It’s time to bring in the Christmas and traditional tree. But what should we do? Which option is the most sustainable? Real or plastic? Since care for the environment matters, the quick answer is that a real tree is usually better, because plastic trees tend to have a higher environmental impact. Yet the issue isn’t that simple, because there are nuances worth understanding.
As is well known, trees help fight climate change by absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and storing it in their branches, trunks, and needles. Christmas trees are no exception, so cutting them might seem wasteful at first glance.
Naturally, it is not advised to cut a forest tree to decorate a home. In the case of cultivated trees, these specimens can actually support local ecosystems. It takes roughly ten years for future Christmas trees to grow to a height of about 1.8 meters. During that time, these trees provide shelter for many bird species and other wildlife, while continuing to absorb carbon.
However, not every tree plantation guarantees sustainability. The method of cultivation matters, particularly the heavy use of pesticides. Plantations that harm natural ecosystems through digging up land for monocultures should be avoided.
Growing Christmas trees in North America supports rural economies in many regions, with millions of trees sold in the weeks before holidays. The two most commonly grown species are Norway spruce and Caucasian fir. Certified environmentally responsible producers offer seals that verify sustainable origin and practices.
buy them close to home
Choosing a tree from a nearby nursery is preferable to buying one shipped from far away. Long-distance transport adds vehicle emissions that can negate some environmental benefits. In practice, supporting local nurseries helps minimize transportation footprints.
Many artificial trees are produced abroad, with a large share coming from overseas factories. When trees are shipped long distances, carbon emissions climb, reducing any potential savings from reuse over time.
The sustainability of a tree also depends on what happens to it after use. If a real tree goes to a landfill, it decomposes and releases methane, a potent greenhouse gas. If it is incinerated, burning releases carbon dioxide and other pollutants. The best end-of-life option is to mulch the tree into garden waste, producing useful mulch or sawdust for home use.
Plastic trees: a poor alternative
What about artificial trees? Proponents note they can be used for multiple years. Yet even with repeated use, the main drawback is that they are made from plastic. Most artificial trees are constructed from polyvinyl chloride (PVC). While durable, PVC is one of the most problematic plastics for the environment. Its chlorine content can lead to dioxins that accumulate in animals along the food chain. PVC is also difficult to recycle and often ends up in landfills for many decades.
Moreover, the carbon footprint of a plastic tree tends to be higher than that of a real tree. Some private sources estimate that a fake tree can generate significant greenhouse gas emissions, more than twice the emissions associated with a real tree left in a landfill and far more than a real tree that has been burned.
If a plastic tree is already in the home, the best approach is to keep using it for as many years as possible rather than discarding it.
The preferred path is to opt for a real tree grown in a sustainable, local nursery, ideally sourced a short distance away, and to convert it into mulch at the end of its life.
A third option is to construct a Christmas display using waste and discarded materials. With a little imagination, households can decorate in an original and sustainable way.
In all cases, the goal is to make mindful choices that reduce waste and emissions while maintaining festive spirit.
Notes on local practices and regional variations can help households tailor their decisions to climate, regulations, and available resources, ensuring a greener holiday season for communities across Canada and the United States.