New York Times: Which is better for the environment? A real pine tree or an artificial one? John Collins Rudolf takes up the question in his New York Times article. “The natural tree is a better option,” answers Jean-Sébastien Trudel, founder of Ellipsos, a Montreal environmental consulting firm that released an independent study in 2009. The firm found that an artificial tree would have to be reused for more than 20 years to be greener than buying a fresh-cut tree annually, because of such factors as the carcinogens produced during manufacture, the nonrecyclable plastic and metal used in their construction, and the shipping from Asia where most of them are made. Living trees, in contrast, contribute oxygen to the atmosphere while growing and can be composted or mulched after use.
The finding that the Saturnian moon may host layers of icy slush instead of a global ocean could change how planetary scientists think about other icy moons as well.
Modeling the shapes of tree branches, neurons, and blood vessels is a thorny problem, but researchers have just discovered that much of the math has already been done.
January 29, 2026 12:52 PM
Get PT in your inbox
PT The Week in Physics
A collection of PT's content from the previous week delivered every Monday.
One email per week
PT New Issue Alert
Be notified about the new issue with links to highlights and the full TOC.
One email per month
PT Webinars & White Papers
The latest webinars, white papers and other informational resources.