My CO2 diary: Tracking my Christmas carbon footprint

As Andy Williams would sing, “The most wonderful time of the year” is just around the corner. Christmas and its family gatherings, lucullian lunches, and present unboxings are a week away from us. 

Some of us have everything already arranged for the Christmas lunch menu and have bought all the presents. Some others are still figuring out what to cook and what to buy for that fussy brother, mother, or partner. 

To be fair to you, I belong more to the second category—I still need to find a couple of presents. While thinking about what to get some of my friends, I wondered: What is the environmental impact of my Christmas? For this festive episode of My CO₂ diary, I looked at the footprint of my Christmas activities, such as buying a Christmas tree and preparing an abundant lunch on December 25. 

Plastic or real Christmas tree? 

Let’s start with probably the biggest conundrum surrounding the festive season: the Christmas tree. As I flew home for the period, this was not really a question for me, as my mother had already made the choice: she has been using a plastic tree for years now. But what if I were to buy my first Christmas tree to bring some festive vibes inside my apartment? What would be the best choice?

According to Feeder.nl, 2.5 to 2.7 million real Christmas trees are sold and disposed of in the Netherlands every year. By contrast, a fake Christmas tree has an average lifespan of six years—this data refers to North America. What is better, then? 

Canadian company Ellio conducted a life cycle assessment for a tree planted 150 km away from Montreal, and one produced and then shipped to Montreal from China. In their analysis, they found out that in the case of the real tree, most of the impact is in cultivation and transport, estimating a carbon footprint of 3.1 kg of CO₂ equivalent. The fake, 2-meter-tall tree from China, lasting six years, produced 48.3 kg of  CO₂ e – over 16 times more than the real one. 

Does this mean real trees are better? Not exactly. If they are left to decompose in landfills, their carbon footprint multiplies fourfold to 16 kilograms of CO₂ e, as they then emit methane. Buying a fake tree is more sustainable in the long term. If you are to keep it for over 10 years, you can make up for the difference with real trees. An alternative can be found in potted Christmas trees, which can be kept for more years and even replanted in our gardens. 

Fancy a Christmas jumper?

As you know, I am still missing some presents. One of my friends is obsessed with Christmas jumpers, so I wanted to get her one to add to her collection. Knowing how impactful textile production is for the planet—20% of the world’s clean water pollution results from dyeing and finishing textile products—I knew it was not the most sustainable gift. 

44% of them are made of acrylic, a plastic fiber that releases around 730,000 microfibers per wash– which eventually end in oceans and our food chain. Research has shown that many people get new jumpers yearly and discard them after a few uses. As is the case for clothing, a more eco-friendly option would be to buy a second-hand jumper. For sure have a good look at labels is necessary. Purchasing cotton or wool ones – as well as one with recycled content – would surely be better. And avoid those with glitters. 

My CO₂ diary: a polluting trip to Sweden as a wake-up call

In the series A week in the life of... we ask someone to keep a CO₂ diary for a week. Today it is the turn of editor Elcke Vels.

Read More

Purchasing online gifts

With the rise of the internet, online shopping has become a common practice. My brother is a fond lover of wine and spirits, and since I could not buy a special grappa anywhere close, I had to resort to the distillery's website. As my family lives in Sardinia, the box needs to travel south from close to Padua, in the North of Italy, doing so via van and ferry. 

Since I still had some time before the 25th, I went for the standard delivery. After I placed the order, I got all the information, including the box’s weight– 4 kilograms. How much would this delivery emit? Thanks to the help of some online calculators, I got the answer. Traveling by van from Padua to the Civitavecchia port would result in 0.26 kilograms of CO₂ e; crossing the sea to get to Olbia’s port would add 0.08 kilograms of CO₂ e, and the final stretch of the journey by van would add 0.07 kilograms of CO₂ e more. In total, this shipment would emit approximately 0.41 kilograms of CO₂ e. 

Food carbon outputs

As for many others, Christmas lunch is a tradition in my family. Unlike other families, we don’t have a Christmas Eve dinner, but we convene for lunch on the 25th, and the menu is usually abundant. 

For starters, next to some tartlets and olives, there is usually some sliced charcuterie, such as ham (5.92 kg CO₂e/kg). Some ravioli pasta usually comes next (0.264kg CO₂e per 100-gram serving), followed suit by lamb, which we traditionally eat on this day—a 100-gram serving emits 5.84kg CO₂e/kg – with potatoes (0.05 CO₂e/kg). After meat comes some fish, usually some roasted prawns (4.07kg  CO₂ e/100 g). 

It is, give or take, around 10 kilograms of CO₂ per person– depending on how much one eats. Luckily, my family buys our meat locally– so that emissions for lamb and ham are lower – and cultivates veggies, meaning that transport emissions are virtually non-existent. And don’t worry about food waste: we are used to eating leftovers in the following days. 

Christmas is more polluting than I thought 

Individual experiences can greatly vary, but I was surprised by how polluting my Christmas could be. However, by paying extra attention to our choices, we can reduce the impact of our festivities. I will surely keep these numbers in mind while buying the latest cadeaux- and avoid glittery Christmas jumpers.