re-purposed turf? uploaded to flickr.com by alist
Over the winter and early spring the grass field behind Watkins Elementary School was replaced with an artificial turf playing surface. I’d been wondering about the ecological impact of replacing live plant material with a synthetic system and I had a suspicion there were camps for and against the transition. The data I found wasn’t too surprising to me, but there isn’t a clear-cut answer to the question “How green is it?”
I spoke with a couple parents of students at Watkins and asked what they knew about the decision to install synthetic turf. I was told the decision was made without a lot of parental or neighborhood input and that I should speak with folks at the Department of Parks & Recreation. One parent noted the decision was made and public “input” was solicited after.
The product installed at Watkins is called FieldTurf according to John Stokes, Chief of Staff at the DC Department of Parks & Recreation. Stokes noted that DPR is “making investments in fields that are heavily used,” and that FieldTurf has been installed in a number of other field locations in the District. The product is made of recycled material and is lead-free. He also noted that the installation eliminates the need for chemicals and the use of gas-powered mowers, reducing pollution.
Artificial turf is often composed of fronds of polyethylene that is anchored into a mat with small rubber pellets. The rubber used in the mat is often recycled from used automobile tires though the percentage of recycled content varies by product. Proponent of synthetic turf note that the field no longer needs to be irrigated, saving the owner thousands of gallons of water a year and the cost of man-hours for the watering. Some studies estimate saving as much as 50,000 gallons of water in a completely dry week during the growing season. The field requires no chemical pesticides. Turf also lasts a long time — indefinitely since it’s plastic and doesn’t decompose — compared to natural grass & sod which can be ripped up, muddied, and replaced when no longer suitable for competition. Certainly the longevity and maintenance of a synthetic playing field is an attractive benefit to an owner (in this case, DCPS).
So what are the ecological drawbacks? Natural grass like any other plant uses the process of photosynthesis to churn out oxygen and take in carbon dioxide. Synthetic turf obviously does not participate in this process and so does little to reduce carbon in the atmosphere. Perhaps the most concerning aspect of synthetic turf is how it retains heat. Grass and soil act absorb heat but can radiate it down into the layers of earth below, keeping the playing field temperature relatively equal to the air temperature. Synthetic turf (since it is plastic and rubber) heats up and retains the heat just like if you were to leave a plastic toy out in the sun on a hot day. The nonprofit Grassroots Educations Network has recorded turf temperatures as high as 160 degrees (F) on hot summer days. Holding that heat in increases ambient air temperatures (exacerbating the urban heat island effect in bigger cities) but also can make a slide or fall on the field more damaging to exposed skin.
There’s more to the debate though. Look for part two of this story tomorrow.
its funny that you are discussing the ecological impact, since it was done with none of that in mind. the only reason to install field turf is maintenance, ie: money.
Having played on both Fieldturf and Nexturf, I want to make sure you’re not trying to compare either of these products to Astroturf — they are not the same products in any respect.
First, both Fieldturf and Nexturf get warm during the day during summer months but neither sees the temperature extremes that Astroturf does.
Second, unlike Astroturf, both Fieldturf and Nexturf allow water to drain through the playing surface like it would for grass — meaning runoff should be about the same.
Third, don’t discount the ecological effect of not having to water a field, apply fertilizers and herbicides derived from petrochemicals, and the large amount of gasoline that is used to cut the grass on playing fields weekly for nine months out of the year.
Fourth, while the initial outlay is high, the reduced maintenance costs more than make for a positive ROI. One thing not to be overlooked is that the fields are now available for all-weather use year round (except when they are frozen and when there is active lightning).
Finally, my teams found that turf systems were safer and provided more predictable playing surfaces compared to grass. The safety aspect comes are three parts:
1) The surface is free of divots, holes and other surface changes (i.e. dirt to grass, etc.) which made falls and injuries due to them (mostly sprained and broken ankles) less prevalent.
2) The surface was also less abrasive to the skin during sliding falls — which means that there were fewer “raspberry” abrasions.
3) Since the playing surface is “softer” and absorbs more energy from impacts, compared to most grass/dirt surfaces, injuries like concussions should be reduced.
4) There are no dust storms. Anyone who’s watched a grass field deteriorate to dirt in the late spring or summer from high usage know what I’m taking about. Fine particulate like this is know to cause breathing conditions, exacerbate Asthma, and it can cause cardiovascular stress in adults.
@Stan- Maybe you should wait for Part 2 tomorrow?
@Jon — Fair enough. I’ll be back.
Thanks for writing this! It’s really interesting. Can’t wait to read the second part. I live just down the street and I definitely think that the field looks great now! And perhaps it’s just spring fever, but it seems like it’s getting much more use by both the kids and neighborhood people.
The field is not “owned” by DCPS, it is owned by the city and is the property of DC Parks & Rec.
From what I understand, the turf field and surrounding upgrades were done in part as a reward for the great accomplishments of the DC Pop Warner Watkins Hornets football team who play and practice on that field.
http://dpr.dc.gov/DC/DPR/About+DPR/News+Room/DPR+Pop+Warner+Football+Teams+Advance+to+Eastern+Regional+Semi-Championship
On to your second post…
“Turf also lasts a long time — indefinitely since it’s plastic and doesn’t decompose”
That statement is flat out wrong. Towson University’s FieldTurf artificial turf had to be replaced after 5 years because the plastic deteriorated. Get the facts. 5 years is not forever.