[No. 03] Berkeley Report: Artificial turf releases more greenhouse gases in its production, transportation and processing than the maintenance of natural turf ever would.” SynTurf.org, Newton. Mass. April 25, 2010. According to a news article in the Santa Cruz Sentinel (April 14, 2010), a recently released report from University of California at Berkeley “concludes that player injuries drop on artificial turf but significant greenhouse gases are released in its creation.” See Genevieve Bookwalter, “New study provides fuel for both sides of artificial turf fight,” in Santa Cruz Sentinel, April 14, 2010, available at http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/localnews/ci_14879819 or click here for pdf.
While the first conclusion may not be necessarily a valid one (see http://www.synturf.org/health.html ), the second conclusion about the carbon footprint of artificial turf fields is on the money (see http://www.synturf.org/carbonfootprint.html ).
The Sentinel quoted David Dornfeld, a Berkeley professor and director of the school's Laboratory for Manufacturing and Sustainability, as saying the report was compiled “to make sure that the resources that were referred to were reasonable.”
The report concluded that “Artificial turf releases more greenhouse gases in its the production, transportation and processing than the maintenance of natural turf ever would.”
As far as SynTurf.org is concerned, this alone is the most significant conclusion of the report, considering that the report is entitled Review of the Impacts of Crumb Rubber in Artificial Turf Applications (February 2010) and “was commissioned by The Corporation for Manufacturing Excellence [MANEX], an industry consulting firm. That company has, in the past, worked with California Integrated Waste Management Board to find ways to best recycle old tires. Those tire pieces often turn into the newest artificial playing fields.” According to Manex’s website http://www.manexconsulting.com/?PageID=268 , individuals interested in obtaining a copy of the full report may email turfstudy@manexconsulting.com .
With the exception of the report’s admission that “Artificial turf can become hot and uncomfortable to play on in warmer months,” which is a no-brainer (see http://www.synturf.org/heateffect.html ), the report’s other conclusions at best perpetuate the myths that the turf industry and proponents of the product have been foisting on the public and way-too-eager politicians and decision-makers.
To illustrate: The conclusion that “The cost to own and maintain artificial turf fields over a decade is 10 to 20 percent less than the cost of natural grass fields” has long been challenged as yet another myth. See http://www.synturf.org/wrapuparticles.html item No. 8 and items relative to maintenance/replacement at http://www.synturf.org/maintenancereplacement.html .
The report also concluded that “artificial turf contains elements that could be toxic to humans,” but dismissed the finding by stating that “ordinary use does not expose players to levels considered dangerous.” The mounting evidence based on research by the scientific and medical communities suggests that a statement such as this conclusion is simply irresponsible, considering that some of the effects of the substances of concern are cumulative. See the various items reported and posted under http://www.synturf.org/warnings.html and http://www.synturf.org/crumbrubber.html and http://www.synturf.org/phthalates.html and http://www.synturf.org/ehhibrief.html and http://www.synturf.org/silica.html and http://www.synturf.org/lead.html and http://www.synturf.org/wrapuparticles.html .
Without the benefit of a conscientious and peer-reviewed longitudinal health study there is no telling what the long-term effect of exposure to chemicals of concern would be on children and youth end-users of turf fields. What we do know is that some of these chemicals and substances have a proven record of being unhealthy at best, carcinogenic and fatally toxic in some other cases to living organisms.
Perhaps the most telling of the general ignorance of the Berkeley report is this statement: “Natural grass requires fertilizer, which could contaminate water supplies, and regular mowing, the emissions of which contribute to greenhouse gases. It also requires watering, which could tax a limited supply.” There are natural grass technologies out there that address each of the grass-is-bad arguments: organic and natural occurring fertilizers as opposed to chemicals; integrated pest management systems, grass that require less water and less growing seasons, with deeper root systems and shorter blades. As for the artificial turf itself: A well-groomed and maintained artificial turf field requires watering (keep silica dust down, smooth the playing surface, cool down); it requires antibacterial treatments, pesticides and fungicides and herbicides, too.
While the installation, mowing (grass)/grooming (artificial turf) and lighting and watering (irrigation) all require some greenhouse gas emissions, in terms of carbon footprint the report did say this: “Artificial turf releases more greenhouse gases in its the production, transportation and processing than the maintenance of natural turf ever would.” Emphasis added.
|
