Real vs. Artificial Christmas Trees – An Environmental Perspective

Each year during the holiday season people begin decorating and buying gifts. For those that celebrate Christmas, an important decision is choosing a tree. This includes deciding if it will be a real or artificial Christmas tree. How does your decision impact the environment? Cost, convenience, and personal preference are all important considerations, but so too is the environmental impact.

Research has shown that locally-sourced natural trees have less environmental impact than artificial ones. An independent Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) study released by the Montreal firm Elliposos [1] determined that real trees have less overall impact in terms of distribution, disposal, and average carbon emissions than their artificial counterparts. The LCA method allows for evaluation of potential environmental impacts of a product (or service) over its entire life cycle and takes raw material processing, manufacturing, transportation, distribution, use, reuse, recycling and disposal impacts into consideration. [2]

When it comes to artificial trees, the key to achieving environmental gains lies in the amount of time they are kept and reused. Average households replace an artificial tree about every six years. Evidence shows that, in general, artificial trees need to be reused for at least 20 years if they are to compare favorably with natural trees.

“It makes sense to choose the tradition that suits your needs while also considering the best environmental practices,” says Kathryn Fernholz, Executive Director of Dovetail Partners, a Minneapolis-based environmental group. “If you choose a real tree, you can get to know your local grower and recycle your tree at the end of the holiday season. If you choose an artificial tree, make sure to reuse it for as many years as possible. Whichever route you go, your goal can be to pass the tradition of selecting a tree – or even the tree itself – down to the next generation!”

Additional environmentally-friendly measures you can take during the holidays include use of recycled and recyclable wrapping paper and greeting cards, use of LED holiday bulbs; and reuse and recycling of real trees and other decorations at the end of the season such as through collection programs, composting, wood chipping or planting.

[1] The study can be found here: Couillard, Sylvain; Bage et. all. “Comparative Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Artificial VS Natural Christmas Tree.” Ellipsos. February 2009.

[2] To learn more about LCA, read Dovetail’s report, “Life Cycle Analysis: A Key to Better Environmental Decisions.”

read more/source: http://www.twosidesna.org/US/Real-vs-Artificial-Christmas-Trees—An-Environmental-Perspective

Related Posts

Forest Leaders Urge Governments to Take Firm Action on Climate Change

“We need a global agreement at COP 21 with clear actions and firm commitments, outlining effective pathways to address climate change,” said Ben Gunneberg, CEO of PEFC International ahead of the upcoming PEFC Forest Certification Week. “These commitments must recognize the multiple benefits of forests and encourage policies that promote sustainable forest management and the use of certified forest products. This will enable PEFC as the world's leading forest certification system to further enhance its contribution to tackling climate change, safeguarding forest ecosystems and sustainable livelihoods."

Two Sides Member Spotlight: Rolland Enterprises inc.

This month’s Member Spotlight features Rolland Enterprises Inc. A leading North American producer of uncoated papers, Rolland manufactures papers with up to 100% post-consumer content. With operations in Quebec and Wisconsin, the company’s operations include a paper mill and converting facility, as well as two state-of-the-art facilities that produce premium recycled pulp. Founded in 1882, Rolland’s enduring commitment to quality, innovation and sustainable manufacturing include sustainable sourcing, energy efficiency, water conservation, wastewater treatment technology, recycling of process byproducts and a continuing focus on further reducing its environmental footprint. Rolland uses the life cycle assessment (LCA) process to guide its sustainability improvement objectives and makes the results of its LCAs public, confirming the company’s environmental stewardship to its many stakeholders. For example, an LCA identified a gap in the company’s water consumption which enabled it to improve its water recycling systems. Today, Rolland’s paper mill has a closed-loop system that uses six times less water and recycles the water 30 times. One of the company’s most successful environmental innovations is the use of 93% renewable biogas energy to manufacture products at its paper mill — the only mill in North America to use primarily biogas for energy. An eight-mile-long pipeline feeds the mill with purified methane gas captured at a nearby landfill. This reduces Rolland’s annual CO2 footprint by 70,000 tons or the equivalent of taking 23,400 compact cars off the road for one year.

Uruguayan forest certification system submitted for assessment

The Uruguayan PEFC Scheme has been submitted to PEFC for assessment. The public consultation, which is your chance to give your feedback on this revised system, will run from 23 August to 21 October. PEFC Uruguay revised the country’s national forest certification system following the entry into force of the revised 2018 PEFC Sustainable Forest Management standard. To provide you with additional information, we are holding a webinar on 23 August, at 14:00 CEST. The webinar is free to attend, and everyone is welcome.
Back To Top
×Close search
Search