Tweet
Artificial Turf Health Concern
A Push To Know Whether “Crumbs” In Artificial Turf Can Make People Sick
Toxins In Artificial Turf Prompt Concern
By REGINE LABOSSIERE
Courant Staff Writer
April 12, 2008
As the use of artificial turf has increased in popularity, there is growing concern that a component in some turf might be hazardous to the health of people and the environment.
Several studies in Europe and a few in North America have shown that rubber "crumbs" used in some artificial turf release toxins that might cause health problems and might be poisonous to plants.
Although there is no scientific evidence that people are getting sick directly because of their use of artificial turf, measures are being taken to protect citizens.
The state legislatures in New York and New Jersey are calling for a moratorium on the installation of artificial turf fields that use crumb rubber until further scientific studies can be conducted. The California State Legislature is considering a bill requiring the state to study the possible connection between artificial turf and staph infections.
Citizens groups in Connecticut have asked their town officials to stop installing the material, which some studies say can cause asthma, eye and skin irritations, cancer, and a decline in plant growth and aquatic life.
Local groups and state officials want to know for sure whether the turf being used in more than 80 municipalities across the state is really dangerous. A bill before the state legislature is asking the government to appropriate $250,000 to the state Department of Environmental Protection to study the issue.
"Given the fact that it was increasingly going into our high school fields, I thought I'd better make sure," said state Sen. Ed Meyer, D-Guilford, who is chairman of the environment committee.
"There's lots of rumors, lots of allegations going back and forth, and I think we need certainty here," added Meyer, who proposed Senate Bill No. 361.
The Senate bill was referred to the appropriations committee, and Meyer said he expects it will be submitted for Gov. M. Jodi Rell's signature at the end of the legislative session in May.
"It's very, very controversial and very upsetting, the charges of toxicity," Meyer said. "... We want Connecticut to have its own independent study."
Recycled vehicle tires are a component in some types of artificial turf. The rubber tires are shredded and ground up into fine particles, creating a product called crumb rubber infill. A football-size field can cost about $1 million, and some fields may be funded in part by state grants. The turf, which has grown in popularity with cities and schools, lasts about 10 years before some parts of it have to be replaced. Crumb rubber sometimes is used as mulch.
The North Haven-based nonprofit agency Environment and Human Health Inc., a group of 10 doctors and public health officials, pushed for the Senate bill this year. Last year it paid the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, a state agency dedicated to scientific research, to conduct a laboratory study on the material.
The study tested out-gassing and leaching from synthetic turf rubber crumbs and positively identified four chemicals — benzothiazole, hexadecane, 4-(tert-Octyl)-phenol and butylated hydroxyanisole. According to Environment and Human Health, the chemicals can cause skin and eye irritation, cancer and can corrode and destroy mucous membranes.
The study found traces of a host of other chemicals but could not identify them positively. MaryJane Incorvia Mattina, the state chemist who headed the study, said the chemicals grew more prevalent in hot temperatures.
"What we have shown is that there are materials coming off as gases from these tire crumbs. We need to know about additional compounds that could be coming out," Incorvia Mattina said. "At this point, we can neither condemn nor condone; we need to know more."
Worrisome
What's unclear is which chemicals and how much of each are getting into the systems of the people using the fields, said Nancy Alderman, president of Environment and Human Health. Since last year, she has been receiving calls from across the country from parents concerned about their school districts and parks departments installing the synthetic turf fields in their towns.
"I think there are certain products we should not be recycling. We should not recycle mercury, we shouldn't recycle asbestos, we shouldn't recycle ground-up rubber tires, especially putting them in children's play areas," Alderman said. "... With what we already know, why would you invest $1 million [in turf] that we don't know for sure is OK? I am floored."
Bridgeport-based lawyer Joel Z. Green used the information from Environment and Human Health and the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station while representing two citizens groups in Fairfield and their successful mission to prevent artificial turf fields from being installedat a private school last year.
The groups were concerned about the effects of zinc found in the artificial turf on a nearby brook. According to the legal documents submitted by Green, the rubber could leach organic compounds and toxic metals and pollute surface and groundwater.
"There is, and there's an increasing number of people who have concerns about these artificial turf fields. There are a lot of questions," Green said.
Differing Opinions
Not everyone has the same reaction to artificial turf. School officials say they have found nothing wrong with it and say their athletes enjoy playing on it.
The state Department of Public Health released a statement last year acknowledging that some of the chemicals found in artificial turf could cause "toxic or carcinogenic activity" in laboratory animals. But, the statement said, "based upon the current evidence, a public health risk appears unlikely. ... DPH's review does not find any reason to stop installation of these fields."
Vincent McDermott, senior vice president of Milone & MacBroom, a Cheshire consulting firm of engineers, landscape architects and environmental scientists, said there is a significant body of scientific literature that supports the environmental safety of artificial turf.
