Coaches love plastic grass because it’s so easy for them and doesn’t get muddy. But plastic grass is not the answer. It can’t be and shouldn’t be. News (http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/04/19/turf.lead.ap/) this week is that the feds are investigating plastic grass because of lead concerns. There will be more and more stories like this in the upcoming months. I guarantee it.

The answer is better grass. Take your energy, your love for soccer and the kids, and your concerns about grass and teach people how to do grass better. Don’t make the problem worse by contaminating our aquifers with rubber pellets and our kids’ lungs with PAHs. Even one field with plastic grass is a serious health hazard.

In any case, whether blissfully naive or not, I still agree with you that there are problems with standard, contemporary lawn care. There are problems with so many aspects of our modern lives. But what I do not understand is how anyone can argue that the problems with standard lawn care justify doing something much worse. And plastic grass is much worse. I notice that you didn’t check out the list of chemicals in artificial turf. How come? What are your reactions to those chemicals? I suspect you will point out that there are bad chemicals in pesticides used on grass. But that’s missing the point.

Also, I have pointed out to you the ways that natural lawn care can be achieved healthfully. You step around that and refer blithely to cost. Have you investigated the cost of artificial turf? The full cost?

One more thing, I don’t know what rubber you’re talking about, but the rubber used by the artificial turf companies is toxic. Independent research shows that it is. In fact some of the research cited by the artificial turf companies, ironically (or perhaps that’s not ironic), shows that it is.

You seem very invested in defending artificial turf. Why? Do you work for one of those companies? Or is it just that you are really opposed to standard lawn care. I’m just curious. Why do you want to defend artificial turf?

http://www.albany.edu/ihe/SyntheticTurfChemicalsdar.htm

Check it out! It’s pretty sobering stuff.

1. Playing on grass is not worse for the environment. Having a permeable surface that is free of cancer-causing agents that leach into groundwater and become airborne is, I just have to repeat, not worse for the environment. (I can’t imagine how anyone could make the argument that natural grass, the kind that evolved over millions of years on our planet, could be worse than a plastic grass that contains polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and that is friendly to MRSA.)
2. Natural grass does not require the addition of toxic fertilizer (with its excess nitrogen and phosphorus). Philip Dickey of the Washington Toxics Coalition makes the following eco-friendly fertilizer recommendations:
• Look for fertilizers that meet the Grow Smart, Grow Safe environmental rating system. These use slow-release nutrients.
• Build healthy soil, which reduces the need for additional fertilizers.
• Add compost to the soil, which improves soil quality and increase the population of beneficial organisms.
• Use organic fertilizer.
3. Grass fields do not require chemical pesticides. Using pesticides on lawns is a relatively new (in terms of the human history of lawns) and bad idea. Disease and fungus control can be achieved through the use of specific bacteria non-toxic to humans and animals. For example, endophyte-enhanced grasses “taste” bad to surface feeding insects. Crabgrass control can be achieved through field aeration. Visit livinglawn.org for more ideas on natural pest control. And, by the way, artificial turf fields do require chemical treatments to control bacteria.
4. Injuries are indeed caused by hard surface areas and by sports in general. Injuries are caused when one player kicks the shins of another (I know this from personal experience!). Sports are indeed risky, especially field sports like lacrosse and field hockey that involve sticks (one reason players wear helmets). (Incidentally, artificial turf used to be much worse than natural grass in terms of surface hardness, but manufacturers have improved the surface hardness so now it feels a lot more like natural grass.) Maybe it’s just me, but I would prefer to risk a sports injury than risk inhaling a known carcinogen like a PAH. (Is it just me?)
5. Indoor carpets are a big concern–as are furniture, components of manufactured homes, smoking, eating nonorganic foods, and on and on. The fact that carpets and other things are toxic does not, however, suggest that we should embrace another source of toxins (since I’m already breathing in polluted air, I might as well play on a field with rubber pellets?). If anything, it means we should try to reduce our exposure to any additional sources of concern.

The arguments you bring up are ones also made by the manufacturers of artificial turf. But these arguments offered by the companies that benefit from the sale of artificial turf do not really stand up to much scrutiny. Look for an upcoming blog here On a Ledge that examines the very research sources offered by the manufacturers as evidence of the safety of plastic grass. I really do appreciate your comment because these are notions that must be dispelled. Plastic grass is much more dangerous than natural grass, and this is why several European countries have banned artificial turf altogether.