At Christmas this year, consumers who care about the environment have lost their brains. Is the artificial Christmas tree more environmentally friendly or the natural Christmas tree more abatement? To spend a "green" Christmas, consumers are in a dilemma.

Many factors affect people's decision to buy Christmas trees, including family traditions, prices, and the degree of difficulty. However, the impact of environmental factors is becoming more and more important. For this reason, whether it is a man made Christmas tree or a natural Christmas tree seller, this year, the "environmental protection card" has been played.

The sale of the Christmas tree is undoubtedly affected by the downturn in the economy. A New York research firm believes that Christmas tree sales have been slightly higher than last year, but profits have been shrinking every week since the festival. For this reason, all the sellers claim that their Christmas tree is the most environmentally friendly.

The Christmas Tree Association, which represents the manufacturers of artificial Christmas trees, said that a study sponsored by it showed that the carbon footprint of artificial trees is less than that of real trees, but the premise is that artificial Christmas trees must be used for more than 10 years.

However, the Pacific Northwest National Christmas Association, one of the representatives of natural tree manufacturers, said that natural Christmas trees can reduce carbon emissions by absorbing carbon dioxide and releasing oxygen, and at the same time, it can also be recycled. The growers also grow new trees in their original position after cutting down trees.

Bill and Anna Holly, from Manhattan's beaches, decided that the best way was to use the two methods. They rented a 3 foot - high potted Christmas tree for Christmas. Bill said, "as long as 70 dollars, they can deliver door-to-door and pick up products, and we can use the same Christmas tree every year, so that Christmas trees can grow with our children." The couple had 3 children under the age of 5.

He said, "it's hard to buy a true tree every year and abandon it. We are not environmental maniac, but we do want to make the decision as far as possible to consider the environmental factors.

Mike Bondi, a professor of Forest Science at the Oregon State University, says the United States has not compared the life cycle of the carbon footprint of artificial Christmas trees and natural Christmas trees. Bondi believed that the study of artificial trees should not be fully believed. "The American Christmas Tree Association's research is not a peer - reviewed scientific study," he said.

The British government established an independent nonprofit company, one Carbon Trust Co., Ltd., recommending people to choose natural trees. However, the company says, in general, natural trees have lower carbon footprint than artificial Christmas trees. In a statement, the company also pointed out that if people use artificial trees for more than 11 years, they would be a more friendly choice for the environment. The reason is that the carbon emitted from the manufacture and sale of artificial trees is equal to the emissions of 11 real trees that are planted and cut down.