Roses Raise Environment Concerns

From water use to carbon emissions, raising and distributing roses has an environmental impact worse than many other crops. David Biello reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Millions of roses get handed out on Valentine's Day. But growing roses has an environmental impact worse than many other crops.

Start with climate change: most roses in the U.S. and Europe are imported from warmer climes. All that flying and trucking adds thousands of metric tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.

Then there's all the water needed to, well, water the flowers. And the runoff fouled by copious quantities of pesticides needed to make the roses look perfect.  


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


There's also the wildlife and workers poisoned by all that fumigation. Add to that habitat destruction where floral plantations displace native forest and wetlands.

Finally, there's the refrigeration needed to keep those blooms fresh. The electricity is often produced by burning fossil fuels, and the refrigerant gases also exacerbate climate change.

A more sustainable and, possibly, more romantic approach is to go with flowers certified by outfits like VeriFlora or, even better, whatever flowers are in season locally. Of course, that's not much help for those of us in wintry climes. Maybe try writing a poem. Let’s see: Roses are red, violets are blue…

—David Biello

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe