Euroverify: natural or artificial, which tree is better for the environment?

ADVERTISEMENT

It's a big dilemma at Christmas: is a real or artificial Christmas tree better for the environment?

It seems that there is no clear answer and that many elements come into play when making a decision.

Experts also say that comparing the relative carbon footprint of real and artificial options might simply be the wrong question and that we should ask ourselves whether it is necessary to have a tree, given the impact on the environment. 'environment.

First, let's see what we know about the natural option.

According to the Polish Ministry of Trade, an estimated 60 million natural Christmas trees will be sold in Europe in 2022 alone. Denmark, Poland and Germany are the main European exporters.

Christmas trees are typically evergreen conifers, such as fir, pine or spruce, which have a harvest cycle of typically nine to ten years. This means that for every tree cut down, another is usually planted to replace it.

When managed well, Christmas tree plantings can have a positive impact on the environment. Trees absorb carbon from the atmosphere and store it, and can also provide refuge for a variety of species, including those in decline.

But if not managed sustainably, Christmas tree plantations can displace natural ecosystems, according to a study carried out by the consulting company Ellipsos.

Chemical fertilizers used on plantations also have a negative impact on the environment and can lead to pollution of rivers, lakes and ecosystems, according to Dr Paul Caplat, senior lecturer in ecology at Queen's University Belfast.

“Pesticides are used because Christmas tree farms are monocultures, in which a single species is grown at high density, putting them at risk of parasitism and disease. explains Dr. Caplat. “Organic cultivation helps reduce this impact, but it can also produce trees.”benches“, whose form is less formatted.

Experts recommend opting for a locally grown tree from an ecological plantation.

The fate of the tree at the end of its useful life is considered essential to reduce its carbon footprint.

Replanting a tree, for example in a pot, is the preferred method because it allows it to continue to be used. Composting or mulching the tree to spread it in the garden is also recommended.

But a tree thrown into a landfill after use will emit methane, a gas more potent than carbon dioxide, when it decomposes.

According to the Carbon Trust the carbon footprint of a typical natural tree burned after use is 3.5 kg, but this increases to 16 kg of CO2 if it ends up in a landfill.

The benefits of an artificial tree depend on recycling and years of use

In comparison, a two meter tall artificial tree is estimated to produce around 40kg of carbon dioxide, ten times more than a properly disposed natural tree.

Artificial trees are often made from petroleum-based materials and are primarily shipped from China, adding to their environmental footprint.

This means that an artificial tree would need to be reused for at least ten years for its footprint to be comparable to that of a real tree.

However, artificial trees are often extremely difficult to recycle due to the mix of materials used. This discourages their reuse or recycling.

According to the University of Sheffield, around seven million Christmas trees end up in landfills in the UK each year, releasing around 100,000 tonnes of harmful greenhouse gases into the environment.

If you opt for the artificial option, experts suggest purchasing a high-quality tree and ensuring that it will be reused for at least ten years.