The advantages of genuine Christmas trees that go unnoticed
Christmas trees have effects on the ecosystem that go far beyond whether they are genuine or plastic according to scientists. So which option is best for a green Christmas?
It is believed that the first Christmas tree in England was set up in 1800 at Queen’s Lodge in Windsor by Queen Charlotte, the German-born wife of King George III.
German Christmas trees had a long tradition, but the upper classes in England quickly adopted them as a stylish aspect of the holiday season. By the 1850s, they were a familiar sight throughout the UK.
Two hundred years later, the now-prized custom of placing a freshly cut tree in the midst of living.
Since I am a millennial, I most definitely fit this pattern. I adore genuine Christmas trees, but I’ve engaged in innumerable discussions (and internal disputes) over whether purchasing one is excessive wastefulness or a necessary, ultimately environmentally irrelevant, aspect of the holiday season.
I do believe that it is much more complex than simply saying, “Oh, we’re cutting down a tree and taking it out.” —Alexandra Kosiba
But as I’ve learned more about the subject, I’ve discovered that the supposed harm they do to the ecosystem might not be as obvious as I first believed. Researchers claim that these discussions frequently focus on the relative carbon footprint of real goods versus plastic ones, but that their wider impact—whether positive or negative—goes much beyond this.
When compared to the production of timber or crops like maize or wheat, or even when compared to the global carbon cycle, Christmas trees are unquestionably not a particularly major use of land. However, they do offer an intriguing subject to think about, in part because more people directly interact.