The Red, White, and Green

Why send one of these guys to an untimely death when you can rent a living one for the same price? Photo via Flickr: Birdfreak.com

Since the first synthetic Christmas tree was introduced in France in 1840, the debate has carried on: real or fake? Even without factoring in the environmental repercussions of either, there are valid arguments to make on both sides: Fake trees don’t shed needles all over the place and are more cost-effective in the long-term; real trees arguably look more elegant and fill the house with that wonderful woodsy smell.

I don’t have a lifetime of piney sense-memory (save my family’s Chanukah bush experiment when I was in third grade) placing me firmly in the real-tree camp, but I have to be honest: I kind of cringe every time I see one of those polyethylene monstrosities. But it also seems such a waste to cut down a living tree every year, even if it does come from a farm and not an actual forest.

What’s more, nearly 30 million Christmas trees will be sold in the US this holiday season, and the majority of them will go straight to the landfill. (Recycling is available, but it’s not everywhere.)

That’s why I think renting a Christmas tree –  à la LivingChristmas.com — is pure genius. Prices range from $25 for a two-to-three-foot potted pine to $125 for a seven-to-eight-foot number, which is about what you’d spend on the chopped-down variety. Plus, it’s delivered to your doorstep. You can keep your living tree for up to three weeks, and after it keeps your home Christmas cozy, it’s picked up to join its other fir friends at the nursery till next year.

With a cut tree going for roughly the same price, why wouldn’t everyone do this?

–Jennifer Grayson

Like this post? Subscribe to The Red, White, and Green RSS feed