5 ms·

I was just discussing tree farm economics with the guy who runs the farm we bought from this year. Our normal place was closed this year, and he told me a numbe

I was just discussing tree farm economics with the guy who runs the farm we bought from this year. Our normal place was closed this year, and he told me a number of his local competitors only opened for one weekend. The trees this year we’re on the short side because of supply issues from the previous years.

psbp 6y ago
This is because of the wildfires in the PNW, right? I remember hearing about this years ago.
- sircastor 6y ago
  I believe it’s actually more related to the economic depression/recession ~2008. Fewer buyers in 2008 meant less space to plant new trees, which means fewer trees reaching maturity for this season. Coupled with a bad few years means more farms closing, meaning fewer trees available for a larger customer base. Though I can’t speak regarding the fires impact on farms.
JKCalhoun 6y ago
Also was just musing about this since we cut a tree for Christmas yesterday. I was feeling a but guilty harvesting a tree every year, wondering if fake was the way to go. Reading the article made me wonder if neither choice was a good one. It does look like "U-Cut" trees are cutting out the middleman(person) and putting money straight into the farmer's pocket. At $65 that's a much healthier profit margin than the $8-$10 they get selling to wholesalers. And I suppose if there were made-in-the-USA fake trees that too could stimulate the local (U.S.) economy ... but that doesn't appear to be the case.
- paulryanrogers 6y ago
  Maybe buy a used artificial one, or just ask friends and relatives of they're getting rid of one? For years I used my grandfather's old artificial tree. It's probably seen 30+ years of service and was still functional when we upgraded.
- cm2012 6y ago
  Every single thing you buy has the same economics. It's not really a moral thing to worry about. Retailers are not evil for taking a cut, they have a very competitive business as well. Plus the farms are quite sustainable, there's no risk of overfarming Christmas trees.
- aynsof 6y ago
  I do wonder how the expert in the article came up with the assertion that fake was now environmentally friendly than real. Surely shipping a pile of plastic from China is worse for the environment than growing a real tree for 10 years. Even if the plastic lasts for a decade, and the alternative is to buy 10 real trees over that same time period, I'd have thought the natural option would be better for the planet.
  - jeromegv 6y ago
    I haven't made the math... but those plastic trees are much smaller and lighter than the real ones (and have a very standard size in a box that can be very well optimized), so shipping them from China on a container boat + container train + keeping them 10 years might not be that bad comparing to what is required to transport those natural trees every single year on trucks often across borders (lots of tree farms in Canada shipping to the US) + complicated transport OUT at the end of the season. Obviously you have to add the positive impact of having a tree growing and the CO2 they process. Just wanted to chime that it might not be that obvious what is really more eco-friendly. I'm speaking as someone who would obviously prefer the plastic-free solution.
  - stilisstuk 6y ago
    I am going to buy a replantable pottgrown tree this year. I've read plastic trees needs to be used 14 years in order to be more eco friendly than cutting a new tree every year.
  - dehrmann 6y ago
    > Surely shipping a pile of plastic from China is worse for the environment than growing a real tree for 10 years. Trees are light and container shipping is efficient. I found this from a totally unbiased source: https://www.worldshipping.org/industry-issues/environment/air-emissions/WSC-CarbonDioxide.png https://www.worldshipping.org/industry-issues/environment/ai... In practice, it's just a different environmental impact. You have to weigh plastic production against more shipping, and depending on what you care about, which is "better" will change.
- Negitivefrags 6y ago
  Don’t feel guilty about harvesting trees. This is literally a carbon capture business. They are not cutting them down from the wilderness.
  - harimau777 6y ago
    At least when I was growing up, we burned them after Christmas. Wouldn't that release the carbon? I guess some of it's still left over as ashes.
    - chrisseaton 6y ago
      Why would you need to burn it?
      - jfk13 6y ago
        The tree takes up a bunch of space. The ashes are more compact.
        crazyjncsu 6y ago
        Plus it’s fun. We’re talking 20 ft high flames you can feel from 50 ft away.
        anthonybennis 6y ago
        In Ireland they are shredded for mulch.
        chrisseaton 6y ago
        Because you're putting most of them into the atmosphere as carbon gas!
  - abootstrapper 6y ago
    Honest question. How would you have to dispose of the tree to capture the carbon? Burry it? Wouldn’t composting release the carbon?

psbp 6y ago

This is because of the wildfires in the PNW, right? I remember hearing about this years ago.

sircastor 6y ago
I believe it’s actually more related to the economic depression/recession ~2008. Fewer buyers in 2008 meant less space to plant new trees, which means fewer trees reaching maturity for this season. Coupled with a bad few years means more farms closing, meaning fewer trees available for a larger customer base. Though I can’t speak regarding the fires impact on farms.