He said Milone & MacBroom conducts studies of the runoff from artificial fields.
McDermott said zinc, in small amounts "well below the threshold of concern for drinking water," was the only heavy metal found by the firm's studies.
"You will read a ton of literature about the environmental impacts of this stuff, and you will find also that the science of it falls on both sides of the spectrum. There are some who say there is absolutely nothing wrong, and there are some who say they are cancer-causing," McDermott said.
Both McDermott and Incorvia Mattina of the Agricultural Experiment Station agree that more testing is necessary for more conclusive results.
Parks and recreation departments and school boards across the state have been touting the benefits of artificial fields, especially in the last couple of years, as more and more have been installed in Connecticut.
They have said the turf doesn't require pesticides, needs less maintenance, causes fewer injuries, doesn't fall victim to bad weather and makes it possible for multiple sports to play on the field during the same season without wearing it out.
"Unless there is concrete evidence that there's a health risk to it and the Department of Public Health takes a stand against it, I'm confident that the field is as good as, if not better than, a natural grass field," said Bruce Sievers, principal of Cheney Technical High School in Manchester.
The school spent $1.5 million on four adjacent artificial fields for softball, baseball, football and soccer and began using them in March. Sievers said the school opted for the turf as a cost-saving measure, rendering fertilizer, irrigation and manpower less of a necessity.
"It looks great, it feels great to walk on," he said. "... As far as we're concerned, it's all good."
The Glastonbury school district discussed artificial turf for about a year before deciding to go ahead with a million-dollar purchase for the high school.
Then, before installing it in October, the school district had the material tested.
"We did a good amount of research because there was some discussion of, 'Was it good? Was it bad?' ... We sent out the materials to labs to examine it, at least to make sure to ourselves and to students that it was OK," said Alan Bookman, superintendent of Glastonbury schools.
He said students and athletic groups that use the field have raved about it because it's easier to play on, balls roll more smoothly and players don't have to contend with holes and rocks and other issues normal to dirt and grass.
David Holden, business manager for Simsbury Public Schools, said Simsbury High School's athletic schedule doesn't get derailed due to bad weather.
"To have a field that gets multiple use during the course of the day has been wonderful and you're able to play on it during all kinds of weather," Holden said. "Normally, a game might be canceled or postponed; we're able to play it because the field drains so well."
Contact Régine Labossière at rlabossiere@courant.com.
Copyright © 2008, The Hartford Courant
Toxins In Artificial Turf Prompt Concern
By REGINE LABOSSIERE
Courant Staff Writer
April 12, 2008
As the use of artificial turf has increased in popularity, there is growing concern that a component in some turf might be hazardous to the health of people and the environment.
Several studies in Europe and a few in North America have shown that rubber "crumbs" used in some artificial turf release toxins that might cause health problems and might be poisonous to plants.
Although there is no scientific evidence that people are getting sick directly because of their use of artificial turf, measures are being taken to protect citizens.
The state legislatures in New York and New Jersey are calling for a moratorium on the installation of artificial turf fields that use crumb rubber until further scientific studies can be conducted. The California State Legislature is considering a bill requiring the state to study the possible connection between artificial turf and staph infections.
Citizens groups in Connecticut have asked their town officials to stop installing the material, which some studies say can cause asthma, eye and skin irritations, cancer, and a decline in plant growth and aquatic life.
Local groups and state officials want to know for sure whether the turf being used in more than 80 municipalities across the state is really dangerous. A bill before the state legislature is asking the government to appropriate $250,000 to the state Department of Environmental Protection to study the issue.
"Given the fact that it was increasingly going into our high school fields, I thought I'd better make sure," said state Sen. Ed Meyer, D-Guilford, who is chairman of the environment committee.
"There's lots of rumors, lots of allegations going back and forth, and I think we need certainty here," added Meyer, who proposed Senate Bill No. 361.
The Senate bill was referred to the appropriations committee, and Meyer said he expects it will be submitted for Gov. M. Jodi Rell's signature at the end of the legislative session in May.
"It's very, very controversial and very upsetting, the charges of toxicity," Meyer said. "... We want Connecticut to have its own independent study."
Recycled vehicle tires are a component in some types of artificial turf. The rubber tires are shredded and ground up into fine particles, creating a product called crumb rubber infill. A football-size field can cost about $1 million, and some fields may be funded in part by state grants. The turf, which has grown in popularity with cities and schools, lasts about 10 years before some parts of it have to be replaced. Crumb rubber sometimes is used as mulch.
The North Haven-based nonprofit agency Environment and Human Health Inc., a group of 10 doctors and public health officials, pushed for the Senate bill this year. Last year it paid the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, a state agency dedicated to scientific research, to conduct a laboratory study on the material.
