, and their physical abilities are probably up to olympic athlete level in most cases. The "climbers" should be labelled "western tourists" (except for the mountain guides).

williamgb• 9 years ago

Wouldn't the label "western tourists" be wildly inaccurate though?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_who_died_climbi...

elcapitan3• 9 years ago

"Rich tourists" would be more appropriate, yes.

kaffeemitsahne• 9 years ago

As an aside, pretty baffling that people go to all the trouble to travel through such a unique, pristine environment and still won't bother to clean up their rubbish (just to be clear, actual garbage, not human remains).

darklajid• 9 years ago

I'm clueless about this whole process. Where would they put that? Carry it up and down again?

Is that feasible?

calvano9152• 9 years ago

Sherpas trek up and down various parts of the climb dozens of times for each group that hires them setting up the next camps, routes, etc. There are people paid for cleanup who also do similar.

The tourists/climbers could do it but aren't as acclimated to the environment. Paying someone else to do it is probably the best way to ensure reliable cleanup and safety of the tourists/climbers.

Death in the clouds: The problem of bodies on Everest (2015)

Related Stories