JKCalhoun 6y ago

Also was just musing about this since we cut a tree for Christmas yesterday. I was feeling a but guilty harvesting a tree every year, wondering if fake was the way to go. Reading the article made me wonder if neither choice was a good one. It does look like "U-Cut" trees are cutting out the middleman(person) and putting money straight into the farmer's pocket. At $65 that's a much healthier profit margin than the $8-$10 they get selling to wholesalers. And I suppose if there were made-in-the-USA fake trees that too could stimulate the local (U.S.) economy ... but that doesn't appear to be the case.

paulryanrogers 6y ago
Maybe buy a used artificial one, or just ask friends and relatives of they're getting rid of one? For years I used my grandfather's old artificial tree. It's probably seen 30+ years of service and was still functional when we upgraded.
cm2012 6y ago
Every single thing you buy has the same economics. It's not really a moral thing to worry about. Retailers are not evil for taking a cut, they have a very competitive business as well. Plus the farms are quite sustainable, there's no risk of overfarming Christmas trees.
aynsof 6y ago
I do wonder how the expert in the article came up with the assertion that fake was now environmentally friendly than real. Surely shipping a pile of plastic from China is worse for the environment than growing a real tree for 10 years. Even if the plastic lasts for a decade, and the alternative is to buy 10 real trees over that same time period, I'd have thought the natural option would be better for the planet.
- jeromegv 6y ago
  I haven't made the math... but those plastic trees are much smaller and lighter than the real ones (and have a very standard size in a box that can be very well optimized), so shipping them from China on a container boat + container train + keeping them 10 years might not be that bad comparing to what is required to transport those natural trees every single year on trucks often across borders (lots of tree farms in Canada shipping to the US) + complicated transport OUT at the end of the season. Obviously you have to add the positive impact of having a tree growing and the CO2 they process. Just wanted to chime that it might not be that obvious what is really more eco-friendly. I'm speaking as someone who would obviously prefer the plastic-free solution.
- stilisstuk 6y ago
  I am going to buy a replantable pottgrown tree this year. I've read plastic trees needs to be used 14 years in order to be more eco friendly than cutting a new tree every year.
- dehrmann 6y ago
  > Surely shipping a pile of plastic from China is worse for the environment than growing a real tree for 10 years. Trees are light and container shipping is efficient. I found this from a totally unbiased source: https://www.worldshipping.org/industry-issues/environment/air-emissions/WSC-CarbonDioxide.png https://www.worldshipping.org/industry-issues/environment/ai... In practice, it's just a different environmental impact. You have to weigh plastic production against more shipping, and depending on what you care about, which is "better" will change.
Negitivefrags 6y ago
Don’t feel guilty about harvesting trees. This is literally a carbon capture business. They are not cutting them down from the wilderness.
- harimau777 6y ago
  At least when I was growing up, we burned them after Christmas. Wouldn't that release the carbon? I guess some of it's still left over as ashes.
  - chrisseaton 6y ago
    Why would you need to burn it?
    - jfk13 6y ago
      The tree takes up a bunch of space. The ashes are more compact.
      - crazyjncsu 6y ago
        Plus it’s fun. We’re talking 20 ft high flames you can feel from 50 ft away.
      - anthonybennis 6y ago
        In Ireland they are shredded for mulch.
      - chrisseaton 6y ago
        Because you're putting most of them into the atmosphere as carbon gas!
- abootstrapper 6y ago
  Honest question. How would you have to dispose of the tree to capture the carbon? Burry it? Wouldn’t composting release the carbon?