We have been using the same artificial Christmas tree for 6 years now.  

I switched to an artificial tree for several reasons:-

1. There are no local trees are good substitutes for a "real" Christmas tree.  I used to buy imported "real" trees which don't last very well in our climate - buying real trees represented a complete waste of money.  The artificial tree cost me a bit more up front, but the cost has been spread over 6 years, so it has actually been cheaper to go the artificial route.
2. The importation of trees means use of fuel in transportation - if I use a "real" tree, I am effectively using fuel every year when I buy a new tree.  My artificial tree is also imported, but that results in one transportation charge amortized over 6 years.  Less transportation fuel
3. I do not have to vacuum as often with an artificial tree - less electricity used.  Also artificial trees don't cause our allergies to go haywire!

A friend argues that the real tree is a greener option, as it is a renewable resource.   Personally, I think hacking down a tree for a couple weeks of decorative use isn't particularly environmentally friendly.

What do you think?   My children would love to have a real tree year, but I'm not sure if I should.

My friend and I had this same debate. She is for real trees and we have an artificial tree (10 years old). She argues the "stuff" used to make the artificial tree is most likely not good for the environment and after people are done with an artificial tree, it goes into a landfill where the plastic parts may never break down.

I argued that growing a tree, cutting it down and using it for 3 weeks isn't the best use of resources. But she pointed out that our city will pick up your tree at the curb (or you can take it to a park) and they will turn it into mulch which the city uses in the public parks and green spaces. So she argues her tree keeps on giving after they use it for a Christmas tree.

It's a toss up, we've decided. And I had to agree with her about getting rid of old artificial trees. Most are just tossed into the trash. A way to recycle them would be better. 

But for frugality's sake, I won. I bought my tree for $40 ten years ago. $4 a year isn't a bad rate. She paid $30 for her real tree this year. That's $10 per week of use (maybe a bit less, she hasn't taken it down quite yet).

I wonder if the fire hazard associated with real Christmas trees is a factor in deciding which is "greener." Many housefires are started with real trees, and the damage done to homes and families can add up, too.

I am partial to artificial Christmas trees, although I will entertain arguments for both sides.

My in-laws had a nice idea for several years: they bought a very small, living tree each year. At the new year, they'd plant the tree on their property. They had many trees planted before they sold their house.

Planting the living tree is a wonderful idea - it won't for us in sunny Barbados though

Maybe you could get a Christmas Palm Tree?

I have to agree that the artificial tree is more frugal in the long term.  I see quite a few donated to Goodwill, Salvation Army and also every tree offerred on the Freecycle list was taken this year.  While they get tired looking when bare, they can still be fluffed and decorated fully.

However, the other day on a TV program, someone used the needles for mulch around acidic plantings, put the branches out for drying and other mulch, and used portions of the trunk of the tree to make candleholders.

 I vot with artificial trees.  It takes years to grow a tree...and tojust cut it down for a few weeks decorations seems mighty wasteful to me.

When our artificial tree becomes too tired, I will definitely look at a potted palm. 

I vote for real trees with the roots still attached so they can be replanted as the greenest alternative. However, since I am allergic to the trees I have an artificial one.

DL

The choice was made for me in my city -- no tree or a fake one.  The fire marshall doesn't allow real Christmas trees in apartments.  We bought a fake one and this is our 3rd year using it.  It's already got the lights on it and it's actually very easy to set up.  I *loved* having a real tree as a kid, but I'm okay with this one.  We paid $70 for it (had to buy it for Christmas so couldn't get in on a good post-Christmas sale), but I figure it'll last at least a decade, hopefully more.  I cannot justify buying a real tree just b/c I want one.  I'm not willing to spend the money!  LOL

Okay, I guess the question is "which is greener?"  The real tree is greener.  It can biodegrade back into the earth, which I believe is G'd's ultimate plan -- dust to dust and all that.  That's just my opinion, though.  And the tree farms are specifically designed to grow trees in a pattern.  The Christmas trees that are real are usually about 7 years old, so the farmers who grow them have 7 to 8 sections worth of trees, so that each year a group is harvested and a new group is planted.  The next question would be if the trees are grown in a "green" fashion using no pesticides and all that, which would come down to each individual farmer.