Real vs. Artificial Christmas Trees
by Lori Brown
Published on November 25th, 2009
12 Comments
The real versus artificial Christmas tree debate replays itself year after year. But the truth is, each option has its own place on the naughty-and-nice list.
Just a few short decades ago, displaying a Christmas tree in your living room really only yielded one option: a real pine or fir tree. That all changed when a U.S.-based toilet bowl brush manufacturer, the Addis Brush Company, created an artificial tree from brush bristles in the 1930s, acting as the prototype for modern artificial trees.
Artificial trees became increasingly popular, with sales jumping to 17.4 million in 2007. Photo: sxc.hu
The Pros and Cons of Artificial
Guilt. Many have made it the sole reason to invest in an artificial tree. The thought of cutting down a new tree each year can put a damper on the holidays for some.
Also, cost, convenience and environmental impact are other reasons consumers opt for an artificial tree.
Given the current economic climate, artificial trees may be especially appealing for their investment value when compared with the recurrent, annual expense of a real Christmas tree. Their convenience is also appealing to consumers as they don’t need watering, don’t leave pine needles all over the floor and transportation from tree farm to home isn’t an issue.
But many experts believe artificial trees actually have a greater negative environmental impact when all aspects of an their life cycle are considered.
Today’s artificial trees are typically manufactured with metal and polyvinyl chloride (PVC), a non-biodegradable, petroleum-derived plastic. In addition, many older varieties may contain lead, used as a stabilizer in the manufacturing process.
Despite their PVC contents, artificial trees are non-recyclable and non-biodegradable, meaning they will sit in a landfill for centuries after disposal.
Furthermore, approximately 85 percent of artificial trees sold in the U.S. are imported from China, according to the National Christmas Tree Association (NCTA), adding to their overall environmental footprint.
The Pros and Cons of Real
There are about 500,000 acres in production for growing Christmas trees. Each acre provides the daily oxygen requirements of 18 people. Photo: Flickr/looseends
Approximately 33 million real Christmas trees are sold in North America each year, according to the U.S. EPA. Luckily, about 93 percent of those trees are recycled through more than 4,000 available recycling programs.
Also known as “treecycling,” the act of recycling a Christmas tree is a leading reason many experts agree they are more environmentally friendly than their plastic counterparts.
Treecycling is an easy way to return a renewable and natural source back to the environment instead of disposing it in a landfill, where decomposition rates are slowed due to lack of oxygen.
Christmas trees are recycled into mulch and used in landscaping and gardening or chipped and used for playground material, hiking trails, paths and walkways. They can be used for beachfront erosion prevention, lake and river shoreline stabilization and fish and wildlife habitat.
A single farmed tree absorbs more than 1 ton of CO2 throughout its lifetime. With more than 350 million real Christmas tress growing in U.S. tree farms alone, you can imagine the yearly amount of carbon sequestering associated with the trees. Additionally, each acre of trees produces enough oxygen for the daily needs of 18 people.
In order to ensure a healthy supply of Christmas trees each year, growers must use sustainable farming techniques. For each tree harvested, one to three seedlings are planted the following spring, ensuring a healthy supply of trees.
According to the NCTA, the Christmas tree industry employs more than 100,000 Americans, an important economic consideration in the real versus artificial debate.
Besides the aforementioned cons associated with real Christmas trees, they are farmed as agricultural products, meaning repeated applications of pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers may be used throughout their lifetime. The ideal tree would be raised organically, using integrated pest management techniques rather than chemicals.
Another con associated with real Christmas trees may depend on where you live. For climates where coniferous trees don’t grow, that tree in your living room may have had to travel hundreds of miles to reach the lot, significantly impacting the environmental impact associated with travel. However, a tree trucked from a couple states away is still traveling thousands of miles less than one from overseas.
An Even Better Option
Go one step further than the real versus artificial debate and consider a living, potted tree this Christmas. Though not feasible for everybody due to climate and land availability, living trees are brought into the home for about 10 days, then replanted after Christmas. If you don’t have the land for replanting, your local parks department will likely accept your tree for planting after the holidays.
The Verdict?
So what’s the final word? Drumroll please… Real trees top our charts for holiday adornment. Even though they might shed needles on your floor, the investment in a U.S.-based product, the carbon-neutral nature of their production and their ease of recycling make them a clear winner.
- Environmental Protection Agency. Holidays and Parties http://www.epa.gov/osw/wycd/funfacts/holidays.htm.
- National Christmas Tree Association. http://www.christmastree.org.
- Sharon Caskey Hayes. Timesnews.net.(11/26/2008). Grower says real Christmas trees are better for environment than artificial ones http://www.timesnews.net/article.php?id=9009208.
Taproot Green Web Hosting » Blog Archive » Top 5 Ways to Green Your Holiday!
posted on December 1st, 2009 at 7:57 pm
[...] are many, many uses for recycled holiday trees. According to Earth911 – “Christmas trees are recycled into mulch and used in landscaping and gardening or [...]
Debra Moon
posted on December 7th, 2009 at 10:03 am
Good article. Please consider adding to the pro’s & con’s of real trees, the number of fires and deaths caused by real trees at this time of the year due to people forgetting to water the tree(s), use the wrong lights, put the tree too close to a heating source, and many other reasons. Usually artificial trees are fire retardent.
Thanks for your time.
Wishing you and yours a Safe, Blessed and Merry Christmas.
Mike Hovis
posted on December 11th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
Real christmas tree farms are not the environmentally friendly industries that they seem to be. Besides the HEAVY use of toxic pesticides , they are fairly devoid of wildlife as they encompass acres and acres of land comprised of a single species. Also the trees are trimmed, and grass is mowed regularly discouraging nesting birds, and other wildlife. Real trees frequently have molds and mosses growing on the trunks and will emit spores once exposed to warm livingroom. This can cause asthma, sinusitus, and sometimes anaphalxsis in severly allergic people. I have 3 times in my life thrown out perfectly wonderful real trees just days before Christmas because it made my living space toxic and unlivable. Explain that to the kids!Choose your poison carefully!
marcel
posted on December 11th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
I am a bit puzzled by your statement “a single farmed tree absorbs more than 1 ton of CO2 throughout its lifetime”. If one tree absorbed one ton of CO2, then it would weigh at least 1 ton. In reality, the tree must be shedding 95% of that weight in the form of pine needles, bark, sap, etc. throughout its lifetime.
Also, there is a misconception about trees locking up CO2. Sure, they store CO2 in solid form while they’re alive. But when they decompose all of that carbon is eventually broken back down and emitted back into the atmosphere as CO2 or methane. That’s the definition of carbon neutral.
Lastly, its not clear to me which has a bigger impact: shipping a lighter plastic tree via cargo ship from China to Houston (which has a port), or shipping a heavier, real tree from Oregon to Houston by diesel truck. Boats are much more efficient than trucks, so its hard to tell which method has a bigger impact per tree.
nick
posted on December 13th, 2009 at 10:59 am
I am a bit shocked that a earth911 website chose a real tree over a fake one. now, I’m not arguing against having a real tree, in fact my family cuts one down each year, but I am surprised with the comments that have been posted. I want to say the posters of those comments are arguing so heavily against having a real tree because they thought they were doing right by buying a fake one, but then proved wrong. But… I can’t say that for sure. I would defiantly go with a real tree that is a recyclable and a positive contribution to the environment over a tree made from harmful chemicals that is not able to be recycled.
You can always plant more trees if you are worried about the oxygen…
You can’t reverse pollution in the air caused by chemicals that were used to make the trees and you can’t reverse pollution from the trees sitting there in a landfill
jeff
posted on December 14th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
I cut down a real Nihilism (aka Christmas) tree each year in a national forest. I love eluding the park rangers. It’s a real life video game …. Not really. Actually, I pay them $10 for the privilige of helping them manage the forest. Tromping through the snow; dragging the tree back to the car-It’s a blast. I could care less which is more environmentally friendly. It’s a family tradition that gets us all in the spirit of the holiday.
Ditto, my bike commute.
20 miles each way. Over 5000 miles a year. Screw the environment. I ride because I like to ride.
Mother earth will be here long after mankind has perished. It’s not about the environment. It’s about you saving the environment the way you want it to be saved for you, at someone else’s expense. Get over yourselves. And Merry Christmas.
Jess
posted on December 28th, 2009 at 11:24 am
I’m glad that I found this page! I’ve been looking for something like this for weeks! It will sure help me for next year!!
Jonathan
posted on January 2nd, 2010 at 11:41 am
Sense and sensibility. For me, only a real tree will do. It’s a taste thing. I’ve seen some of these magnificent and expensive artificial trees – they look ideal from a distance. Get a bit closer and you see what they really are: fakes. For me, that’s a big let-down that only serves to heighten the worst aspects of consumerism and artifice that have grown to taint America’s Christmas. Do you want to see plastic flowers? Do you want to eat artificial food? Do you want to go to a museum full of replicas and forgeries? Go real!
Lazy Susan « Mission: Bliss
posted on February 11th, 2010 at 4:22 pm
[...] Earth 911 Real vs. Fake [...]
ernest Carter
posted on March 3rd, 2010 at 10:39 am
Real is great for a while. They do become expensive if you what an attractive tree you can display with pride. They can be burdensome if you are in a time crunch, or one person gets stuck with the messy clean up and daily watering. As time goes on after many real trees We decided to get a pre lit artificial tree. The time up and down was reduced by an entire day and we did not have to go out in the cold and suffer the hunt for the perfect tree. The tree we got was a new natural branching pattern design and the strong limbs that are better suited for the larger ornaments sold today. It was nice to have the fresh cut tree in the house, but I would never go back. I actually think with all the chemicals that need to be used to grow those near perfect trees which every one wants, that the artificial tree is in the long run a better investment.
Leslie
posted on March 3rd, 2010 at 10:49 pm
I bought a Fake tree about 20 years ago. The good thing about this particular tree is that the “needles” are made from recycled newspaper, colored green. It has held up very well, with only a few spots where the daily news is now showing thru. Maybe more tree manufacturers should be responsible and make the trees from recycled materials!!!!! The best of both worlds!
sophie
posted on March 8th, 2010 at 8:33 am
I agree with Lelsie, trees should be made out of recycled materials, and should also be recyclable.