I was just watching the Today Show a couple of minutes ago. They're getting ready to set up the Christmas Tree, and someone from the Center was just talking about their new, environmentally-friendly approach to the tree. Apparently, this year they used a handsaw to trim up the base instead of a power saw. They're also going to be stringing the tree with power-saving LED lighting instead of the usual bulbs. And they were discussing all of this right next to the 84-foot high tree that they cut down to use as a holiday decoration.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Is it just me, or are the holidays getting more and more high tech and environmentally friendly? Maybe it is me. I haven’t used real pine to decorate for the holidays in years. There may be some bits among the potpourri in the centerpiece, but just about everything else has been replaced with paper…
Or something. A while ago, in "Michele Bachmann, Light Bulb Vigilantes, and the Dim Bulbs of the Tea Party", I described the fear that the psychiatric wing of the Republican Party (and its dominant wing) has towards more energy efficient light bulbs. This is what appears to drive that fear:
On…
They may have a green logo and they may have written environmental stewardship policies, but the work environment at Dollar Tree is dangerous. This month their employees may be wearing Christmas hats and jingle bells, but those will do little good protecting them from falling boxes and blocked fire…
I know that the holidays were originally celebrated by non-religious folk -- more commonly known as "godless heathens" by the religious wingnuts of all persuations in the crowd -- but our holidays were savagely stolen, repackaged and sold as religious consumer events devoted to orgiastic…
If you really followed the story, you'd know that the tree was dying anyways and that's why the owners agreed to have it taken down and gave it to NBC/Rockefeller (in exchange for a little landscaping to fill the hole left by the tree).
The alternative was to leave it where it was until the root really gave in and then have it crash into their house.
Not every giant tree is taken down out of greed or ignorance.
I'd be interested to see your source for that, Joe, since the closest any of the stories I could find came to saying anything like that was a line that the tree was "nearing the end of a Norway spruce's lifespan". I've seen that in a couple of places, but I've seen nothing that would suggest that the tree was "dying."
for every tree cut down, we need to plant 10 more.
If, on the other hand, we actually planted 10 trees for every one that died, we'd sooner or later have a problem.
Not so much, Johnnie.
Not every planted tree will l-well, you say for one that died. But if you only include "mature" trees, well, a lot of planted trees are going to fail. That's just how it is.
(Not that I have any idea if it's a 10/1 ratio or what, but it's probably pretty high, given how many offspring a given tree can produce in one year.)
In defense of Joe, I have a co-worker whose wife worked her entire career for the USFS, and according to her the term "mature" when applied to trees, can also be read "dying".
I have no idea how many years were left on this particular tree, of course.
Hahaha well that is something indeed!