The study tested out-gassing and leaching from synthetic turf rubber crumbs and positively identified four chemicals — benzothiazole, hexadecane, 4-(tert-Octyl)-phenol and butylated hydroxyanisole. According to Environment and Human Health, the chemicals can cause skin and eye irritation, cancer and can corrode and destroy mucous membranes.
The study found traces of a host of other chemicals but could not identify them positively. MaryJane Incorvia Mattina, the state chemist who headed the study, said the chemicals grew more prevalent in hot temperatures.
"What we have shown is that there are materials coming off as gases from these tire crumbs. We need to know about additional compounds that could be coming out," Incorvia Mattina said. "At this point, we can neither condemn nor condone; we need to know more."
Worrisome
What's unclear is which chemicals and how much of each are getting into the systems of the people using the fields, said Nancy Alderman, president of Environment and Human Health. Since last year, she has been receiving calls from across the country from parents concerned about their school districts and parks departments installing the synthetic turf fields in their towns.
"I think there are certain products we should not be recycling. We should not recycle mercury, we shouldn't recycle asbestos, we shouldn't recycle ground-up rubber tires, especially putting them in children's play areas," Alderman said. "... With what we already know, why would you invest $1 million [in turf] that we don't know for sure is OK? I am floored."
Bridgeport-based lawyer Joel Z. Green used the information from Environment and Human Health and the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station while representing two citizens groups in Fairfield and their successful mission to prevent artificial turf fields from being installedat a private school last year.
The groups were concerned about the effects of zinc found in the artificial turf on a nearby brook. According to the legal documents submitted by Green, the rubber could leach organic compounds and toxic metals and pollute surface and groundwater.
"There is, and there's an increasing number of people who have concerns about these artificial turf fields. There are a lot of questions," Green said.
Differing Opinions
Not everyone has the same reaction to artificial turf. School officials say they have found nothing wrong with it and say their athletes enjoy playing on it.
The state Department of Public Health released a statement last year acknowledging that some of the chemicals found in artificial turf could cause "toxic or carcinogenic activity" in laboratory animals. But, the statement said, "based upon the current evidence, a public health risk appears unlikely. ... DPH's review does not find any reason to stop installation of these fields."
Vincent McDermott, senior vice president of Milone & MacBroom, a Cheshire consulting firm of engineers, landscape architects and environmental scientists, said there is a significant body of scientific literature that supports the environmental safety of artificial turf.
He said Milone & MacBroom conducts studies of the runoff from artificial fields.
McDermott said zinc, in small amounts "well below the threshold of concern for drinking water," was the only heavy metal found by the firm's studies.
"You will read a ton of literature about the environmental impacts of this stuff, and you will find also that the science of it falls on both sides of the spectrum. There are some who say there is absolutely nothing wrong, and there are some who say they are cancer-causing," McDermott said.
Both McDermott and Incorvia Mattina of the Agricultural Experiment Station agree that more testing is necessary for more conclusive results.
Parks and recreation departments and school boards across the state have been touting the benefits of artificial fields, especially in the last couple of years, as more and more have been installed in Connecticut.
They have said the turf doesn't require pesticides, needs less maintenance, causes fewer injuries, doesn't fall victim to bad weather and makes it possible for multiple sports to play on the field during the same season without wearing it out.
"Unless there is concrete evidence that there's a health risk to it and the Department of Public Health takes a stand against it, I'm confident that the field is as good as, if not better than, a natural grass field," said Bruce Sievers, principal of Cheney Technical High School in Manchester.
The school spent $1.5 million on four adjacent artificial fields for softball, baseball, football and soccer and began using them in March. Sievers said the school opted for the turf as a cost-saving measure, rendering fertilizer, irrigation and manpower less of a necessity.
"It looks great, it feels great to walk on," he said. "... As far as we're concerned, it's all good."
The Glastonbury school district discussed artificial turf for about a year before deciding to go ahead with a million-dollar purchase for the high school.
Then, before installing it in October, the school district had the material tested.
"We did a good amount of research because there was some discussion of, 'Was it good? Was it bad?' ... We sent out the materials to labs to examine it, at least to make sure to ourselves and to students that it was OK," said Alan Bookman, superintendent of Glastonbury schools.
He said students and athletic groups that use the field have raved about it because it's easier to play on, balls roll more smoothly and players don't have to contend with holes and rocks and other issues normal to dirt and grass.
David Holden, business manager for Simsbury Public Schools, said Simsbury High School's athletic schedule doesn't get derailed due to bad weather.
"To have a field that gets multiple use during the course of the day has been wonderful and you're able to play on it during all kinds of weather," Holden said. "Normally, a game might be canceled or postponed; we're able to play it because the field drains so well."
Contact Régine Labossière at rlabossiere@courant.com.
Copyright © 2008, The Hartford Courant
Comment