The first ISO-compliant third-party peer reviewed Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) comparing the most common artificial Christmas tree sold in the United States to the most common real Christmas tree sold in the United States, found that the choice of either tree has a negligible impact on the environment.
However, the study’s findings show that length of ownership, disposal method and “tree miles” can make a difference on which tree is environmentally preferable.The study, conducted by PE INTERNATIONAL and peer reviewed by an independent third party panel, took into consideration five key environmental indicators to determine which tree type is environmentally preferable.
The environmental impact of Christmas trees
The study was sponsored by the American Christmas Tree Association (ACTA) a non-profit organization representing artificial Christmas tree retailers and real Christmas tree retailers, to clear up common misperceptions about the environmental impacts of Christmas trees.If you purchase an artificial tree, keep it in use for at least nine years
The study also highlights an “Eight Christmas Environmental Payback Period” between the two tree products based on the study’s five environmental indicators. The study found that the environmental impacts of one artificial tree used for more than eight Christmas’ is environmentally friendlier than purchasing eight or more live cut trees over eight years. "ACTA encourages responsible consumerism," said Jami Warner, Executive Director of ACTA. "Consumers should consider the impact on the environment for every item they purchase, not just Christmas trees."Read the full final report here
