The Economics of Christmas Trees • Hacker News Board

Re: The Economics of Christmas Trees

#11

Post by Slartie » Sun, Dec 06, 2020, 8:41 PM UTC

This is really interesting. There seems to be a significant difference between the US Christmas Tree economy and the one in Germany.

We got our tree for this year a week ago directly from a grower in the local area where we always buy our trees. It is of average size (the 6'-7' size is also what we mostly consider a good size over here) and it only cost us 30€, so our prices here seem to be significantly lower than in the US. Also, I don't know anybody here who has a fake plastic tree - these aren't really a thing here, basically people either don't have a tree at all, or they get a real one.

Re: The Economics of Christmas Trees

#12

Post by harimau777 » Sun, Dec 06, 2020, 8:47 PM UTC

Negitivefrags wrote: post #10

JKCalhoun wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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-…

Don’t feel guilty about harvesting trees. This is literally a carbon capture business. They are not cutting them down from the wilderness.

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.

Re: The Economics of Christmas Trees

#13

Post by nostromo » Sun, Dec 06, 2020, 8:49 PM UTC

I'll take this opportunity to share this cool video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08K_aEajzNA

Re: The Economics of Christmas Trees

#14

Post by davidw » Sun, Dec 06, 2020, 8:53 PM UTC

We're fortunate to live near a national forest here in Oregon where we can get a $5 permit, and go cut our own tree. They're not so 'perfect' looking, but it's a fun family experience.

Re: The Economics of Christmas Trees

#15

Post by chrisseaton » Sun, Dec 06, 2020, 8:55 PM UTC

harimau777 wrote: post #12

Negitivefrags wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t feel guilty about harvesting trees. This is literally a carbon capture business. They are not cutting them down from the wilderness.

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.

Why would you need to burn it?

Re: The Economics of Christmas Trees

#16

Post by silexia » Sun, Dec 06, 2020, 8:59 PM UTC

I run a Christmas tree farm at a small scale. I wonder if real Christmas trees are actually worse for the environment than fake trees as many real Christmas trees are burned rather than sent to a landfill?

Re: The Economics of Christmas Trees

#17

Post by abootstrapper » Sun, Dec 06, 2020, 9:03 PM UTC

Negitivefrags wrote: post #10

JKCalhoun wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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-…

Don’t feel guilty about harvesting trees. This is literally a carbon capture business. They are not cutting them down from the wilderness.

Honest question. How would you have to dispose of the tree to capture the carbon? Burry it? Wouldn’t composting release the carbon?

Re: The Economics of Christmas Trees

#18

Post by dehrmann » Sun, Dec 06, 2020, 9:04 PM UTC

Negitivefrags wrote: post #10

JKCalhoun wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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-…

Don’t feel guilty about harvesting trees. This is literally a carbon capture business. They are not cutting them down from the wilderness.

> This is literally a carbon capture business.

Even if you're not burning it the day after Christmas, it'll get chipped and composted. Some of the carbon is released in composting, some wood will remain, but with how people use mulch, I wouldn't expect it to capture carbon long enough to be interesting.

Re: The Economics of Christmas Trees

#19

Post by cptskippy » Sun, Dec 06, 2020, 9:04 PM UTC

cm2012 wrote: post #4

This is a great article.

I wish they explored the ACTA claims that artificial Christmas trees are more environmentally friendly than real trees.

Artificial trees are made from PVC and the by products of PVC manufacturing are highly toxic and historically highly polluting.

In order for that claim to be true under China's lax regulatory environment, either they have some revolutionary new method of producing PVC or farming Christmas trees is highly polluting. Either way, I would love to know the answer.

Sadly it's probably just a lie as the head of the ACTA is an artificial tree mogul.

Re: The Economics of Christmas Trees

#20

Post by jfk13 » Sun, Dec 06, 2020, 9:04 PM UTC

chrisseaton wrote: post #15

harimau777 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Why would you need to burn it?

The tree takes up a bunch of space. The ashes are more compact.