CryoNet #32576 - #32578

CryoNet - Mon 3 May 2010

    #32576: Re: ten good cryonicists? [John de Rivaz]
    #32577: Re: migration for cryonics [yvan Bozzonetti]
    #32578: Re: migration for cryonics [John de Rivaz]

Rate This Digest: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32576%2D32578

Administrivia

To subscribe to CryoNet, send email to:
    [email protected]
with the subject line (not message _body_):
    subscribe
To unsubscribe, use the subject line:
    unsubscribe
To post a message to CryoNet, send your message to:
    [email protected]
from the same address to which you are aubscribed.
Send questions, comments, or feedback to [email protected]
with "CryoNet" or "cryonics" somewhere in the Subject line.

Since all CryoNet messages are archived and accessible via WWW,
including search engines, make certain that your postings
reflect how you want the world to see you.

To retrieve past messages, send email to:
    [email protected]
with the message numbers in the subject line.
(Message 0003 describes the advanced syntax.)
You also can retrieve them via the CryoNet web page at URL:
    http://www.cryonet.org/

For administrative or other questions/suggestions, send email
to me at "[email protected]" with "cryonics" in the subject line.
    - Kevin Q. Brown


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32576
From: "John de Rivaz" <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: ten good cryonicists?
Date: Sun, 2 May 2010 12:27:10 +0100

It has been asked what the critical mass of prepaid people would be needed to build a cryonics preparation and storage facility in the UK to serve northern Europe. Ten?

This is a very good way of looking at it.

The obvious first question is how much to ask per patient. CI and Alcor vary widely. As we are considering the UK, then lets use British pounds. A CI membership in the UK includes a transport element, so to keep the maths easy lets suggest L50,000 as the prepayment fee, which is a bit more than the cost with CI. However the unreliability of air transport and international shipment has been removed, so it is reasonable to put a price tag on this benefit. 

Ten members therefore equates to a total of half a million pounds. Surely it ought to be possible to do it for this? I suspect not. Therefore the options are simply to wait for more members or increase the price. Bear in mind this is prepayment, not insurance funding. Increasing the price would make the wait for enough members longer. The longer the wait, the more expensive the task becomes. The cost of buildings and services are both subject to high inflation. Some who may be considering cryonics will perish and be destroyed without the facility ever appearing.

I will make some guesses as to what would be needed. These are fairly wild guesses - maybe others can suggest some figures that are more calculated:

First lets look at the endowment fund needed to run it all:

Income required from endowment fund
                             L000s
wages                    25 (probably be lucky to get away with so "little")
taxes, insurance etc on wages
                              12
accountancy            2
building taxes, insurance, utilities
                               10 
equipment maintenance and liquid nitrogen
                                 5
that totals                54

in normal times one would probably aim at getting about 3% income after tax from a fund whose principal keeps up with inflation, therefore to produce 54k invest 1800k

The capital therefore works out as follows:
                            L000s
building purchase 500
fitout                    100
professional fees etc (for business as well as premises, assuming volunteers not available)
                              75
endowment fund 1800

total                    2475, say two and a half million.
                                
If adequate professional help is available, from determined and enthusiastic people, it may be possible to reduce taxes which could reduce these figures. For example there is a 17.5% tax penalty on paying the professional fees and buying any equipment and making maintenance expenditure which may be legally avoidable with suitable professional help. In addition,  with suitable help, it may be possible to reduce taxation on funds used by members to make the prepayments. But cutting taxes doesn't mean it would become cheap, just less expensive!

An alternative method of funding the running costs would be to charge a subscription to live members. However this has the problem that when near death, payments may be missed. And, of course, if the live membership drops without replacement, then the facility may become unviable. But with the proposed ten members, the subscription would be approximately 500/month. Not cheap, but feasible. But how many people would turn away from cryonics if it involved a loss of income of L500/month? They'd still have to put up nearly 70k each to join. That sort of commitment would certainly enhance the idea that cryonics is only for the rich. Also if the income earner of a household decides to commit part of his income and capital this way the other members may object.

Cryonics did not start on this sort of a basis. If these calculations had been done it maybe never would have started. But the price of a DIY or "garage" approach was disasters on the way. There do need to be facilities in different legislatures and also to reduce the risks and uncertainties of transport between legislatures.

The Eyjafjallajokull fiasco illustrated how cheap mass air transport has become compared to traditional surface transport. People took cheap mass air transport for granted - until it was taken away.

We cryonicists should realise that cryonics as presented by the two US service providers is really very cheap compared to what it might be if started from scratch.

-- 
Sincerely, John de Rivaz:  http://John.deRivaz.com for websites including
Cryonics Europe, Longevity Report, The Venturists, Porthtowan, Alec Harley
Reeves - inventor, Arthur Bowker - potter, de Rivaz genealogy,  Nomad .. and
more

 Content-Type: text/html;

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32576

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32577
Date: Sun, 2 May 2010 21:28:37 +0200
Subject: Re: migration for cryonics
From: yvan Bozzonetti <[email protected]>

--00032555932ea837370485a17b75

> From: "John de Rivaz" <[email protected]>
>
>   <...>
>
> I don't think that there is any specific law against cryonics as there may
> be in some countries.
>
> To an extent these three are all interleaved. Undoubtedly there would be
> vast sums of money to be taken for compliance costs which may make it more
> the difficult to find what is needed for buying a building, equiping it, and
> endowing a fund to pay staff. The costs of a caretaker could be avoided by
> siting it near someone willing to do it for free, but then once he is under
> cryopreservation there may not be anyone else in the same area.
>

Could it be possible to use at first a simple shelter?
May be something as a greenhouse?
It seems that could be sufficient for weather protection of a cryostat.
That could reduce the cost and the  law overload...
Body preparation has not to be done in the same place. It would be better,
yes, but if that induce too much cost at start, it may be counterproductive.
I know the neuro only has some bad press, yet it would reduce the capital
investment at start (cryostat, LN2,...) A brain can be moved in a cheap
transport container at LN2 temperature without liquid content.
The cost for up to 10 brains would be near L3.00/day, L1000.00/year.

Yvan Bozzonetti.

--00032555932ea837370485a17b75

 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32577

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32578
From: "John de Rivaz" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: migration for cryonics
Date: Sun, 2 May 2010 22:15:15 +0100

Evan Bozzonetti has suggested that a UK cryonics storage facility starts with a cheap shed to house cryostats. ("Greenhouse" may have been thought to be a translation of "horticultural building" rather than a house built of glass to propagate plants.)  I suspect that this is how the failed cryonics providers in the USA were run. I don't think it wise to try and cut corners when designing a facility. Horticultural buildings must be used for that purpose, not something else. That is what town planning is about. Cryonics patients are too vulnerable to actions by the authorities to risk doing anything illegal.

-- 
Sincerely, John de Rivaz:  http://John.deRivaz.com for websites including
Cryonics Europe, Longevity Report, The Venturists, Porthtowan, Alec Harley
Reeves - inventor, Arthur Bowker - potter, de Rivaz genealogy,  Nomad .. and
more

 Content-Type: text/html;

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32578

----------------------------------------------------------------------

End of CryoNet Digest
*********************