How sad is your Christmas tree.

[Guest pd.ryder]

Well, he's been and gone (Santa, that is).

Prezzies delivered and unwrapped, turkey stuffed and, ehem, stuffed :D

Now, we all have to do something with that ever-sprinkling tree. Needles everywhere and more jump off with the slightest of looks.

Where did yours go? What did you do with it? Have you still got it leaning up the shed, waiting for that day when the missus finally does her nut cus it's still there?

Well, I came home shortly after New Year to find she'd set about ours with the loppers - while it was still in the lounge . I couldn't believe it :shock:

Anyway, here's the result. And, like I asked in the first place - how sad is yours ;) ?

[Guest brykins]

Now, we all have to do something with that ever-sprinkling tree..........Where did yours go?

Back in the box it came out of and back into the loft.....far less agro and far kinder to the environment......

[Guest awarner [MVP]]

I've not had a real tree for a few years now, stopped getting them after the next doors cat decided to use it as a P*** post :evil: :shock: :evil:

[Guest chucky.egg]

Ours went to the great Mulcher in the sky... er, car park

@Brykins

What makes you think plastic trees are kinder to the environment?

Surely "natural" ones are kinder - little polution in their manufacture, no additional packaging, 100% recyclable

Or am I missing something?

[Guest pd.ryder]

Surely the mass cultivation of these trees encouraged the maitenance of countryside which may otherwise remain unattended?

It is widely recognised that even burning a whole tree doesn't greatly contribute to 'Global Warming' and the Greenhouse Effect in the same way as dead trees in the 'wild' ;) don't.

It seems to me all that plasticated wire and tinsel will need to be disposed of at some point - probably via a landfill - which will no doubt take a couple of hundred years or so to 'degrade' naturally into the environment.

Just a thought, don't bite my head off.........

[Guest brykins]

Surely the mass cultivation of these trees encouraged the maitenance of countryside which may otherwise remain unattended?

It is widely recognised that even burning a whole tree doesn't greatly contribute to 'Global Warming' and the Greenhouse Effect in the same way as dead trees in the 'wild' ;) don't.

It seems to me all that plasticated wire and tinsel will need to be disposed of at some point - probably via a landfill - which will no doubt take a couple of hundred years or so to 'degrade' naturally into the environment.

There's a whole raft of arguments backwards and forwards, mostly pro real trees, but mostly voiced by growers themselves. The argument that the countryside would otherwise remain unattended (to me) doesn't hold up as we have people starving all over the world, yet we are happy to donate acres and acres of land to produce trees for us to cut down, cover in crap and left to die in our homes once a year?

There's the commonly voiced argument that burning a tree releases all the CO2 that the tree has "consumed" during it's life, thus making the environmental effect of that tree zero.

Also - don't know about your area (and where I live is better) but where I used to live (when we bought the plastic tree, eight years ago) all real trees were picked up by the dustmen on the normal round and thrown into the landfill - at least here they are collected and mulched so better.

All in all, I figure that my plastic tree, which still looks perfect, ought to last fifteen years or so (less if I can convince Mrs Brykins that a tree is a bloody stupid way to celebrate her God!) and probably has fewer environmental effects than those same fifteen real trees, and that space could be better used growing crops to feed people.

[Guest pd.ryder]

Unfortunately, your argument doesn't really hold much water.

There are acres and acres of land left unattended (not even 'fallow') every year and land owners are paid to do this by the EU. Madness I know, but also a reality. These acres of land are not used to grow food for developing countries nor is the area maintained in any other way (but don't get me started on the use of this land for shooting purposes, either :D cus there's much of it 'cared for' by gamekeepers)

I think I'll stick to an 'Annual Replacement' tree with it's wonderful, Christmassy smell and recyclability ;)

[Guest chucky.egg]

I know this is going Off Topic a bit, but...

All in all, I figure that my plastic tree, which still looks perfect, ought to last fifteen years or so (less if I can convince Mrs Brykins that a tree is a bloody stupid way to celebrate her God!) and probably has fewer environmental effects than those same fifteen real trees, and that space could be better used growing crops to feed people.

But the impact of producing a "tree" out of metal and plastic must be huge compared to growing a real tree.

Even if you factor in the fuel burnt by the guy with a Land Rover and chainsaw it can't come close to extracting the oil, refining it, the manufacture of the "tree" out of those elements, packaging, distribution etc.

I know someone who measure environmental impact of different services so I'll ask them if they have any details on this.

I'm not having a pop at you, it's just got me curious now. Often the assumptions about impact are wrong (and that could be my assumptions as easily as yours).

[Guest chucky.egg]

Notice that I resisted the urge to respond to the "use the land to grow food for hungry people" issue.

[Guest pd.ryder]

Notice that I resisted the urge to respond to the "use the land to grow food for hungry people" issue.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Mmm, we'll leave that to Mr Geldoff and his happy band :D of anti-capitalist followers ;)