How Green is Chelsea flower show

Hi All,

What's your thoughts on greening issues, environment and the carbon foot print, taking into account air miles, petrol, growing all the plants, green house heating to bring on cold store to slow down depending what they are, putting it all up taking it all down the waste that must be created, I could go on and on ...

Or does all the benefits encouraging growing plants, creating jobs, etc nullify all the negatives

Spruce

 

I doubt very much that it could ever become truly carbon neutral, but the organisers are at least increasingly aware that these are issues they need to be seen to be addressing - see this recent press release, about this year's show: RHS Chelsea Flower Show Gardens Reduce their Carbon footprint / RHS Gardening

Show garden fittings and plants are often recycled by their designers - I live nearby (south of the river) and can think of a local primary school and a local nursing home that both have gardens created in this way. Nice for the pupils and patients, and a bit of extra publicity for the designers too, of course!

 

As I understand it @Spruce the RHS does now have strict rules about imported plants, growing media, watering, sustainability, recycling the gardens/structures/plants after the show with some going to charitable ends such as gardens for hospitals, hospices, schools etc.

I suspect that a simple calculation of the carbon footprint from transporting in plants and construction materials and then taking it all away again gives a negative result. On the other hand, the show and its press and TV does so much now to raise awareness of environmentally positive gardening techniques and plants as well as the long-term good the gardens go on to do when rebuilt elsewhere that I believe the final balance is positive.

 

Given that the exhibits represent a brief moment in time, I don't think it's very green at all.

If it was a realistic garden exhibition, where the best of the best gardeners show off realistic gardens that people can actually achieve, then it would be a good thing. But if I understand correctly (based on a few things I saw on telly) they literally select plants that will look good for the brief duration of the show. It's not saying, this is what your garden can be like. It is basically a very temporary art exhibition. Nothing wrong with art. I just don't think this particular art show has any credible eco credentials at all.

 

@Clueless 1 v2 Those selected plants come from commercial nurseries and then either get sold off at the end of the show or go on to be part of the garden when it is rebuilt elsewhere or they go back to the nursery to join the rest of the stock or get composted.

Whatever happens to them they are not wasted and anyone with a modicum of imagination can appreciate the artistry and skills of the designers, growers and garden builders as well as get inspiration for plant and colour forms and combinations for their own gardens, whatever their taste or conditions dictate.

The plants chosen in the last decade or more are far more seasonally appropriate than when I first went to Chelsea in 1990 when there was a huge, unsustainably sourced rock garden on the bank, imported trees and shrubs and combinations that would never happen in nature eg daffodils and Michaelmas daisies in the same garden and in flower at the same time.

 

I do feel the scale of some of the hard landscaping is ridiculous. Carting giant rocks from A to B for a week's exhibition is wholly pointless, in my view.

A no-concrete rule would be good. Gardens should be living spaces, not the odd bit of greenery in amongst acres of landscaping. IMVHO!

 

Sadly I think I lack a modicum of imagination.

I wouldn't mind looking around the plants in the makies, maques, marquese , tents but the show gardens are just pointless IMHO.

 

It seems a truly ridiculous event to me, have a plant fair with lots of growers and stop the huge waste of money on making show gardens that you don't give access to properly. They try so hard to dress it up as a charitable event and all it is, is a mingling opportunity for poshos. The RHS really have to find a way to create revenue but also to also make their shows feel more equitable and up to date. Their new urban show in Manchester maybe the way forward instead of Chelsea.

 

If you go to the show @pete and get there early before the hoards you can get up close to the gardens and take decent photos as well as see the planting combinations and clever use of colour, form and texture. There is certainly too much hard landscaping and large, expensive, show-off water features in some of the big gardens but Chris Beardshaw and Adam Frost and co always do fabulous planting.

I don't like the gardens representing deserts, drought blighted areas of southern France or concepts about war and peace and so on. For me, they are not about the plants.

The best stands in the marquee/plant pavillion at Chelsea also do mini landscapes and plant associations in what are, effectively, garden borders and beds so one can get ideas about plant heights, colours, tones and contrasts.

@amancalledgeorge Chelsea is elite and has always been about horticultural excellence in all its forms from nurserymen and women to designers to landscapers and garden builders who also get a prize for best build. Shows like Hampton Court where you can walk thru the gardens, Tatton where they do back to back gardens and smaller, themed gardens, Malvern with school projects and young designers are all part of making the shows more accessible to a wider audience.

There are also plans to hold shows in new venues. It's not expensive to join the RHS and you get preferred access to teh shows as well as the magazine and free entry to all the gardens. I don't understand why people persist in thinking it's only for toffs. It's not. It's for gardeners at all levels and incomes.

 

Not bothered watching it for years. Utterly ridiculous. More Fashion than flowers.

 

I think if the show gardens remained on show for around 10 months at which point they could then start building the new ones for the next year it would be more acceptable, but as we all know the gardens are unreal and can't last more than a week, basically film sets.

 

I have been several times and loved it. Would I go again? Yes, like a shot.
I love the gardens, but they are not real, it is theatre.
Some people go to be seen, but most go for the gardens and the plants. Yes, it’s expensive, but does that mean it’s for poshos, no more than a sporting event. It is cheaper than watching my beloved THFC.

 

Found this article on Financial Times discussing the question of how sustainable the Chelsea Flower Show is: Can Chelsea Flower Show sustain itself?

Some quotes below:

• “Chelsea Flower Show is a rare blend of expertise, pretence and trade.”

• “This year, the carbon footprint of the designed gardens outdoors has been monitored, not least for their choice of materials and biodiversity.
  
  They are awkward ideals to attach to the show as a whole. It relies on bringing more than 100,000 people into the Royal Hospital Chelsea’s grounds, together with the power, lighting, artificial watering and transport which underpin the exhibits and the TV crews. The most planet-friendly option would be not to hold a show in the first place.”

• “…a basic issue about the show’s sustainability is whether enough first-class exhibitors will continue to come into London. Deterrents include parking and emissions charges, highly priced accommodation and, back home, the increased expense of heating the houses and polythene tunnels in which show plants are brought to a peak.”

But it also highlights how the gardens, including balcony and veg gardens, can serve as inspiration to the public, and mentions how more and more gardens are now being relocated after the show.

I went to Chelsea once, when they held it in September 2021. It was a hot, sunny day and quite a few people needed help from paramedics; food and drink was terribly overpriced; the crowds were unbelievable and it was difficult for me (being height challenged) to get a good view of some of the more popular gardens. There was a lot of walking and, I thought, not enough seating.

My only purchases were camellia oil from the Niwaki stall and allium bulbs that were incredibly large and heavy to lug around the whole site (they’re still a highlight in my rose border). Still, I enjoyed it overall — especially the houseplant, dahlia and acer exhibits — and spent all day at the show. I can’t bring myself to think about going again considering the expense of the tickets and travel to London, but I might be tempted in a few more years.

 

I don't think any major event, horticultural or otherwise, can truly claim to be 'sustainable' for the reasons given in the article. What events such as the major flowers can do is give people ideas and advise on making their own gardens sustainable. That could be far more productive in the long run.