For the environmentally minded, Christmas trees pose a peculiar dilemma.
Should one cut down a living tree, only to chuck its carcass a few weeks later? Or should you buy the artificial version, which in addition to not being real and not giving off that wonderful evergreen aroma, is not likely to ever decompose in a landfill?
It’s a tricky issue, particularly now that artificial trees have become widely available, can be found in a plethora of sizes and varieties, and are much better looking than they were in years past.
Plus–and this is a big, big plus for many of us–the lights are permanently attached.
With real trees, “I think a lot of people are just tired of putting the lights on, taking them off and then throwing out a dead tree,” said Jane Brinton, buyer/manager at Brinton’s Home & Garden store in Carmel, Calif.
Brinton notes that the popularity of artificial trees is on the rise.
Most large chain stores, such as Target and Wal-Mart, sell artificial Christmas trees. So do some home improvement stores.
They can even be ordered online through sites such as www.houseoftrees.com.
Artificial trees are nothing new. In fact, they’ve been around since the late 1800s when they were made of wire and feathers dyed green. Between 1900 and 1950, many were manufactured for use in hotels, stores and the homes of the wealthy.
The current artificial trees resemble their living cousins, down to the needles. A few years ago, it was easy to tell them apart. But the quality has improved significantly. The way they’re put together also has changed for the better–now many have hinged branches so they are easier and quicker to set up.
Prices range from about $20 for the very bottom-of-the-line tree and go up, usually running hundreds of dollars for a nice-looking, large specimen.
As for the smell–or lack thereof–people can buy cans of pine scent to spray on the tree. Brinton recommends getting a few real garlands to provide the aroma.
The trend toward artificial trees apparently has distressed those who grow and sell the real thing. It’s also the subject of debate in online forums.
The Web site www.christmas-trees.com notes that “Christmas tree farms stabilize soil, protect water supplies and provide refuge for wildlife while creating scenic green belts. Often, Christmas trees are grown on soils that could not support other crops. A benefit to the atmosphere, real Christmas trees absorb carbon dioxide and other gases, emitting fresh oxygen. One acre of Christmas trees produces the daily oxygen requirement for 18 people.”
Yet another alternative would be the living Christmas tree, points out Heide Feldman, public education coordinator for the Monterey Regional Waste Management District.
“The potted tree is a kind of compromise,” she said.
Branching out
Real tree pros:
– Fits with tradition.
– Smells nice.
– Supports tree farmers.
– Trees, while growing, put oxygen in atmosphere and can prevent soil erosion.
– Can be mulched when Christmas is over.
Real tree cons:
– Can be a fire hazard if allowed to dry out.
– Drops needles, making it messy.
– A hassle to bring home and then discard.
– You have to kill it to bring it home.
Artificial tree pros:
– Can be used over and over.
– Cheaper than buying a tree each year.
– Lights already installed on some versions.
– If used for years, doesn’t add to landfill.
Artificial tree cons:
– May not look as good as the “real thing.”
– Storage space needed to keep it for following year.
– Made from petroleum products, a nonrenewable resource.
– Difficult to recycle.
———-
Edited by Cara DiPasquale (cdipasquale@tribune.com) and Kris Karnopp (kkarnopp@tribune.com)
